Login

russian armor

Churchill is garbage

23 May 2016, 08:45 AM
#21
avatar of MissCommissar

Posts: 673


The king tiger's durability is not the only thing that make it fearsome, it's the fact it's got the 88mm kwk 43 doom cannon.

Even if churchill have the same hp and armor as the king tiger, the king tiger is still going to be the stronger unit.

We are not even complaining about the churchill's gun, as those knowledgeable recognize the fact that the 75mm ROQF was a "ok" gun at best.


So, if armor is ok, gun is ok - what's wrong with Churchill then? That's question to OP, cos I don't understand his point about Chruchill at all.

Suggestion to give some "bonus to units around Churchill" is... kinda good but only in one case - it won't have main gun. Just like Cromwell Commander in vCoH.

Actually, I think it could be good to change Churchill in Anvil tactics to single Cromwell/Comet Command tank, which will perform like Command Panther (with some another bounses and abilites, though) and will be unarmed. And won't cost too much because of it, maybe 50-80 fuel. What do you think about it?
23 May 2016, 09:12 AM
#22
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



So, if armor is ok, gun is ok - what's wrong with Churchill then? That's question to OP, cos I don't understand his point about Chruchill at all.

Suggestion to give some "bonus to units around Churchill" is... kinda good but only in one case - it won't have main gun. Just like Cromwell Commander in vCoH.

Actually, I think it could be good to change Churchill in Anvil tactics to single Cromwell/Comet Command tank, which will perform like Command Panther (with some another bounses and abilites, though) and will be unarmed. And won't cost too much because of it, maybe 50-80 fuel. What do you think about it?


240 armor is not okay for a unit whose main(and sole) purpose is to act as the spearhead of an assault.

and the churchill is not the first stone wall tank to fail. the kv-1 is pretty much in the same boat.
23 May 2016, 09:33 AM
#23
avatar of Svanh

Posts: 181

That´s rather because the Comet is overperforming.

What makes the Comet over-perform? I've always found it very close in performance to a Panther, just with different specialties. :)

320 armor (panther)
1280 hp (king tiger)
510 mp 185 fuel
16 pop (panther)

there.

It might need a little more balancing, but that sounds great.

jump backJump back to quoted post23 May 2016, 07:58 AMImSkemo
any one tried churchill + command vehicle(AEC or bren ) + Firefly ?? or a single comet is better than that ?

Cromwells and a Command Vehicle are better, simply because you can get more guns (the main thing the Command Vehicle buffs) for the same price. The Churchill actually has a slightly worse version of the Cromwell's gun.

jump backJump back to quoted post23 May 2016, 08:17 AMButcher
The Churchill should get armor values in between that of a Tiger and IS-2. The health pool should go down to that of other heavy tanks. I don´t like that there is no reward for flanking and circling it with mediums as it takes way too many shots to finish. Meanwhile most guns go through the frontal armor. Thus smart usage of the Churchill isn´t rewarded nor is bad usage punished. I think it´s rather boring.

What do you think of Firesparks' suggestion?

So, if armor is ok, gun is ok - what's wrong with Churchill then? That's question to OP, cos I don't understand his point about Chruchill at all.

You're essentially paying more for a medium tank that sacrifices the scaling benefits of a medium tank (flanking ability, speed) for durability. This leaves it in a position where it can't reposition fast enough to scare off capping squads or chase medium tanks and its main gun isn't good enough (slightly weaker than the Cromwell's) to fight anything else head-on.

In addition, the armour only affects engagements with light and medium tanks, not AT guns or (medium/heavy) tank destroyers, which reduces the Churchill's impact.

As an aside, the Churchill would actually have great anti-infantry veterancy if tank MGs weren't mostly decorative since it gets two more hull MGs at vet 1.

23 May 2016, 09:37 AM
#24
avatar of MissCommissar

Posts: 673



240 armor is not okay for a unit whose main(and sole) purpose is to act as the spearhead of an assault.

and the churchill is not the first stone wall tank to fail. the kv-1 is pretty much in the same boat.


240 armor is actually OK for tank with such huge HP bar. Make it bigger and there will be really only one way to stop that beast - using PaK 43s or heavy TDs, and all of them are doctrinal.

KV-1 is not really "meatshield tank". It works like slower, but little better armored version of T-34-76 for very high price and doctrine. If KV-1 would cost 90-100 fuel - it would be perfect for that design. Or... it can be soviet copy of UKF's Churchills - a lot of HP, same gun, same armor for same price. I would like to have that also.

23 May 2016, 10:03 AM
#25
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



240 armor is actually OK for tank with such huge HP bar. Make it bigger and there will be really only one way to stop that beast - using PaK 43s or heavy TDs, and all of them are doctrinal.


The concept of a durable allied tank isn't new. the soviet get access to the is2 by default.

if the axis atw can deal with 1040 hp 375 armor, it can deal with 1280 hp 320 armor.

and the difference between 1040 and 1280 is smaller than it looks.
1280/160 = 8
1040/160 = 6.5 (7)
23 May 2016, 10:10 AM
#26
avatar of Jadame!

Posts: 1122

jump backJump back to quoted post23 May 2016, 07:03 AMGumboot
I definitely didn't say all shots grant EXP. I will do the numbers and get back to you (At work) but just because I don't wrack up 1000+ comments doesn't mean I do not know shit. Played since release (well when AMD drivers got fixed) and I know how the EXP system works.


What it has to do with anything? I know how game works (as other people with high ranks might do aswell, shocking, right?), units gain experience only from dealing damage. In tanks combat no penetration means no damage, which means no experience.

jump backJump back to quoted post23 May 2016, 07:03 AMGumboot
Even without the numbers though, if you have an expensive (regardless of what you believe) tank which has a low armour value and large target size. Means that a greater % of shots are giving an EXP value. If the value is lower then that issued say by penetrating a Panther it is relative to the % of time you will achieve EXP split between full pen and deflection. As I said in the office and unfortunately not paid to justify myself to people online.


I dont believe, i know, lol. If you dont want to discuss things, then don't post, simple enought.
23 May 2016, 10:13 AM
#27
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



The concept of a durable allied tank isn't new. the soviet get access to the is2 by default.

if the axis atw can deal with 1040 hp 375 armor, it can deal with 1280 hp 320 armor.

and the difference between 1040 and 1280 is smaller than it looks.
1280/160 = 8
1040/160 = 6.5 (7)
so the Churchill will be only one on the field right ?
23 May 2016, 11:46 AM
#28
avatar of Crumbum

Posts: 213

jump backJump back to quoted post23 May 2016, 10:10 AMJadame!


I dont believe, i know, lol. If you dont want to discuss things, then don't post, simple enought.


Just because you think you know, doesn't mean you actually know. What you know might be wrong. :loco:
23 May 2016, 12:00 PM
#29
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



240 armor is not okay for a unit whose main(and sole) purpose is to act as the spearhead of an assault.

and the churchill is not the first stone wall tank to fail. the kv-1 is pretty much in the same boat.


At least KV-1 has amazing and heavy armor suited vet.

Like.. acceleration bonus or.. speed!

so the Churchill will be only one on the field right ?

Sure thing buddy!
The moment it gets Tiger gun stat-wise.

You think heavy tank that struggles to finish off single P4 deserves to be limited?
You are not biased any longer. You are bias incarnation now.
23 May 2016, 12:13 PM
#30
avatar of DAZ187

Posts: 466

churchill is not a tank destroyer. so dont spam them.
one churchill and one firefly works well.
it soaks up all the damage and gives firefly vision
23 May 2016, 12:44 PM
#31
avatar of Crumbum

Posts: 213

jump backJump back to quoted post23 May 2016, 12:00 PMKatitof

You are not biased any longer. You are bias incarnation now.


The irony is real :lolol:
23 May 2016, 12:59 PM
#32
avatar of SolidSteel

Posts: 74

jump backJump back to quoted post23 May 2016, 05:11 AMiceman
No, Ostheer Tiger is garbage.


More ROF pls
23 May 2016, 13:14 PM
#33
avatar of Strummingbird
Honorary Member Badge

Posts: 952 | Subs: 1

Churchill is definitely pretty underwhelming when it hits the field, but snowballing 2 or more becomes very tough to deal with. They aren't really killable under most circumstances, and stacked with the absurd rate of repair on upgraded sappers it becomes quite hilarious how much raw HP the brit player can throw at you.

Improving the side-benefits of the Anvil package would go a long way to improving the viability of the Churchill. Airburst shells are great, but having them benefit the soon-to-be-buffed Sexton would make both Royal Arty commander and Anvil synergistic. Early warning flares don't seem to work at all, or have minimal impact (I've never noticed its effects ingame). Heavy engineers probably shouldn't change, if only because the repair speed they get is (as mentioned earlier) quite insane.

As others have mentioned, an infantry-buff aura for the vehicle could work too, emphasizing its role as an infantry support tank. The Churchill smoke screen is, I assume, meant to shield infantry following the tank from HMG and supporting fire, but the speed penalty is a little too significant to make it useful. I believe it drops the tank's speed by 50%, could be worth trying 75% instead.

Lastly the Churchill is just way overshadowed by the very effective Comet. The phos shells on the comet definitely deserve a nerf, the 5 sec reload + 70 range + the fact that they rapidly burn team weapons to death (unlike the inferior Yank phosphorus) is a little too much.
23 May 2016, 14:43 PM
#34
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

1) In order to make Churchill more worthwhile, Relic should first address the broken/subpar abilities that hold Anvil synergy back.
- Advanced warning is still bugged (doesn't work at all)
- Airburst shells are awesome. However, HE shells are still garbage (they might need the Sexton treatment).

The latter is important since having access to indirect fire & Heavy Sappers requires a lot of popcap. This brings us to the next problem.

2) In order to utilize all Anvil benefits, this requires too much popcap.

As Brits, you always need 2 Healing Tommies (EVEN if you plan on blobbing your entire army) = 16 popcap
To get access to arty, you need a sniper or a flare tommy = 8 popcap
To make use of heavy sappers, you would be foolish not to get 2 of them = 16 popcap.

That's 5 squads of infantry (or 40 popcap). And notice that none of these squads have any AT utility whatsoever. Sure, you can buy PIATs. However, which squad should use PIATs?
- You can't give PIATs to heavy sappers (since their speed makes them useless to chase tanks)
- You can't give PIATs to tommies (their Vet3 bonus and reload penalty will get in the way).

Finally, on top of that you have the Churchill which has minimal AT utility and costs 18 popcap.

Now, if Brits had access to popcap-free healing, things would have been more tractable (you could forego on-field healing to save up 16 popcap).

3) Anvil Churchill needs a popcap decrease.

Anvil Churchill shares the same popcap as the AVRE and the Crocodile, but shares none of their utility. The Tiger Tank costs only 1 popcap more, and has exactly the same durability (but more speed, better gun, better vet).

In the worst case, if the enemy spams TDs, your AVRE, Crocodile, Tiger is still able to camp a VP and prevent the enemy from capturing. The Churchill can't (thus it only ends up taking popcap).

If you fear Churchill will become too spammable, Relic could introduce a hardcap. However, a slow tank with a subpar gun will never be spammable (since it exposes the player to multiple forms of counterplay). Thus, if you build 2 Churchills, I will build 3 Stugs, and you will end up with 0 Churchills.

4) Churchill needs to award even less veterancy than it does now.

Churchill's main gun is the grenade. This isn't enough to threaten targets, which is OK. However it gives off too much veterancy to targets which it cannot chase/wipe.

You need other units to wipe veterancy off, and Churchill's price already gets in the way of that.
23 May 2016, 14:53 PM
#35
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post23 May 2016, 12:00 PMKatitof


At least KV-1 has amazing and heavy armor suited vet.

Like.. acceleration bonus or.. speed!


Sure thing buddy!
The moment it gets Tiger gun stat-wise.

You think heavy tank that struggles to finish off single P4 deserves to be limited?
You are not biased any longer. You are bias incarnation now.

Well 320 armor and 1280 hp not doctrinal for only 180 fuel would be spammed like no tomorrow (and in biased right ?)
23 May 2016, 15:11 PM
#36
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

With a pea shooter mounted on it. :snfQuinn:

Or you plan to roadkill opposing armor and infantry with it?
23 May 2016, 15:42 PM
#37
avatar of Grim

Posts: 1096

The problem with the Churchill is that the high HP pool is utterly negated by its slow speed. It spends more time getting into range than the faster comet/cromwell does and takes more damage in that time.

Not to mention its inability to......drive away.

And people saying the Comet is over-performing....please be serious XD
23 May 2016, 16:27 PM
#38
avatar of PanzerGeneralForever

Posts: 1072

1) In order to make Churchill more worthwhile, Relic should first address the broken/subpar abilities that hold Anvil synergy back.
- Advanced warning is still bugged (doesn't work at all)
- Airburst shells are awesome. However, HE shells are still garbage (they might need the Sexton treatment).

The latter is important since having access to indirect fire & Heavy Sappers requires a lot of popcap. This brings us to the next problem.

2) In order to utilize all Anvil benefits, this requires too much popcap.

As Brits, you always need 2 Healing Tommies (EVEN if you plan on blobbing your entire army) = 16 popcap
To get access to arty, you need a sniper or a flare tommy = 8 popcap
To make use of heavy sappers, you would be foolish not to get 2 of them = 16 popcap.

That's 5 squads of infantry (or 40 popcap). And notice that none of these squads have any AT utility whatsoever. Sure, you can buy PIATs. However, which squad should use PIATs?
- You can't give PIATs to heavy sappers (since their speed makes them useless to chase tanks)
- You can't give PIATs to tommies (their Vet3 bonus and reload penalty will get in the way).

Finally, on top of that you have the Churchill which has minimal AT utility and costs 18 popcap.

Now, if Brits had access to popcap-free healing, things would have been more tractable (you could forego on-field healing to save up 16 popcap).

3) Anvil Churchill needs a popcap decrease.

Anvil Churchill shares the same popcap as the AVRE and the Crocodile, but shares none of their utility. The Tiger Tank costs only 1 popcap more, and has exactly the same durability (but more speed, better gun, better vet).

In the worst case, if the enemy spams TDs, your AVRE, Crocodile, Tiger is still able to camp a VP and prevent the enemy from capturing. The Churchill can't (thus it only ends up taking popcap).

If you fear Churchill will become too spammable, Relic could introduce a hardcap. However, a slow tank with a subpar gun will never be spammable (since it exposes the player to multiple forms of counterplay). Thus, if you build 2 Churchills, I will build 3 Stugs, and you will end up with 0 Churchills.

4) Churchill needs to award even less veterancy than it does now.

Churchill's main gun is the grenade. This isn't enough to threaten targets, which is OK. However it gives off too much veterancy to targets which it cannot chase/wipe.

You need other units to wipe veterancy off, and Churchill's price already gets in the way of that.


+1

Would rather get free blitz on my tanks and access to gammon bombs for ISs AND access to the superb comet that has only 10 less armor than tiger :p
23 May 2016, 16:42 PM
#39
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post23 May 2016, 15:11 PMKatitof
With a pea shooter mounted on it. :snfQuinn:

Or you plan to roadkill opposing armor and infantry with it?
do you rember the old day the Churchill was spammed the gun did not change if you give it 80 damage then we can talk
23 May 2016, 18:19 PM
#40
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

do you rember the old day the Churchill was spammed the gun did not change if you give it 80 damage then we can talk


And you forget that it was viable due to all the other OP things right? Commandos and offmap specially. People would still go for Comets, thing is, Churhills were noob friendly.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

766 users are online: 766 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49101
Welcome our newest member, Dorca477
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM