Login

russian armor

t34/85 is a bit too cheap

17 Jul 2016, 13:10 PM
#21
avatar of OZtheWiZARD

Posts: 1439

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jul 2016, 12:20 PMDomine



Do you play the game? 85s are 130 fuel. And you get only one of them



I guess I have added that I haven't played that commander in my original post for no reason, did I?



jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jul 2016, 11:29 AMKatitof

The call-ins don't exist any longer for 34/85, they are T4 unit now and the price was lowered to not make it too steep or arrive too late compared to old call-in.



But you still need specific commander to be able to build T-34/85 right?
17 Jul 2016, 13:25 PM
#22
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

You do, but I wouldn't call them call-ins anymore as, well, they aren't that any longer.
17 Jul 2016, 13:28 PM
#23
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885




I guess I have added that I haven't played that commander in my original post for no reason, did I?

But you still need specific commander to be able to build T-34/85 right?


The 85 is just ability-unlocked additional unit in soviet T4. The unlock ability is in the commanders that earlier had 2x od 1x 85 callin, is 0cp and passive.
17 Jul 2016, 15:28 PM
#24
avatar of atouba

Posts: 482

It's the too expensive for Pz4. If T34/85 is ok. Both Ost and OKW have more expensive medium tanks. The Ost Pz4 should cost 115 fule while the OKW Pz4 should cost 135 fuel(back to the previous cost).
17 Jul 2016, 16:35 PM
#25
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

It's not that is under priced but the problem lies in the indirect buff it got , let's start:
1 now can pen any axis rear armor
2 t34-76 mg buffed so t34 85 too
3 volks blob gone
4 is in one of the best doc for all faction (motor guard)
Then has 800 hp and enough armor to make p4 bounce it
While having awesome rate of fire
So it fits the meta too well
It still get easily beaten by stug and jp4
17 Jul 2016, 16:55 PM
#26
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

It's not that is under priced but the problem lies in the indirect buff it got , let's start:
1 now can pen any axis rear armor

So can P4. Increase P4 price?
2 t34-76 mg buffed so t34 85 too

Isn't really that relevant, because its main cannon can actually hit infantry.
3 volks blob gone

Irrelevant. Pfaust and puppchen is just as lethal to it.
4 is in one of the best doc for all faction (motor guard)

Irrelevant. Arguably, its the only soviet relevant doctrine since forever.
Then has 800 hp and enough armor to make p4 bounce it

EZ8 got even more, yet it costs pretty much the same. Both, 34/85 and ez8 are half tier above P4, so them being stronger then it isn't really an argument. They got discount, because they are doctrinal units that require tech structure, no other vehicle does.
While having awesome rate of fire

Only panther and TDs shoot slower.
So it fits the meta too well

Not really an argument. It fits meta, because its reliable.
If you want to nerf units, because they fit meta, you'd have to nerf HMG42, all OKW inf call-ins, pretty much any unit that is reliable.

It still get easily beaten by stug and jp4
17 Jul 2016, 17:04 PM
#27
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post17 Jul 2016, 16:55 PMKatitof

So can P4. Increase P4 price?

Isn't really that relevant, because its main cannon can actually hit infantry.

Irrelevant. Pfaust and puppchen is just as lethal to it.

Irrelevant. Arguably, its the only soviet relevant doctrine since forever.

EZ8 got even more, yet it costs pretty much the same. Both, 34/85 and ez8 are half tier above P4, so them being stronger then it isn't really an argument. They got discount, because they are doctrinal units that require tech structure, no other vehicle does.

Only panther and TDs shoot slower.

Not really an argument. It fits meta, because its reliable.
If you want to nerf units, because they fit meta, you'd have to nerf HMG42, all OKW inf call-ins, pretty much any unit that is reliable.

It still get easily beaten by stug and jp4
no really katiof wtf !!!!
Was I saying nerf that shit ?I was just stating a point I don't want to nerf it or make it cost too much
And p4 is overpriced but yea say what you want
Btw no p4 can't pen all tank rear Churchill is 2 Isu comet it has only 110 pen
Do you even think before posting or are you are just to disagree everyone : " I like that cake" kat :"no you don't "
17 Jul 2016, 17:06 PM
#28
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

T-34/85 penned rear armour of all axis tanks 100% since forever. The rear armour nerf buffed the t-34/76 significantly, thogh, in fact heavy armour is the only targets it's able to hit quite often.
17 Jul 2016, 17:09 PM
#29
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

T-34/85 penned rear armor of all axis tanks 100% since forever.
tiger and KT say otherwise
17 Jul 2016, 17:20 PM
#30
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

tiger and KT say otherwise


Well, yeah, you are right. On the other hand, don't you think that the top medium of a faction should reliably pen the rear armour of heavies? That's what top mediums are all about.
17 Jul 2016, 17:33 PM
#31
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474



Well, yeah, you are right. On the other hand, don't you think that the top medium of a faction should reliably pen the rear armour of heavies? That's what top mediums are all about.
I think that is ok Infact I was stating a point it fit the meta soo well
17 Jul 2016, 19:15 PM
#32
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414

I love the t34/85, it just has more utility/power for it's cost.

If the doc argument is being used, we have to consider the power level of all the other doc units. Not very many of them are as cost effective as the t34/85.
17 Jul 2016, 19:28 PM
#33
avatar of TheMachine
Senior Caster Badge

Posts: 875 | Subs: 6

I think if anything, the Panzer IV just needs a Pen buff to make it scale better against Comets and heavies.
17 Jul 2016, 19:42 PM
#34
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

I think if anything, the Panzer IV just needs a Pen buff to make it scale better against Comets and heavies.


I agree, its damn stupid that the p4 has 110 pen while sherman AP and cromwell have 120. Especially as even in the model you can see that p4s gun is longer barreled and thus should have better pen. I would even suggest buffing p4 to 120 pen while nerfing cromwell and sherman to 110 at the same time.
17 Jul 2016, 20:44 PM
#35
avatar of comm_ash
Patrion 14

Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1

Just because a unit is doctrinal is not a reason for it to be more cost efficient than it should be. Doctrinal units are additional options for you to use to play the game, not better versions of stock units. T34/85 is insanely cost efficient with 800 HP and a fairly good maingun for only 130 fuel. It definitely needs an increased cost to bring it in line with other tanks price/performance wise, when compared with stock armor like the P4.
17 Jul 2016, 21:02 PM
#36
avatar of Mr.Smith

Posts: 2636 | Subs: 17

The T34/85 got a cost-reduction, I believe, simply because of the teching cost increase (when it got integrated into the tech-tree after dominating the call-in meta).

1. IMO, 'imbalancing' a units production/replacement cost simply because of the teching requirements to build it is a folly:

- This kind of balancing only takes account for the first appearance for the unit
- You can't predict how long a game will drag after the unit is called in.
- The longer the game has the tendency to drag (e.g., 4v4), the more efficient the unit becomes (while also eclipsing other commanders)

To see why this kind of balancing is flawed, look no further than the Bofors:
- I would argue that the first Bofors comes late enough.
- However, it is ridiculously cheap to replace a lost Bofors.

2. The reason for all this, is 1v1 call-in meta.

Call-in spam simply laughs in the face of teching. If T-34/85's weren't crazy-cost efficient, what hope would you ever have to keep that unit relevant vs no-tech, call-in Tigers?

IMO:
- It's fair for the T-34/85 to get a cost nerf. It will still remain useful
- However, it will be even better if we also locked all other call-in units behind tech requirement; not just E8 and T-34/85.



I agree, its damn stupid that the p4 has 110 pen while sherman AP and cromwell have 120. Especially as even in the model you can see that p4s gun is longer barreled and thus should have better pen. I would even suggest buffing p4 to 120 pen while nerfing cromwell and sherman to 110 at the same time.


Note that penetration also depends on range. What you see listed on stat.coh2.hu is only the mid-range penetration. Some tank guns gain/lose penetration at a higher rate than others.

For instance:
Panzer IV:
120 - 110 - 100 (Near - Mid - Far)

Sherman
140 - 120 - 100

Cromwell
135 - 120 - 105

T-34/76
120 - 100 -80

T-34/85
160 - 140 - 120

Puma
160 - 120 - 80

What this means is that even though P4 penetration looks pretty low compared to the Sherman, they become equal at max-range.
17 Jul 2016, 21:14 PM
#37
avatar of tightrope
Senior Caster Badge
Patrion 39

Posts: 1194 | Subs: 29

I agree that call ins are the next major balance issue. I'm on board with miragefla where they are dramatically more expensive if you don't have tech.

I don't mind if you still call them in with no build time but being able to skip tech makes pricing things very difficult.
17 Jul 2016, 21:29 PM
#38
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



I agree, its damn stupid that the p4 has 110 pen while sherman AP and cromwell have 120. Especially as even in the model you can see that p4s gun is longer barreled and thus should have better pen. I would even suggest buffing p4 to 120 pen while nerfing cromwell and sherman to 110 at the same time.


the penetration on the sherman got buffed because no one ever use it into the late game. Unfortunately people still never use it into the late game because it have bad survivability. Even the british are abandoning their cromwell for the comet since the cromwell is a lot easier to kill now.

ironically the t34/76 "scale" better since it's so cheap.
17 Jul 2016, 21:38 PM
#39
avatar of sinthe

Posts: 414



For instance:
Panzer IV:
120 - 110 - 100 (Near - Mid - Far)

Sherman
140 - 120 - 100

Cromwell
135 - 120 - 105

T-34/76
120 - 100 -80

T-34/85
160 - 140 - 120

Puma
160 - 120 - 80

What this means is that even though P4 penetration looks pretty low compared to the Sherman, they become equal at max-range.


If that is the weapons profile for pen, the p4 needs some love.
17 Jul 2016, 22:26 PM
#40
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

I see only one problem with T35/85.

First one is very expensive but as the game moves on over 30-40min it becomes too cheap. 140-145F would be a fair price.
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

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

494 users are online: 494 guests
1 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
39 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49062
Welcome our newest member, Mclatc16
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM