Pershing buff?

If it gets more health then you would need to nerf it in other areas like removing the double tap, reducing aoe, reducing reload buffs with vet etc.

Incorrect.

JPIV is 45 sight range.

You are correct with that. Must have misread that one. Doesn't matter anyway, the vehicle is immobile enough to compensate and has no turret on top of that.

Command PV has 50 sight range at vet 0. Same with Tiger Ace at 50.

Jadgtiger has 85 range. KV2 on indirect has 70 (IIRC).

Got me with the Jagdtiger, that one always slips by me because I have never ever used it even once. Regarding the other things, they are exactly what I said. No Ostheer vehicle has more than 50 gun range, except the Elefant. And the KV-2 again is neither a tank, nor a tank destroyer so it has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

If it gets more health then you would need to nerf it in other areas like removing the double tap, reducing aoe, reducing reload buffs with vet etc.

I think it's still worth a try.

If it gets more health then you would need to nerf it in other areas like removing the double tap, reducing aoe, reducing reload buffs with vet etc.

I would rather make it a heavy specialized in AT than AI, so USF only Heavy Tank was specialized in duels, like the Panther is.

Instead of discussing marginals regarding combat usage, i think its safe to assume that the Pershing indeed does belong in the game just like many other vehicles both balance wise and historically.

And it does deserve a performance increase along with some tweaks just like the Tiger 1 does.

Nope, I like the way it is right now. It's actually one of the few units in this game that actually rewards good micro/skill.

It's a fast tank that hits hard on a faction that is already highly mobile. Excellent for hit-and-run tactics, unlike the sherman that is too slow to perform like this.

and for the people saying it need more AT power, get a jackson.

I would slightly reduce its AI power for higher armor/hp to stand better against late game axis tanks.

I love it, best "heavy" tank for me due callin, the faction and commander it is in and the faction it comes up against (i lol everytime I oneshoot grens/pgrens/obersoldaten. If you get a Jackson before/after that you got a small tank force which can take on every enemy Amor if the game wasnt too onesided (which should not be the case if you look how strong early and midgame is..)

no buff nedded

Its ability to snipe models, and indeed squads from beyond LoS immediately prevents buffing it in my mind. The unit is nasty when used well, and performs as a powerful platform able to get and get out in a hurry, all the while dealing good damage to all targets.

This is not a breakthrough tank, this is basically a Comet. If you want a breakthrough tank (AKA more health) play Soviets.

Again, remember that its effectiveness is very different in 1 vs 1 games and larger team games I agree that it has incredible potential in smaller games due to its mobility. Nevertheless it lacks a lot when in a frontline with no flanking possibilities.

I think that nerfing its AI for a bit more health is still reasonable. Trust me, staying in a front line with a Pershing is not that awesome if you play it. It does glance shots but not really that often considering there are already heavier tanks. Trust me, it eats two shots and almost instantly needs to be repaired because otherwise it will just go down in seconds. The role of tanking does not seem to exist here. The whole plan might be that you try to bait Germans a bit onto the Pershing and then proceed with Jacksons, Shermans or other stuff. But when it goes in it just cannot withstand the firepower and thus is not really reliable. In team games without real flanking possibilities it just does not shine
Again. 1 vs 1 - totally fine.

This is not a breakthrough tank, this is basically a Comet. If you want a breakthrough tank (AKA more health) play Soviets.

It's not about winning and not about playing with heavy breakthrough tanks just for the sake of doing it. I enjoy playing USf despite it being (arguably because of micro) the hardest faction to play, especially in team games. Hence the suggestion.

What are German players' experiences when fighting Pershings? What do you guys think? And I mean objectively, not "Oh, no more buffs for USF, make Germany great again!" and others like that

All it needs is just better veterancy IMO. All the other single call in heavies have wayyy better vet.

All it needs is just better veterancy IMO. All the other single call in heavies have wayyy better vet.

The difference between Vet 1 and 2 compared 3 is such a huge power spike.

Again, remember that its effectiveness is very different in 1 vs 1 games and larger team games I agree that it has incredible potential in smaller games due to its mobility. Nevertheless it lacks a lot when in a frontline with no flanking possibilities.

I think that nerfing its AI for a bit more health is still reasonable. Trust me, staying in a front line with a Pershing is not that awesome if you play it. It does glance shots but not really that often considering there are already heavier tanks. Trust me, it eats two shots and almost instantly needs to be repaired because otherwise it will just go down in seconds. The role of tanking does not seem to exist here. The whole plan might be that you try to bait Germans a bit onto the Pershing and then proceed with Jacksons, Shermans or other stuff. But when it goes in it just cannot withstand the firepower and thus is not really reliable. In team games without real flanking possibilities it just does not shine
Again. 1 vs 1 - totally fine.



It's not about winning and not about playing with heavy breakthrough tanks just for the sake of doing it. I enjoy playing USf despite it being (arguably because of micro) the hardest faction to play, especially in team games. Hence the suggestion.

What are German players' experiences when fighting Pershings? What do you guys think? And I mean objectively, not "Oh, no more buffs for USF, make Germany great again!" and others like that

Adding optional health at the cost of aoe, so it doesn't wipe squads as reliably would result in USF 1v1 players being unhappy with it I think. For 1v1s I don't think it needs a change like that. USF armor overall packs a punch and is fast but less durable, relies on safety in numbers and expendability to some extent. Probably those qualities don't pay off as well in multi player games unless you have a synergy with other factions. Playing against a Pershing in 1v1s I'd probably welcome a harder to kill version that doesn't wipe squads as easily.

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.

It's true but what moving units are not microintensive? It's kinda same for all. You still have to pay close attention to your hmg and I don't think, for example, a King Tiger is micro-unintensive. The KT is slow and a high value target. With this sluggishness in mind you need to be fast with microing it for that very reason and driving the KT is not just driving the KT, it's also managing all the supporting units around it, or it will die.

I say (and you do as well) that micro-intensiveness is foremost a function of number of troops and all movable troops are micro-intensive, so I don't think pinpointing certain units and labelling them micro-intensive is a fair representation.

It's true but what moving units are not microintensive? It's kinda same for all. You still have to pay close attention to your hmg and I don't think, for example, a King Tiger is micro-unintensive. The KT is slow and a high value target. With this sluggishness in mind you need to be fast with microing it for that very reason and driving the KT is not just driving the KT, it's also managing all the supporting units around it, or it will die.

I say (and you do as well) that micro-intensiveness is foremost a function of number of troops and all movable troops are micro-intensive, so I don't think pinpointing certain units and labelling them micro-intensive is a fair representation.

I labeled them micro intensive mainly becouse they are cheap late game units, so they obviously appear in higher numbers. For jackson kiting is another factor, it not only has to kite infantry like any other tank, but also tanks, to keep range advantage. Without it jackson is either useless or already dead. Low armor also doesn't help - you can drive into newly repositioned at-gun, or even two and drive away for repairs. With jackson horde, at least one is going to die at such occurence.

Same goes for axis factions: keeping your ele in position and avoiding being flanked at the same time is micro intensive, at least in higher level matches. Still it is nothing compared to microing 3 stugs at the same time and they cost same amount of fuel and roughly manpower.

It's true but what moving units are not microintensive? It's kinda same for all. You still have to pay close attention to your hmg and I don't think, for example, a King Tiger is micro-unintensive. The KT is slow and a high value target. With this sluggishness in mind you need to be fast with microing it for that very reason and driving the KT is not just driving the KT, it's also managing all the supporting units around it, or it will die.

I say (and you do as well) that micro-intensiveness is foremost a function of number of troops and all movable troops are micro-intensive, so I don't think pinpointing certain units and labelling them micro-intensive is a fair representation.

The difference in micro when we compare KT and USF armor is simply that when you leave KT for a few seconds and micro other units, the tank will be just fine, which is not the case with USF vehicles. You don't really have to babysit the King Tiger. You cannot really afford to lose sight on your M26, because unlike KT it will eat a lot less shots and Pop goes the Pershing!