OKW infantry anti-tank is not sufficient

"even as small as it is, has a chance to bounce the JP means that its armour is pretty impressive (i was under the impression that small chances to pen were null but any chance to bounce was untouched, as small as it is)"

Small chances ARE NULL JP4 won't bounce anything from su 85

"And being able to bounce mediums more often than not IS a big deal when we are talking the prices were talking for these units."

Generalist mid pen is 120.
It means 53% of penetration chances, hardly more often than not.

What generalists are you looking at here? Iirc the only medium with pen that puts mid pen at 120 would be the sherman AP shells (140 close iirc) t34 should has 100 mid (80 at far) and the cromwell should iirc have a profile no better than the old p4 (100/110/120)
E8 and t34/85 have better profiles of course but they are doctrinal and much closer in price

As for the null deal there on stats, im not sure the chance is negated that low. Perhaps Vipper could confirm/deny but i thought it was a much lower margin (like 4% or lower) to count as negated.

@Firesparks agreed, jp4 being 120 fuel would be perfect.

Su 85 should get a complete rebalance IMHO.
A 200 damage model that actually push the vehicle into the anti heavy role.

Firefly is mostly okeish, if anything i would rather boost its mobility and turret traverse

The fact that the Schu-mine is triggered by infantry just contributes to this.

Expecting that aggressive enemy tank to drive over it as it tries to crush your machine gun crew? Too bad, some engineers just exploded on it and will cost like 20 manpower to reinforce, GG.

Also, it's interesting how no one mentions the Sturmpioneer Panzerschreck as AT. And it's not just because it's subpar in itself. It's because you can't actually upgrade Sturmpioneers with anything other than mine sweepers, and not because of the mines, but because losing one of their STGs makes them a worthless squad against infantry, and as OKW, you can't afford doing that just to get a single Panzerschreck.

The point is OKW has no proper AT infantry?

Hey look at how the thread is going, people nick picking individual stats to determine which one is the best. Then suddenly someone bring another stat on the table and all over again each of them is doing again new calculation with the new stat to determine which one is the best. Then suddenly someone bring another stat on the table and... Do you think there is anything interesting to read here for someone who's here not to fight for his beloved faction but to keep the game balanced?

Factions have their own flavors, OKW hold 10 different units or abilities that are dedicated to damage tank, from pzfaust to the JTiger including the Pak41. That's the maximum in the game, Shreck are in the list but are considerate as a support tool for the 9 other ways you have to damage and destroy tanks. Because if you add a second shreck to the little guys you might reverse this design and let anyone bring shreck blob again in the game.

So in the end, yes you are right, OKW doesn't hold proper sufficient infantry AT, that's it and the faction and game is design around it.

stop contradicting yourself.

And as I explained FF does not need vet 3 to hit the JP. Due to 45 mid range and tank commander it has an excellent chance to hit the JP4 even at vet 0.

Show Spoiler

I did mention at what vet FF gets the accuracy bonus because it is different from the other TDs, but a FF does not need it against a JP4, so it is not a part of my argument.

As for the null deal there on stats, im not sure the chance is negated that low. Perhaps Vipper could confirm/deny but i thought it was a much lower margin (like 4% or lower) to count as negated.

Su-85 has 240/230/220 penetration going up to 312/299/286 at vet 2.
JP 4 has 230/80 armor.

Chance to penetrate for Su-85 frontally at range 60 are 95.6%.

As far as I can remember the limited of calculation is 3%.

JP has a chance to bounce a Su-85 shell at range 60 but it really small.

What generalists are you looking at here? Iirc the only medium with pen that puts mid pen at 120 would be the sherman AP shells (140 close iirc) t34 should has 100 mid (80 at far) and the cromwell should iirc have a profile no better than the old p4 (100/110/120)
E8 and t34/85 have better profiles of course but they are doctrinal and much closer in price

As for the null deal there on stats, im not sure the chance is negated that low. Perhaps Vipper could confirm/deny but i thought it was a much lower margin (like 4% or lower) to count as negated.

Cromwell mid pen has always been 120, sherman has been buffed to 120.
2 out of three generalists have 120 mid pen.

Negated or not, it's a laughable excuse.
A 5% chance to bounce at long range won't make jp4 better.
It's (not specifically you) double standars and hipocrisy at its finest.
Multiple times it has been pointed out that "jp4 can pen any medium" and that "allies don't have panthers" while the Comet (which falls into medium category and is nondoctrinal) has 42% chances of bouncing at long range.
Going back to the cost point, Comet has also a lot of utility, a turret, good ai performances, an accuracy no brainer upgrade that makes total accuracy better than jp4 vet 0 and 1 and same exact penetration, while having far superior mobility and healtpool, only for 40 more fuel.

The issues will always remain:

1) Unless the opponent decide to spam generalist and handheld at lose deflection damage "mid" armor is useless.
It won't bounce anything else anyway.

2) As a medium counter is insanely expensive

Or

3) As an heavy counter is lackluster in penetration

4) its [insert 80%of okw units here] veterancy has been lazily implemented and reworked. It takes incredibly longer to vet up compared to the counterpart while vet 5 is now vet 3 (*pointing at now useless vet 5 first shot damage bonus, that doesn't actually reduce the number of shots required to kill at all, and more issues).

Cromwell mid pen has always been 120, sherman has been buffed to 120.
2 out of three generalists have 120 mid pen.

Negated or not, it's a laughable excuse.
A 5% chance to bounce at long range won't make jp4 better.
It's (not specifically you) double standars and hipocrisy at its finest.
Multiple times it has been pointed out that "jp4 can pen any medium" and that "allies don't have panthers" while the Comet (which falls into medium category and is nondoctrinal) has 42% chances of bouncing at long range.
Going back to the cost point, Comet has also a lot of utility, a turret, good ai performances, an accuracy no brainer upgrade that makes total accuracy better than jp4 vet 0 and 1 and same exact penetration, while having far superior mobility and healtpool, only for 40 more fuel.

The issues will always remain:

1) Unless the opponent decide to spam generalist and handheld at lose deflection damage "mid" armor is useless.
It won't bounce anything else anyway.

2) As a medium counter is insanely expensive

Or

3) As an heavy counter is lackluster in penetration

4) its [insert 80%of okw units here] veterancy has been lazily implemented and reworked. It takes incredibly longer to vet up compared to the counterpart while vet 5 is now vet 3 (*pointing at now useless vet 5 first shot damage bonus, that doesn't actually reduce the number of shots required to kill at all, and more issues).

Ah well i didnt realize cromwell pen was so high, seems like a bit much tbh. Similarly the su85 DOES have too much pen, it could afford to drop some pen in favour of a 200 damage point i think but (yes i know I brought it up) at any rate the role of the su85 is to tackle armoured up foes, while its only a 5% chance to bounce the mere fact that it CAN attests to the armour on the JP4. Units of lesser pen are much less effective *cough* su76* *cough*

Also im unsure why we are even using the mid range as an example, having 60 range if an enemy is poping shots at 20 you done goofed on a tactical level, we SHOULD be using far values but no matter.

I personally feel that the only problem with the JP4 is that it comes too late. Ideally imo the schwere should have its price split so obers, the jp4 and the p4 come a bit sooner but have the AA gun and panther and KT delayed (more in time than overall cost) to give the OKW more of a chance against allied cheese (su76 spam, stro)ng infantry and the likes) while not INSTANTLY haveing a hard point in the schwere (how many times have you caught it setting up JUST too late and been forced off by sudden model evaporation?

Anyways. Comparing to the comet is incredibly silly. The JP4 outranges it by a third the comets range and doesnt require a full tech nor a specialization to get. Plus the comet has a pop of 20 vs the 14 of the JP4. So yea its only 40 fuel more but its got plenty of its own drawbacks too

You get the JP4 because it is a definitive medium counter and if the enemy does go the route of mediums it gives the best chance of survival, it needs to be supported but its bar non the best medium counter around.

I certainly wouldnt be opposed to taking a look at its vet (get some pen modifiers in there) and timing, but much cheaper and it would be a no brainer because of its range amd durability and that shouldnt be the case

And as I explained FF does not need vet 3 to hit the JP. Due to 45 mid range and tank commander it has an excellent chance to hit the JP4 even at vet 0.

Show Spoiler

I did mention at what vet FF gets the accuracy bonus because it is different from the other TDs, but a FF does not need it against a JP4, so it is not a part of my argument.

Su-85 and M36 get x130% accuracy at vet 2 and FF has a mid range of 45(!!!) x110% accuracy from commander and another x130% at vet 3

you are selectively picking your own words and ignoring the rest.

and Speaking of FF, they have a good reason for their high accuracy. They have one of the worst DPS in the game. 200 damage with a 8s reload is pretty bad. Their mobility is pretty bad as well.



FF:


+good accuracy
+good penetration
+tulip rockets
-bad mobility
-bad DPS
-tulip rocket require a individual munition upgrade and munition cost per use. It's very munition hungry
-bigger than normal size (23)


and actually let's look at FF vs jp4 accuracy at 45m

FF size: 23
jp4: 17

FF accu at 45: .05 (x1.10) = .055
Jp4 accu at 45: .045

FF vs jp4 = .055 * 17 = .935 (.85 if no tank commander upgrade)
Jp4 vs FF= .045 * 23 = 1.035

even with the tank commander, the Jp4 have an accuracy advantage over the Firefly. it is statistically impossible for a stationary jp4 to miss the firefly at 45m.

and actually let's look at FF vs jp4 accuracy at 45m

FF size: 23
jp4: 17

FF accu at 45: .05 (x1.10) = .055
Jp4 accu at 45: .045

FF vs jp4 = .055 * 17 = .935 (.85 if no tank commander upgrade)
Jp4 vs FF= .045 * 23 = 1.035

even with the tank commander, the Jp4 have an accuracy advantage over the Firefly. it is statistically impossible for a stationary jp4 to miss the firefly at 45m.

The value of TD is on how it fight other TDs but how well it counter tanks.

JP is a decent units, but it is very expensive (in tech cost,cost and pop) for countering mediums
and luck penetration vs heavily armored vehicles.

You claimed the JP has serious advantage due to its target size and armor but the number you provide show a slight advantage 6.5% that becomes even less when one factor in collision hits.

As for the DPS of FF you also underestimate it:

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

FF vs KT
vet 0 82.75 - 107.50
vet 3 37.75 - 56.50

Firefly (Tulip)
vet 0 66.25 - 91.00
vet 3 31.50 - 44.00
(number might be a bit off since the patch)

I am not sure what you point is thou.

FF does not need to have the high accuracy its has. It does not need to have mid range longer than Elephant and JT and it does not need an extra x130% at vet making able to "score" hit reliably even vs kubel.

FF is does not have a mobility that far worse than JP4 while it has access to "warspeed", 45 S radius 360 vision and access to hammer tracking.

The value of TD is on how it fight other TDs but how well it counter tanks.

Its actually how well it counters the range of tanks its meant to be.

JP is a decent units, but it is very expensive (in tech cost,cost and pop) for countering mediums
and luck penetration vs heavily armored vehicles.

I guess we will be going over this until OKW becomes 100% ost clone or the other way, so lets go over it yet again:
OKW pays extra 25 fuel for all medium vehicles and up for the vet5 system as well as for its fuel starved theme. Vet5 might not give raw stats anymore, but you are still getting more utilities then equivalent units.

As for the DPS of FF you also underestimate it:

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

FF vs KT
vet 0 82.75 - 107.50
vet 3 37.75 - 56.50

Firefly (Tulip)
vet 0 66.25 - 91.00
vet 3 31.50 - 44.00
(number might be a bit off since the patch)

FF is british top tier, most expensive TD, they have no alternative to it nor they have anything above it in terms of fighting armor.

JP4 is NOT OKW top tier unit for engaging armor nor it is even intended to engage heaviest allied armor.
Panther is made for that.
Again, allies have NOTHING above FF, Jackson and SU-85 to fight heavy axis armor, but axis does have panther. Relations between AT units are NOT copy pasted equivalents.

If OKW will lose Panther all together or Panther becomes impotent against heavy armor, then you will be 100% correct and JP4 will deserve a buff to be on level of allied TD, but as long as Panther is designed to counter heavy tanks you are only purposefully invoking bias by presenting false facts.

If you want to truly compare effectiveness of allied TDs vs JP4, you should compare it against MEDIUM armor, which is intended JP4 target, because(I can't stress this enough) PANTHER exists for the very reason of countering IS-2 and such.

Elephant and JT and it does not need an extra x130% at vet making able to "score" hit reliably even vs kubel.

Fully agree, lets give FF a more suitable vet instead, like +30% reload speed.

hammer tracking

How long does it last again?

OKW pays extra 25 fuel for all medium vehicles and up for the vet5 system as well as for its fuel starved theme. Vet5 might not give raw stats anymore, but you are still getting more utilities then equivalent units.

A great theory from Katitof , but unless it written somewhere from Relic it did not happen.

How long does it last again?

I know you trouble with game mechanics and stats, but pls don't ask me find for you you can simply check yourself be reading the patch notes.

A great theory from Katitof , but unless it written somewhere from Relic it did not happen.

It is written in the patch notes.

BALANCE UPDATES
OKW
After analyzing play data from the weekend we saw an increase in early tank usage for the Oberkommando West. We are releasing a targeted change to directly reduce that usage and to bring the OKW on par with the other four factions.

Panzer IV Ausf. J Medium Tank
* Fuel cost increased from 135 to 150

Panther PzKpfw V Medium Tank
* Fuel cost increased from 175 to 200

Panther PzKpfw V Command Tank
* Fuel cost increased from 200 to 225

Tiger B “Königstiger”
* Fuel cost increased from 260 to 310

“Jagdtiger” Panzerjäger Tiger Ausf. B
* Fuel cost increased from 245 to 280

For someone who exclusively sits in stat sheets and patch notes, I have expected you to know that.

Reason different then I have stated, however a reason stated by relic directly nevertheless, unfortunately OKW revamp blog post is no longer there for the "lore reasons" on the changes.

I know you trouble with game mechanics and stats, but pls don't ask me find for you you can simply check yourself be reading the patch notes.

I might not learned by heart all of the stats, but at least I am aware of which units are supposed to be used against what and don't use scenarios that never happen under any circumstances as examples.

Snip

Are you not seeing the obvious problem with your theory? If all OKW armored vehicles are supposed to be affected by this, then how come the Jagdpanzer4 (the unit that most people agree is overpriced and that we were talking about) isnt even on this list? Also these patch notes arnt up to date. The current King Tiger costs 280 fuel, the Panzer 4 costs 140 fuel and the Panther costs 185 fuel.

The value of TD is on how it fight other TDs but how well it counter tanks.

This is a gross failure of valuation

Being able to establish "td dominance" over the allies means your heavy tank can fight more effectively.

This is especially important in team game since the allies will be fielding their TD en mass to fight the heavy tank. Having your own 60m TD to fight back is invaluable since you don't have to risk diving in and the Jp4 is especially good for killing other TD.

Are you not seeing the obvious problem with your theory? If all OKW armored vehicles are supposed to be affected by this, then how come the Jagdpanzer4 (the unit that most people agree is overpriced and that we were talking about) isnt even on this list? Also these patch notes arnt up to date. The current King Tiger costs 280 fuel, the Panzer 4 costs 140 fuel and the Panther costs 185 fuel.

Because
1) It was expensive already.
2) Was never spammed heavily because MUH PUNTOR

Being able to establish "td dominance" over the allies means your heavy tank can fight more effectively.

This is especially in team game since the allies will be fielding their TD en mass to fight the heavy tank. Having your own 60m TD to fight back is invaluable since you don't have to risk diving in and the Jp4 is especially good for killing other TD.

The only reason JP4 is invaluable is the purpose of this thread:
OKW luck a 60 range ATG or sufficient AT infantry to destroy enemy TDs.

I am not sure what is your point, since in your opinion JP4 should be cheaper which I agree.

I have posted my opinion that JP4 is ok unit, too expensive to counter medium with too low penetration to fight Super heavies.

It ok for pushing of allied TDs and that is about it. Its armor and size give it only a slight advantage since allied TDs have enough penetration and accuracy to hit and penetrate.

The only reason JP4 is invaluable is the purpose of this thread:
OKW lack a 60 range ATG or sufficient AT infantry to destroy enemy TDs.

that's called faction design

I could, but I want to teach you a lesson on not putting out silly comparisons between things that literally no one except comp stompers use.

Unfortanlly the only lessons you can teach me are on subject that you are good at and those are being a "fanboy" and insulting others and I am not interested in learning either.

On the other hand let me teach you one in arithmetic:

Katitof's theory:

...
OKW pays extra 25 fuel for all medium vehicles and up for the vet5 system as well as for its fuel starved theme. Vet5 might not give raw stats anymore, but you are still getting more utilities then equivalent units.
..

It is written in the patch notes.
BALANCE UPDATES
OKW
After analyzing play data from the weekend we saw an increase in early tank usage for the Oberkommando West. We are releasing a targeted change to directly reduce that usage and to bring the OKW on par with the other four factions.

Panzer IV Ausf. J Medium Tank
* Fuel cost increased from 135 to 150
...
Tiger B “Königstiger”
* Fuel cost increased from 260 to 310

“Jagdtiger” Panzerjäger Tiger Ausf. B
* Fuel cost increased from 245 to 280

150-135 = 15 not 25
310-260 = 60 not 25
280-245 = 35 not 25

Pls stop posting as if you are spokesman for Relic especially since what you write is simply wrong.

Unfortanlly the only lessons you can teach me are on subject that you are good at and those are being a "fanboy" and insulting others and I am not interested in learning either.

To be hones, I believe you are on your way there alone without me guiding anything.
All I see you ever do is post allies nerfs and act like a snippy smartass, so you have well covered both, being a fanboy and insulting(as subtle as you may think you are).

150-135 = 15 not 25
310-260 = 60 not 25
280-245 = 35 not 25

Pls stop posting as if you are spokesman for Relic especially since what you write is simply wrong.

Please do what you do best and go read stuff up.
Initially OKW armor had same cost as ost, but that was changed when their eco was changed, the changes did not happen patch to patch, but over time and they add up to +25 fuel for respective vehicles.

But I appreciate the effort on your part for trying to be as snippy as I used to be back in the day.
You're on the very right track, but still lack the experience.