Login

russian armor

Kyle wants feedback on the PIV

PAGES (10)down
3 Dec 2016, 09:01 AM
#81
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



The e8 use to have much less hp but it was buffed to 720. This is a discussion about the p4 not the 75mm Sherman which is a completely fine unit that doesn't need changes. The reason you don't see it as much is the change in meta where calliopes and pershings and jacksons have taken larger roles in usf play and going for a Sherman is often a weaker option.


the whole reason pershing and calliope were added is because the sherman just was not up to the task.
3 Dec 2016, 09:10 AM
#82
avatar of JackDickolson

Posts: 181

So far the general consensus is that they should buff the long range penetration, nerf the overperforming equivalents and lower the cost.

Buffing the stock long range penetration would mess with the rolse and intended use of the vehicle, and "PIV spam' will be an annoying thing to face and deal with. If we are worried about its late game scaling, then it could be added as a veterancy bouns at level 2 or 3. Like %15-%20 increased penetration once the unit reaches vet 2.

Nerfing the OP equivalents has been long overdue. Particularly, increasing the cost of the cromwel, T3485, M4C, Ez8.


Lowering the fuel costs seems like to be the best option here, it will balance it against the sherman and T3476, as right now its costs is closer to top tier mediums while having inferior performance and effectiveness compared to low tier mediums like the T3476 and Sherman.


There were also some great suggestions, giving the unit a more specific role through upgrades. Just like the good old Vcoh Days.
3 Dec 2016, 09:22 AM
#83
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

So far the general consensus is that they should buff the long range penetration, nerf the overperforming equivalents and lower the cost.

Imo it is the problem is that the unit holds no shock value and is too weak vs heavy TDS.

Su-76, Stuart/AT unit, ACE/AT unit or Crom remove any shock value of the units.

Alpha strike 8 sec kill from firefly and M36 sniping also shut it down even when vetted.

Reduce the effectiveness of this counters vs mediums and the unit will perform better
3 Dec 2016, 09:28 AM
#84
avatar of Crumbum

Posts: 213



the whole reason pershing and calliope were added is because the sherman just was not up to the task.


The task of what? Carrying the usf late game? At this time usf late game was notoriously bad but it wasn't specifically because of the Sherman, it was a number of factors and units which contributed. Overall the Sherman filled its role as a medium tank quite well.
3 Dec 2016, 10:29 AM
#85
avatar of Vuther
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1



The task of what? Carrying the usf late game? At this time usf late game was notoriously bad but it wasn't specifically because of the Sherman, it was a number of factors and units which contributed. Overall the Sherman filled its role as a medium tank quite well.

'Twas always pretty decent, constantly miles better than the 34/76 for 99% of its life, but its weakness in the AT regard was a compound to the problem to USF's ability for AT late-game (and then they didn't necessarily need it if they just played keep-away from the big cats and got lucky wipes :romeoHairDay: ). They definitely don't need the Sherman for that with the state of the 57mm ATG, Jackson and Zookas right now, though I would rather the Sherman's AP shell at least stay effective enough such that flanking heavies is considered worthwhile for it.
3 Dec 2016, 12:39 PM
#86
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2016, 09:22 AMVipper

Imo it is the problem is that the unit holds no shock value and is too weak vs heavy TDS.

Su-76, Stuart/AT unit, ACE/AT unit or Crom remove any shock value of the units.

Alpha strike 8 sec kill from firefly and M36 sniping also shut it down even when vetted.

Reduce the effectiveness of this counters vs mediums and the unit will perform better


Lol all mediums tanks are weak vs heavy TDS. Do ppls write buff t-34-76/sherman/cromwell vs JP ?
Its the problem with TDS compared to counter heavy tanks, thats why medium are bad vs them and its normal. Dont need change all game to make balance with unit who are fine.
3 Dec 2016, 12:40 PM
#87
avatar of vasa1719

Posts: 2635 | Subs: 4

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2016, 06:56 AMAradan
PzIV work with another stuf, which OST have. You cannot buf his AT role, without nerfing AI ability.
Dont make from PzIV super unit, making StugIII and Ostwind useless.

Nerfing all allies tanks, will mean unplayable late game.


+1
3 Dec 2016, 14:24 PM
#88
avatar of empyriumm

Posts: 51

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2016, 06:56 AMAradan
PzIV work with another stuf, which OST have. You cannot buf his AT role, without nerfing AI ability.
Dont make from PzIV super unit, making StugIII and Ostwind useless.

Nerfing all allies tanks, will mean unplayable late game.


Lol, u mean cromwell, comet(like an undoc cheap, very fast tiger) nerf not need?

Or ostwind doing its job as AI comparing to same fuel price centaur?

U need think all arounded not one sided...

3 Dec 2016, 14:32 PM
#89
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066



Lol, u mean cromwell, comet(like an undoc cheap, very fast tiger) nerf not need?

Or ostwind doing its job as AI comparing to same fuel price centaur?

U need think all arounded not one sided...



He is a 4v4 player. He always argues from that point of view. So in this sense of balance discussions, he misses the mark.
3 Dec 2016, 14:40 PM
#90
avatar of Sturmpanther
Lead Strategist Badge

Posts: 5441 | Subs: 36

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2016, 06:56 AMAradan
PzIV work with another stuf, which OST have. You cannot buf his AT role, without nerfing AI ability.
Dont make from PzIV super unit, making StugIII and Ostwind useless.

Nerfing all allies tanks, will mean unplayable late game.




+1


+1
3 Dec 2016, 14:53 PM
#91
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


Lol all mediums tanks are weak vs heavy TDS. Do ppls write buff t-34-76/sherman/cromwell vs JP ?
Its the problem with TDS compared to counter heavy tanks, thats why medium are bad vs them and its normal. Dont need change all game to make balance with unit who are fine.


Actually no
Jp is not a heavy TD it has less penetration than a SU-76, it a medium TD that cost more than most medium tank and has higher pop than most medium tanks and once the camo is fixed you will see allot less of it.

The Panther a heavy TD is not cost efficient vs medium.

The armor PZIV get as veterancy is quite useless VS M36 firefly and SU-85 and even questionable vs SU-76.

In the size and speed of the PZVI, the accuracy, penetration, range and damage of heavy TD make PZIV a bad investment.

To top it all a firefly can literally take down a PZIV in 8 second with little reaction time from the player.

Cheaper light vehicles that arrive earlier can counter it, cheaper medium tanks can fight it, AT infantry can blob it, premium medium tanks out class it and Heavy TD can fire on it out of sight and range...
3 Dec 2016, 16:28 PM
#92
avatar of Aradan

Posts: 1003



He is a 4v4 player. He always argues from that point of view. So in this sense of balance discussions, he misses the mark.


But i play both side. I want to have the same chance of winning, regardless of the selected side.
3 Dec 2016, 16:41 PM
#93
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

PzIV is weak for cost and has been since ages, however, this has become all the more apparent with the Cromwell coming on the stage. The thing to do is to slightly (!) reduce the PzIVs cost (lets say 330 mp, 120 fuel) and then bring blatantly overperforming units like the Crom and the Su76 in line. The Su85 is fine, btw.
3 Dec 2016, 16:47 PM
#94
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

The Su85 is fine...


The Su-86 as many other heavy TD has very high accuracy especially at range 60 being able to hit and penetrate medium tanks at that range with almost 100% chance even when vetted...
3 Dec 2016, 17:14 PM
#95
avatar of __deleted__

Posts: 1225

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2016, 16:47 PMVipper
:)

The Su-86 as many other heavy TD has very high accuracy especially at range 60 being able to hit and penetrate medium tanks at that range with almost 100% chance even when vetted...

This is true, but its also fine. The Su-85 is a dedicated AT platform optimal for dealing with heavy tanks, with zilch utility against any other targets, it comes out of T-4 and is therefore not as easily available or as cost effective as ie. the Su-76 (which can barrage Paks...), and when not vetted it has rather slow ROF plus its rather sluggish and can therefore be relatively easily swarmed and circled by mediums. In other words, it has one narrowly defined role for the lategame which it performs well, but its expensive and needs extensive teching. I see nothing wrong with it except maybe its ROF at vet 3.
3 Dec 2016, 17:18 PM
#96
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2016, 16:47 PMVipper
:)

The Su-86 as many other heavy TD has very high accuracy especially at range 60 being able to hit and penetrate medium tanks at that range with almost 100% chance even when vetted...


Tank Destroyers are supposed to be good at destroying tanks, that's all they do, and they are your best defense vs the big german felines.
3 Dec 2016, 17:39 PM
#97
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


Tank Destroyers are supposed to be good at destroying tanks, that's all they do, and they are your best defense vs the big german felines.


Imo medium tank destroyer like the SU-76/stug should less effective vs hing end tanks and in the same heavy TD should less effective vs Medium.

The reasons are simple:
As an example Stug is so effective vs Supper heavy that there is little reason to invest in Panthers.

On the other hand firefly can take out a Vet 3 PZIV in 8 sec and little counter-play from the PZ4 making the PZIV obsolete...

Heavy TDs can already hit Super heavy tanks reliably, firefly for instance has no reason to have 110% chance to hit the PZIV in range 60...
3 Dec 2016, 18:15 PM
#98
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2016, 06:56 AMAradan
PzIV work with another stuf, which OST have. You cannot buf his AT role, without nerfing AI ability.
Dont make from PzIV super unit, making StugIII and Ostwind useless.

Nerfing all allies tanks, will mean unplayable late game.


+1 Some common sense in this thread at last.
3 Dec 2016, 19:08 PM
#99
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2016, 17:39 PMVipper
The reasons are simple:
As an example Stug is so effective vs Supper heavy that there is little reason to invest in Panthers.
The way you word it it sounds like the StuG is the reason people dont build Panthers. But even if there was no StuG in the game, I wouldn´t build the Panther.
3 Dec 2016, 19:28 PM
#100
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Dec 2016, 17:39 PMVipper
Imo medium tank destroyer like the SU-76/stug should less effective vs hing end tanks and in the same heavy TD should less effective vs Medium.

That's how it used to be, and you know what it was like? Every game was "rush heavy tank" because few things could hurt them, so it was a low risk high / reward strategy to just always go heavy tanks. Now heavy tanks are limited and have counters that can be fielded by stock armies, and it's better this way.
PAGES (10)down
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

923 users are online: 923 guests
1 post in the last 24h
11 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50002
Welcome our newest member, rwintoday1
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM