Login

russian armor

OKW infantry anti-tank is not sufficient

PAGES (8)down
16 Feb 2018, 17:02 PM
#1
avatar of FlyingWalrus

Posts: 6

Trying to be as objective as possible here.

After the last patch, came a nerf to the OKW panther and KT. This is fine, since both of those units were extremely effective/ hard to deal with. However, these units were so prevalent due to the underlying issue of the current OKW: terrible AT options. As of now, OKW has only the raketenwerfer and the sturmpios shreck upgrade to deal with tanks. The rakenten CAN cloak AND retreat, which is helpful obviously but with it still suffers from its embarrassingly low range. Sturmpios only get 1 shreck, and are so soft that they can be easily wiped in the open by tanks, infantry, and any indirect fire. This means that units anti infy tanks and tank destroyers like the churchill croc, the firefly, the kv8, the centaur, the jackson overperform against OKW. Tanks like the centaur can obliterate a raketen/pios often before it gets more than 1 shot off. Therefore, as long as a single allied AT gun is in support these tanks have free reign even in the mid to late game. Tank destroyers can't be attacked by infantry due to the poor range, so units like the KT are very difficult to use against a competent allied player. The OP panther and KT were a hole that was filling the one that was left by the OKW infantry, and with that gone, as an OKW player i se myself trying to rely on the PAK 43 for my anti-tank. Really not sure why the raketen isn't replaced by the PAK 40, since at it's current performance the OKW really struggle in that regard.

Just my two-cents. Feel free to tell me why I'm wrong.
16 Feb 2018, 17:16 PM
#2
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

Literally every single OKW player:
Pretending JP4 doesn't exist.
16 Feb 2018, 17:47 PM
#3
avatar of LiberalPerturabo

Posts: 26

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Feb 2018, 17:16 PMKatitof
Literally every single OKW player:
Pretending JP4 doesn't exist.


Wow, that's such a clever and well thought out argument.
Indeed, why would a faction need any form of proper AT like any other if they already have access to an overpriced glorified stug?
16 Feb 2018, 17:55 PM
#4
avatar of ferwiner
Donator 11

Posts: 2885

Overpriced stug :O come on, jp4 is the best non doc AT in the game. Plus it costs roughly as much as a SU85, which is much worse than jp4. The only runner up to the jp4 is the jackson, but it is more expensive and still not as good.
16 Feb 2018, 18:02 PM
#5
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Overpriced stug :O come on, jp4 is the best non doc AT in the game. Plus it costs roughly as much as a SU85, which is much worse than jp4. The only runner up to the jp4 is the jackson, but it is more expensive and still not as good.

Su-85 is much worse than JP?

Su-85 time to kill a KT
Vet 0 62.40 - 79.35 Vet 3 36.81 - 50.52

SU-85 time to kill a Tiger
Vet 0 39.80 - 56.75 Vet 3 27.67 - 32.24

JP time to kill IS-2
Vet 0 65.25 - 85.25 Vet 3 50.74 - 66.27

All that while costing:

JP 400/135 14 POP
Su-85 350/130 12 POP

I don't really see how SU-85 is "much worse".
16 Feb 2018, 18:13 PM
#6
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Feb 2018, 18:02 PMVipper

Su-85 is much worse than JP?

Su-85 time to kill a KT
Vet 0 62.40 - 79.35 Vet 3 36.81 - 50.52

SU-85 time to kill a Tiger
Vet 0 39.80 - 56.75 Vet 3 27.67 - 32.24

JP time to kill IS-2
Vet 0 65.25 - 85.25 Vet 3 50.74 - 66.27

All that while costing:

JP 400/135 14 POP
Su-85 350/120 12 POP

I don't really see how SU-85 is "much worse".



I can't believe you still go to these numbers from tests in vacuum when you compare units. 230 armor vs 140 might have something to do with it. Time to kill doesn't mean anything whatsoever, given that you have to pretend nothing else wants to shoot at the TD while it just chips away at a heavy.

Jp4 can actually ping mediums/infantry AT trying to rush it which you know, might actually happen if your targeting a heavy tank with a Tank Destroyer.

And the SU85 costs 130 fuel not 120. Has since the reload/penetration adjustment.
16 Feb 2018, 19:07 PM
#7
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Feb 2018, 17:16 PMKatitof
Literally every single OKW player:
Pretending JP4 doesn't exist.


hes referring to INFANTRY BASED AT.
16 Feb 2018, 19:16 PM
#8
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Feb 2018, 19:07 PMAlphrum


hes referring to INFANTRY BASED AT.

And mentions KT and Panther as a base for argument while ignoring dedicated tank destroyer of OKW.
16 Feb 2018, 19:17 PM
#9
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

Save your breathe, OKW is done for.

I kept repeating, don't nerf everything down to Eastern Front level, instead try to strike a balance between the 2 or bring the Eastern Front Armies up, but nope.

Now why are the Wehr and Soviets the only viable Armies to play again?

Because you nerf badly/differently (asymmetrically) designed Armies down to generically/symmetrically designed Armies, it just doesn't work like that.

You either redesign one side, or try to strike a balance between the 2, nerfing one side to the other's won't work, but perhaps, MAYBE, giving some toys of the overperforming side to the underperforming one MIGHT HAVE done a bit better of a job at balancing. I say maybe the might have here because I tried to make a mod which gave the Wehr 5 man infantry squads and gave both the Eastern Front Armies forward retreat points in some form and other small changes to bring them up a notch and to be honest, they were quite enjoyable to play as, like right now, and didn't feel underperforming anymore (like before) however I only tested my mod against the AI, so apart from myself and my experience against the AI using my a bit buffed up Eastern Front Armies I can't say how they would have faired in another person's hands or against other people sadly.
16 Feb 2018, 19:24 PM
#10
avatar of insaneHoshi

Posts: 911




I can't believe you still go to these numbers from tests in vacuum when you compare units. 230 armor vs 140 might have something to do with it. Time to kill doesn't mean anything whatsoever, given that you have to pretend nothing else wants to shoot at the TD while it just chips away at a heavy.

Jp4 can actually ping mediums/infantry AT trying to rush it which you know, might actually happen if your targeting a heavy tank with a Tank Destroyer.

And the SU85 costs 130 fuel not 120. Has since the reload/penetration adjustment.


Armour hardly matters since a) allied at has high pen anyways, b) it only really counts vs mediums and if the jp4 is getting hit by those, you've already made a mistake and will soon be out maneuvered.

And while I'm ranting, they nerfed it's vet 5 so that it's ambush (a one time) bonus only does 200 damage, which is incredibly insignificant. Compare that to the m36s hvap which does bonus damage and pen and the firefly's vet 3 which is perminant.
16 Feb 2018, 19:33 PM
#11
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 4474

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Feb 2018, 18:02 PMVipper

Su-85 is much worse than JP?

Su-85 time to kill a KT
Vet 0 62.40 - 79.35 Vet 3 36.81 - 50.52

SU-85 time to kill a Tiger
Vet 0 39.80 - 56.75 Vet 3 27.67 - 32.24

JP time to kill IS-2
Vet 0 65.25 - 85.25 Vet 3 50.74 - 66.27

All that while costing:

JP 400/135 14 POP
Su-85 350/130 12 POP

I don't really see how SU-85 is "much worse".
it's worse cause is in the allied faction, every unit is worse if it's allied remember "UP" comet, t38/85 and cromwell
16 Feb 2018, 20:21 PM
#12
avatar of A table

Posts: 249

''If anything, volks got a buff when shreck got removed because of 2 STG's and a nondoctrinal snare.

With that said, the Raketenwerfer is quite powerfull but is prone to dying rather easiliy(hence the camo) and Pzershrecks on sturms are just a waste of that AI firepower early- game and the repair upgrade, the latter of which is needed later in the game with your high- health tanks.

Perhaps an solution is to give the Sturmpioneers 2 shrecks in the upgrade, remove the cold weather immunity bonus(Who TF left that? Cold weather is not even in automatch anymore, lmao) and increase price to 120 accordingly to match wehr Panzergrens.''

Copypasted this from my comment on another post discussing the exact same topic: OKW AT infantry. I think it is still relevant.
16 Feb 2018, 20:43 PM
#13
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1



Armour hardly matters since a) allied at has high pen anyways, b) it only really counts vs mediums and if the jp4 is getting hit by those, you've already made a mistake and will soon be out maneuvered.


I don't agree entirely there. So many people say that taking a single shot as a TD is a "mistake" when half the time you need to do it to get a shot off on another target. Having one volks squad in the area means you can easily get the jp4 away by snaring the medium if its rushes.

Same goes for Jackson or SU85, but the Jp4 has that extra protection. Having stealth at all is still nice, and it gets 800 health at vet 2 as well. It has plenty of its own advantages.


And while I'm ranting, they nerfed it's vet 5 so that it's ambush (a one time) bonus only does 200 damage, which is incredibly insignificant. Compare that to the m36s hvap which does bonus damage and pen and the firefly's vet 3 which is perminant.


It's old ambush damage was OP (400?), but I agree 100% the current is lackluster. Should at least have a pen buff too on ambush if not more damage too.
16 Feb 2018, 21:36 PM
#14
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


I can't believe you still go to these numbers from tests in vacuum when you compare units. 230 armor vs 140 might have something to do with it. Time to kill doesn't mean anything whatsoever, given that you have to pretend nothing else wants to shoot at the TD while it just chips away at a heavy.

Jp4 can actually ping mediums/infantry AT trying to rush it which you know, might actually happen if your targeting a heavy tank with a Tank Destroyer.

And the SU85 costs 130 fuel not 120. Has since the reload/penetration adjustment.


Let me see if I get this straight. In your opinion time to kill Tanks is bad way to measuring the effectiveness of TDs.

Instead their armor is and thus Jp is "far superior" because it has 230/80 armor compared to Su-85 that has 140/70.

In addition JP4 can "ping" (?!) AT infantry and that is why it "far superior".

Did I get this right?
16 Feb 2018, 22:27 PM
#15
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 450

Jp4 is good vs other tank destroyers. You should not build one if the enemy has no tank destroyers. p4s, panthers, and command panther is used for everything else.
17 Feb 2018, 01:11 AM
#16
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Feb 2018, 21:36 PMVipper


Let me see if I get this straight. In your opinion time to kill Tanks is bad way to measuring the effectiveness of TDs.


Nope, its not just about time to kill and TDs. Again, it's about your vacuum scenarios in general.

Let me try again: putting two units down (Tds, infantry, whatever anything) and seeing how long it takes 1 to kill the other when the other isn't allowed to try to fight back is a stupid waste of time. That easier to understand? Unless I'm wrong and its totally normal for KTs to just cement themselves in place when a Tank Destroyer starts shooting at them....

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Feb 2018, 21:36 PMVipper

Instead their armor is and thus Jp is "far superior" because it has 230/80 armor compared to Su-85 that has 140/70.

In addition JP4 can "ping" (?!) AT infantry and that is why it "far superior".


What is the "far superior" for? No one said anything about far superior, and I'm not even the one who said the SU85 was much worse. And what's (?!) for? Ping=deflecting a shell/round/etc., tank crews have described that action as "pinging" for some time.

I didn't say anything about armor being a good indicator for TD comparison, I only pointed out the armor difference for these 2 TDs specifically because that is the only significant difference between them. They are relatively even everywhere else, except with a difference of 90 armor.

17 Feb 2018, 01:37 AM
#17
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

Save your breathe, OKW is done for.


Basically this. CoH3 or start abusing cheese. OKW is an uphill battle from minute 1.
17 Feb 2018, 06:08 AM
#18
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1



Basically this. CoH3 or start abusing cheese. OKW is an uphill battle from minute 1.


Here is hoping CoH3 won't have a faction like prOKW.
17 Feb 2018, 06:14 AM
#19
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Hahaha and then out of desperation you go back to Ostheer and have to face the button of doom that sends the pride of the Red Army Airforce after you that obliterates units within the blink of an eye.
17 Feb 2018, 06:23 AM
#20
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

jump backJump back to quoted post16 Feb 2018, 19:16 PMKatitof

And mentions KT and Panther as a base for argument while ignoring dedicated tank destroyer of OKW.


He cited those two tanks to then introduce the underlying problem and how the nerfs have worsened those problems. The JP4 is a nice tank destroyer, but it doesn't substitute the poor handheld at options of the OKW faction when compared to all the other factions.
PAGES (8)down
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

949 users are online: 949 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49077
Welcome our newest member, juliavargascom
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM