Login

russian armor

OKW armors cost should be reverted

23 Jun 2016, 20:43 PM
#41
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742


If it can self spot, it can't outpace a Stug. Even if both units have sight on each other, the Stug is still faster. You can win if you have LOS AND you back up prior to the Stug starts moving up. Overall it's a match up decided by RNG mostly (whoever miss probably losses).

Penetration means shit, and hits to kill are equal although the Stug has less health. On the same time it takes for the Su85 to do 4 reloads, a Stug makes 5. I'll gladly trade a Stug for an Su85. Most people are scared to do that kind of push.
Any kind of veterancy puts the edge on the Stug (TWP, vet2 no longer offers RoF for Su85 and it does on the Stug, vet3 RoF vet is higher on the Stug).


Well considering my whole point was that differing circumstances can heavily influence that match-up, more evidence to show that it's not as simple as 'this beats that' is perfectly welcome.

The StuG never gets that self spot or range, just as the SU-85's vet is different with penetration having implications for units outside a matchup with a StuG. And while the SU-85 slows down on self spot, I don't think anyone can deny the defensive advantage.

They're different units with different costs and function. This is not the same as comparing the differing costs and function of the Panzer 4 or Panthers from Ostheer and OKW.
23 Jun 2016, 20:46 PM
#42
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1



235 vs 180 is a pretty significant difference.

180 bounces Zookas like a third of the time, 234 bounces them like half of the time, definitely not nothing.
23 Jun 2016, 20:55 PM
#43
avatar of TheGentlemenTroll

Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 20:46 PMVuther

180 bounces Zookas like a third of the time, 234 bounces them like half of the time, definitely not nothing.


Plus more bounces means more shots given off by the p4 and therefore more damage can be done, people brush off the armor stats but there isa reason the okw p4 is considered a lot better than the ost p4
24 Jun 2016, 07:11 AM
#44
avatar of atouba

Posts: 482



235 vs 180 is a pretty significant difference.

Read my post. Churchill has 1400HP and 290/190 armor. 1400 vs 640 and 290 vs 235 is a pretty pretty significant difference but guess what, The fuel cost is 160 vs 150. I don't know RELIC's LOGIC... OKW pz4 should be at least 720hp imo to be in line with its expensive cost. Even though it has 5 vet levels, it still dies to 4 shots by TDs. I HAVEN'T HAD A VET 5 PZ4 yet. The 5 vet levels is nothing to a tank which has 640HP. And who builds OKW panther now when they can builds JP4?200 fuel is too too much. Who ever has a vet 5 panther?Show me the pic pls.
24 Jun 2016, 07:15 AM
#45
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2016, 07:11 AMatouba

Read my post. Churchill has 1400HP and 290/190 armor. 1400 vs 640 and 290 vs 235 is a pretty pretty significant difference but guess what, The fuel cost is 160 vs 150. I don't know RELIC's LOGIC... OKW pz4 should be at least 720hp imo to be in line with its expensive cost. Even though it has 5 vet levels, it still dies to 4 shots by TDs. I HAVEN'T HAD A VET 5 PZ4 yet. The 5 vet levels is nothing to a tank which has 640HP. And who builds OKW panther now when they can builds JP4?200 fuel is too too much. Who ever has a vet 5 panther?Show me the pic pls.



Which churchill you talk about? Because the one in the game have 240 armor.
24 Jun 2016, 07:56 AM
#46
avatar of medhood

Posts: 621

The Vehicles from the Mechanized Truck should be left untouched but the vehicles from the Panzer Schewer Headquarters could use adjustestments

The Panther, Panzer and Jagd could use in between 10-20 Fuel reductions, mainly cause OKW now has to side tech and having lost Shrecks on Volks they dont have much support AT wise anymore

Combat Blitz could also use a nerf like Smith said
24 Jun 2016, 08:11 AM
#47
avatar of ofield

Posts: 420

I don't think they should cost less. They still get vet 5. You are supposed to keep them alive. And hell, they are beasts with vet4+5.

Nevertheless is would accept a small price decrease for t4
24 Jun 2016, 08:16 AM
#48
avatar of RealName

Posts: 276

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 15:20 PMButcher
Please... don´t even bother answering Katitofs posts. This draws too much attention to his bullshit. You can´t argue with him at all. Ignore him and he will go away... or spread more of his shit like a tumor. Who knows? I´m done with the insults in the majority of his posts.


Huh. All I read is
jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 11:52 AMKatitof
pffbt prrt fpt pfbwart pffrt ffwt fwt fwwt pft
from him. Reading blatantly biased forum warriors' posts is counterproductive to any discussion, whether it be on balance or not.



jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 11:07 AMZyllen
People bring in arguments that no longer apply.

The reason the cost was increase was because volks shrek + quick teching nullified allied armour. the shrek is gone and the ostheer has even a quicker tech then the okw.

Vet 4 and 5 is impossible to attain in normal situations. The so called superiority of these units is minor and not worth the rather massive fuel increase.

People that say that the okw should have less armour presence because they are biased as shit , then i will say let the old obers return. the same obers that could smash 3 allied squads single handedly.

Their is no good reason for the okw to have more expensive stuff then the ostheer.


+1

People sometimes reason out the price of OKW armor being expensive due to their "superiority" to other factions' armor, mainly because of vet4 and vet 5. You almost never get to those levels unless you're in an extremely long game or your opponent is feeding vet to you (which means you're winning the game anyway). That is not enough reason to justify higher costs for armor(or teching, for that matter). Honestly if this the case, then vet 4 and vet 5 should be removed and made as an upgrade (maybe separate for infantry and armor), and unit prices slightly reduced. This way, you can make use of your armor, and when you DO manage to attain vet 3 with them aka not get them killed to all the cost efficient cromwells they have, you can opt to upgrade them and MAYBE make use of the extra vet levels.

Jagdpanzer however, is the exception and is fine for its cost if not a bit too cost efficient. Can't say the same for the others.
24 Jun 2016, 08:51 AM
#49
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

:snfPeter:

Reading blatantly biased forum warriors' posts is counterproductive to any discussion,


Then proceeds to +1 Zyllen :sibHyena:

Dude, your picture and full biography is on wiki page if you search for "hypocrite", if you go for "double standards" you'll find further life achievements :romeoHype:

Nothing changed for OKW AT except now they have AT snare on top of previous kit and puppchen got buffed.
Less shrecks, but overall AT got buffed, side upgrades are options, you can still rush tanks if you forego them, you know, like allies have to if they rush tanks. Its called making a choice, something that OKW players never had to do before.
24 Jun 2016, 08:53 AM
#50
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 10:35 AMKatitof

And 135 fuel SU-85 loses to 90 fuel StuG.
230 fuel Pershing loses to 175/200 fuel panther.
AEC loses to a pair of 222, which cost over 50% less fuel and similar menpower.
Your point?



:foreveralone:

Pershing is call in tank though, requires no tech, Panther is expensive for OKW.
24 Jun 2016, 09:17 AM
#51
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439

Better units should cost more. Why would you even try to argue something this obvious.
24 Jun 2016, 10:10 AM
#52
avatar of medhood

Posts: 621

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2016, 08:11 AMofield
I don't think they should cost less. They still get vet 5. You are supposed to keep them alive. And hell, they are beasts with vet4+5.

Nevertheless is would accept a small price decrease for t4

I know theyre a beast at Vet 5 but I dont think that is much of a problem except with a few or them, Panzer 4 isnt OP at Vet 5 unlike the Jagdpanzer for example

But this is more to do with the units Veterancy itself, the Jagdpanzers Camo for example needs to be changed or re-adjusted but that is a topic for another thread

24 Jun 2016, 11:00 AM
#53
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

The only OKW vehicle that regularily reaches vet 4 or 5 is the Panzer IV.

I can count on one hand how often I had a vet 5 Panther or Jagdpanzer IV.
24 Jun 2016, 11:05 AM
#54
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2016, 11:00 AMButcher
The only OKW vehicle that regularily reaches vet 4 or 5 is the Panzer IV.

I can count on one hand how often I had a vet 5 Panther or Jagdpanzer IV.
Actually, getting JP4 to high vet is also reliable, if it didn't got there, it means the game was too short as perseverance of the unit is extremely easy with dimensional shift.
24 Jun 2016, 11:20 AM
#55
avatar of Aradan

Posts: 1003

jump backJump back to quoted post24 Jun 2016, 11:00 AMButcher
The only OKW vehicle that regularily reaches vet 4 or 5 is the Panzer IV.

I can count on one hand how often I had a vet 5 Panther or Jagdpanzer IV.


In large team games ,with no problem you can reach vet 4-5. And it is noticeable advantage for OKW.
25 Jun 2016, 05:47 AM
#56
avatar of A big guy 4u

Posts: 168

Hahaha no.

So you want to keep normal resources AND get cheaper tanks? Do you know that right now, income/cost ratio, OKW tanks are actually cheaper?
25 Jun 2016, 06:16 AM
#57
avatar of IncendiaryRounds:)

Posts: 1527

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post23 Jun 2016, 20:46 PMVuther

180 bounces Zookas like a third of the time, 234 bounces them like half of the time, definitely not nothing.


+1 Massive difference, cuz the rifles can at nade the tank after penetrating, so a rifle squad can 1v1 a tank which is bs. Snare infantry shouldn't get additional hand-held at unless doctrinal (brit tank hunters). Riflemen can just get one bar and one zook making axis armor a liability to micro - constant kiting motion is required or else you'll lose it to a zook + at nade and then followed up by an "on me" and a infantry horde of zooks to finish off the tank.
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

961 users are online: 961 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49107
Welcome our newest member, Falac851
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM