Login

russian armor

Pershing buff?

Do you think that Pershing needs a health/armor buff?
Option Distribution Votes
13%
14%
22%
49%
1%
Total votes: 85
Vote VOTE! Vote ABSTAIN
31 Jul 2016, 15:18 PM
#1
avatar of Dj Rolnik

Posts: 21

Hey guys,

I'd like to hear your opinion on the Pershing buff that I was thinking about recently. First off, however, a diclaimer: I do not want to create another whine thread. If you want to reply: "No", or "USF fanboy", you are unwanted on this thread. I would like to hear your opinions and create a civilized discussion.

Secondly, I have noticed that many many people on forums argue about things without taking into account the fact that 1 vs 1s are something different than 4 vs 4s. That, obviously, makes any potential changes that more difficult to implement. Opinions might vary because of that fact but I'd like to hear your thoughts anyways.

Lastly I am not the best player in the community and I am mostly a team games player. I might be wrong on some points and I might be making mistakes using it. So now straight to the point!

As you all know, Pershing is the long awaited Heavy Tank for the USF. As you all know 2, many people in the community argue that its price does not reflect its potential. 600 manpower and 230 fuel? (O.O) Many people are screaming that it's trash and other stuff. For a long time I refused this, but after a little time spent with it, I must agree.. Personally I got super-super hyped, when I heard it announced. I would never think, that I would be playing with Tactical Support Company (Calliope) more than with the Heavy Cavalry Company (Pershing). After the commander was released I tried to squeeze the most of the company and always stumbled upon the same problem. Pershing just does not stand a chance against other heavies. And yes, before you attack me. I know that it is supposed to be more agile with better firepower. Nevertheless, its agility does not serve very much use even if you flank other heavies because it is quickly prioritised as the biggest threat and taken down in a matter of seconds. USF is focused around agility, versatility and combined arms. Thus, using Pershing as a tank (literally) and distraction is presumably a perfect idea when the rest of the army attacks from a different side. However, It's super hard when Pershing goes down so quickly.

The USF heavy apparently has more armor and better firepower than the Tiger but still goes down faster. It feels like it was not created to stand 1 to 1 with a german "counterpart". Claiming that Pershing is okay, because it has a better gun does not seem justified to me considering it comes super late game (as other heavies) and rarely battles Panzer IVs but rather Tigers, KTs and stuff like that. More health of a Tiger still makes it better against Pershing as the latter will simply not last through all of the Tiger's shots and Pershing's better gun seems to be there only to make up for the fact, that without it, the tank would be the worst thing in the US army. The gun simply does not grant any advantage over German heavies due to their health level.

Having all that in mind, I thought about suggesting giving it a buff. Maybe someone would be so kind to create a simple mod for a try? Stugs have sideskirts, m20 has a sideskirt upgrade, I know there is something else which has sideskirts as well, but I cannot recall this right now. Why not give the Pershing an armor/health upgrade/skirt-like and convert it to Super Pershing? (Yes there is such a thing. The main difference is more armour and a slightly better gun, but I would stick to the armour upgrade only) Screenshots below.
That would be an upgrade obtainable by either:
a) A super expensive muni-based armour upgrade (200?) to give it additional armor (actually health since buffing armor would be even more frustrating to German players)
b) Changing its veterancy bonuses - Currently vet 2 grenades are as useful as a chocolate teapot. Really. Grenades, when used even, tend to targe vehicles instead of infantry :/ Lelic...
c) Any other hard-to-meet requirement (maybe all tiers built?) which would make it stand a bit longer in the late game?

I think that this upgrade would have to be pretty hard to obtain but would offer the USF players a bit more chance in the late game. Let's be honest, Allies still struggle with German lates. And I am not whining about it, that is completely reasonable as German tanks were always superior and that is fine. Nevertheless, having a heavy tank with so little chance in the late game, when there are Elefants, Tigers, KTs or Jags is a bit frustrating. If the super expensive health upgrade would be in, I would be a bit mor cautious with it and try to obtain the so-much-needed health boost when I have the resources.

What do you guys think? I am very curious to hear your opinion on that since I know there are a lot of people who, just like me, were pretty disappointed with what they received with the commander and just do not use him any more. Again, please do not treat this as a whine thread. I just put my thoughts here with a little hope for someone noticing this and maybe having a similar opinion.

Thanks guys!

Pershing:


Super Pershing:
31 Jul 2016, 15:22 PM
#2
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

Pershing is in a perfect spot right now, there is no need for any changes. What's more, super pershing would be the only tank in whole game that wasn't used during ww2, that's why relic is not going to try this even if they thought pershing is UP.

Also, this is wrong forum for ballance thread.
31 Jul 2016, 15:24 PM
#3
avatar of Dj Rolnik

Posts: 21

Can we move it to a proper section then, plz? I am having trouble navigating through the numerous forums and their subsections and their sub-subsections.
31 Jul 2016, 15:26 PM
#4
avatar of Dj Rolnik

Posts: 21

Pershing is in a perfect spot right now, there is no need for any changes. What's more, super pershing would be the only tank in whole game that wasn't used during ww2, that's why relic is not going to try this even if they thought pershing is UP.

Also, this is wrong forum for ballance thread.


Apparently a few were used. But still, "a few". There are a couple other vehicles in the game which I believe were mostly prototypes and only several were produced and saw battle.
31 Jul 2016, 15:31 PM
#5
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885



Apparently a few were used. But still, "a few". There are a couple other vehicles in the game which I believe were mostly prototypes and only several were produced and saw battle.


Standard pershing has very few documented battle usages during ww2. The super pershing is absolutely out of question. If you find anything telling you about battle usage of super pershing its pure propaganda.
31 Jul 2016, 15:45 PM
#6
avatar of JohnnyShaun

Posts: 144

Pershing is lacking of HP pool mainly. Gun is ok, armor is approx ok, speed is ok. Another thing is that real pershing had .50 cal mounted MG and should be added ingame.
31 Jul 2016, 16:06 PM
#7
avatar of Dj Rolnik

Posts: 21



Standard pershing has very few documented battle usages during ww2. The super pershing is absolutely out of question. If you find anything telling you about battle usage of super pershing its pure propaganda.


I understand that it might not be used often (at all?) during the WWII but it's not about deleting the Pershing and adding the Super Pershing. All I am suggesting is giving it an HP pool boost. It does not necessarily have to be a Super Pershing in the end. I suggested it as it is a similar vehicle with only a few changes and would be a good source for graphical model, but outside of that, I do not want to change the vehicle. If we can add a buff to the original Pershing without making it a "Super" variant - I am fine with that.
31 Jul 2016, 16:20 PM
#8
avatar of CookiezNcreem
Senior Strategist Badge
Donator 11

Posts: 3052 | Subs: 15

Moved.

For reference,


Coh2 central is for stuff like this, adding units and whatnot is COH2 gameplay.


Coh2 balance is "Sturmpiooners OP"

COh2 bugs is "USF mortar fires sturmtiger shells"

Lobby is for news, or general community based discussion, "new tournament on the way!" etc.


The state office is basically the L2play forum, "Im struggling with ____ how to counter?"
31 Jul 2016, 16:25 PM
#9
avatar of Dj Rolnik

Posts: 21

Moved.

For reference,


Coh2 central is for stuff like this, adding units and whatnot is COH2 gameplay.


Coh2 balance is "Sturmpiooners OP"

COh2 bugs is "USF mortar fires sturmtiger shells"

Lobby is for news, or general community based discussion, "new tournament on the way!" etc.


The state office is basically the L2play forum, "Im struggling with ____ how to counter?"


Thanks Cookiez! :)
31 Jul 2016, 16:25 PM
#10
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885



I understand that it might not be used often (at all?) during the WWII but it's not about deleting the Pershing and adding the Super Pershing. All I am suggesting is giving it an HP pool boost. It does not necessarily have to be a Super Pershing in the end. I suggested it as it is a similar vehicle with only a few changes and would be a good source for graphical model, but outside of that, I do not want to change the vehicle. If we can add a buff to the original Pershing without making it a "Super" variant - I am fine with that.


Try to compare the stats of tiger and pershing. The only important thing that tiger is better at is the hp pool, while pershing gets all the other benefits - it has higher penetration, better AI, speed and acceleration. Plus, it has totally amazing special attack and crew nades. Hp is its only disadvantage (for the record it also has lower rear armour but its not important for such a fast tank). Just learn to use tanks strenghts and don't let enemy use its weaknesses and all will be well.

You can also look at it the other way: USF has 2 amazing tanks at last tier - sherman which is great flanker and best AI med in game, and jackson - a TD that has great view range and deals with even heaviest of german tanks. These two tanks are enough to win any late game match but they have one problem - they are micro intensive and when the numbers become bigger and bigger, you need a lot of skill to manage all of them.

That is when pershing comes in - a heavy that is kind of micro intensive for a heavy as well, but still much, much less than two additional mediums. It also has good armour, usefull abilities and does the job of both jackson and sherman - being better at both roles. That's why it is needed and why you should build it. If you find pershing usefull, just like I do, and you would buy it instead of two additional jacksons, then its in perfect spot - it adds combat ability to your army while not being one tank army itself.
31 Jul 2016, 16:34 PM
#11
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

If you want it to have more survivability, then nerf it's AOE. It is too potent at sniping units, especially grens and pgrens.

In 1v1 the Pershing is very potent when supported right. If you preserve your 57mm at gun and have it at vet 2 or vet 3 when the Pershing comes out, you have the fastest firing at gun in the game supporting your Pershing. This in combination with double bar riflemen and a mortar or two is a very good combo. Add a Jackson and you are unstoppable.

Pershing is fine as it is. USF doesn't need any further buffs. They are only overshadowed by Soviets in terms of effectiveness in 1v1s.
31 Jul 2016, 16:38 PM
#12
avatar of Dj Rolnik

Posts: 21



Try to compare the stats of tiger and pershing. The only important thing that tiger is better at is the hp pool, while pershing gets all the other benefits - it has higher penetration, better AI, speed and acceleration. Plus, it has totally amazing special attack and crew nades. Hp is its only disadvantage (for the record it also has lower rear armour but its not important for such a fast tank). Just learn to use tanks strenghts and don't let enemy use its weaknesses and all will be well.


I totally see your point. Nevertheless, I still struggle to keep it alive even when facing with front armor. Trying to use its strengths like speed and the hvap shell all the time. To add to it, the Combined Arms also is there for a reason, I know it ;) You might be right on the fact that Tiger does not have any special abilities like that of Pershing, but it also has a gunner at the top. Pershing grenades, as I mentioned, are trash. Every time I hope for them to target infantry, they target the nearest Panther instead.. The entire nature of this seems to be completely random and thrown in there just to occupy space in the veterancy buffs.

You also mentioned its better AI capabilities. Again, that's fine, but AI is not AT (cap'n obvious). I would rather use the Shermans, which are clearly an infantry support tanks and have great AI capabilities, than have a heavy tank good at fighting inf, where it should fight other tanks.

Please be aware, that all the pros you mention the Pershing has, are very good in 1 vs 1 matches. In larger team games, not very much. Most of the time there's no room for flanking and you are facing not 1 but 2 or more hostile vehicles. Its speed only helps it run back if spotted by three other German vehicles.
31 Jul 2016, 16:38 PM
#13
avatar of The amazing Chandler

Posts: 1355

Waiting for DonnieChan's player card post :D

Joking aside, i think the Pershing is fine. It is a infantry killing machine.
31 Jul 2016, 16:42 PM
#14
avatar of Dj Rolnik

Posts: 21

Waiting for DonnieChan's player card post :D

Joking aside, i think the Pershing is fine. It is a infantry killing machine.


Another post about AI, eh? :P Guys, cool. I get it. It's fine vs inf. But it's not inf that USF struggles with.
31 Jul 2016, 16:45 PM
#15
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885



Another post about AI, eh? :P Guys, cool. I get it. It's fine vs inf. But it's not inf that USF struggles with.


Jackson also got powerful buff recently - not needing a scout is super important for a TD, it also allows for some a-move here and there.
31 Jul 2016, 16:49 PM
#16
avatar of mediev

Posts: 93

Pershing is lacking of HP pool mainly. Gun is ok, armor is approx ok, speed is ok. Another thing is that real pershing had .50 cal mounted MG and should be added ingame.


You are right about the .50 cal. Pershing is the only heavy tank without the ability to upgrade to an MG. WHY? Is Relic really that lazy? It is one tank, so you should be able to get the maximum out of it.
31 Jul 2016, 16:51 PM
#17
avatar of Dj Rolnik

Posts: 21



Jackson also got powerful buff recently - not needing a scout is super important for a TD, it also allows for some a-move here and there.


Yes, I completely agree here. I usually use Jacksons with Pershing combo. Not saying there's no wayto overcome them. It's just soo incredibly hard. Jacksons also tend to have problems with German front armor. It glances even from a Panther. I just thought that a separate upgrade for a Pershing would benefit USF late game a bit more. In 1 vs 1s you usually do not have that much resources in the late game and seeing this upgrade in action would be rare, tbh. I'd rather spend that tons of muni on smoking and advancing forward. In team games, however, there is a clear front line and not much space for flanking. That's why I thought of giving the Pershing a health boost (even a very expensive one, that's fine) to give it just a little bit more survivability. There's very little chance for USF to break through a defensive German line of a competitive player.
31 Jul 2016, 16:58 PM
#18
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1617

I'd rather make all call-ins tied to tech.

Its stupid to get M26/Tiger/Is-2 etc with low tech.
31 Jul 2016, 17:04 PM
#19
avatar of mediev

Posts: 93



Jackson also got powerful buff recently - not needing a scout is super important for a TD, it also allows for some a-move here and there.


If you mean that LoS buff at vet 2 or whatever, it is irrelevant. It is +5 sight. That is nothing for a TD, because even then the sight is still much shorter than the firing range, unlike on a Tiger for example, where the LoS buff matters a lot more. Jackson ALWAYS needs a scout, otherwise its gonna die. Everything that destroyed Jacksons before, still does. The pen is still not that great either. It is OK at times, but you just cannot depend on those finishing shots the way you can eg. with a Firefly. That is just my opinion though.
31 Jul 2016, 17:46 PM
#20
avatar of Dj Rolnik

Posts: 21

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Jul 2016, 16:49 PMmediev


You are right about the .50 cal. Pershing is the only heavy tank without the ability to upgrade to an MG. WHY? Is Relic really that lazy? It is one tank, so you should be able to get the maximum out of it.


It would be cool, yeah, but it would not change my attitude towards the tank. As we have already established, the tank is already an AI beast.

I still think that from the 4 vs 4 team games perspective the upgrade, no matter how expensive, is definitely worth at least trying out. I do acknowledge that in the end I might say that it's not necessary too, however at this point I am reluctant to do so ;)
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

870 users are online: 870 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49074
Welcome our newest member, Kintz652
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM