OKW infantry anti-tank is not sufficient

I would see the rak movement nerfed to the speed of the camod zis in exchange for increased range while cloaked in friendly territory. Then the cancer of creeping rakks or 270mp scouts is gone but the rak performs as a better defensive AT gun. I WOULD say a pair of shreks on obers (remove them from sturms) but we ALL know that will turn into many bitch threads about "worse pgrens that cost more, come later AND only have rifles?!?!?!111?"

Maybe an option for panzerbuche on volks, exclusive to the STG operating like con PTRS to provide stopgap AT would be nice....

Also the JP4 is the OKW answer to allied TDs. Not only is it guaranteed to pen them all and able to fire back at their range, it also has a chance to bounce them AND is a stupid small target size (smaller than a halftrack iirc) i know every player want "Attack move into infantry, fire off 240 damage with 100% chance to pen then retreat" style hand AT but its fucking cancer...

Nope, its not just about time to kill and TDs.

Actually it is also about time to kill (T.T.K.) since you clearly wrote that

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.

Now TTK is used for ballistic weapons the same way DPS is used as for small arms fire.

If you accept DPS as one indicator of infantries performance you must also accept TTK as one.
So do you accept DPS as an indicator?

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....

So it is personal?

Only in this case the data does not come from me, I am only using them. They come from Mr.Smith if you do no not agree with his method feel free to debate the issue with him.

https://www.coh2.org/topic/56469/tank-destroyer-time-to-kill-stats

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.

There is little point in playing word games.
ferwiner wrote:

...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...

To which I responded that SU-85 is not "much worse"(or that JP is "far superior" than SU-85).

So do you agree with ferwiner that Su-85 is much worse than JP or not and you arguing with me is simply personal?

And what's (?!) for? Ping=deflecting a shell/round/etc., tank crews have described that action as "pinging" for some time.

Only hand held AT weapon do not "ping" because the do deflection damage even if they fail to penetrate. In addition if a JP is in range of enemy AT infantry it is a good time to get it out of there.

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.

No it not.

JP has a penetration 200/185/170
and
Su-85 has penetration of 240/230/220

In other word SU-85 has more penetration far than JP has close.

In addition Su-85 gets even more penetration at vet 2.

(It also gets more accuracy and better reload modifiers than the JP)

To make thing even worse the Su-85 has a lower XP value while generally fighting tanks with higher XP value.

So the question still stands, in you opinion is the Su-85 "far worse" than the JP? and if so why?

Actually it is also about time to kill (T.T.K.) since you clearly wrote that

Its actually more complex then raw TTK.
Range, mobility, spotting ability, cost, accuracy - all of that play pretty major part.

Its not always about your exclusive 1v1 vacuum dps tests on flat ground with zero micro.

Its actually more complex then raw TTK.
Range, mobility, spotting ability, cost, accuracy - all of that play pretty major part.

Its not always about your exclusive 1v1 vacuum dps tests on flat ground with zero micro.

So the question still stands, in you opinion is the Su-85 "far worse" than the JP? and if so why?

So the question still stands, in you opinion is the Su-85 "far worse" than the JP? and if so why?

In my opinion outside of them both being 60 range TDs are incomparable as they serve 2 different sub roles.

SU-85 is meant as all-rounder TD with heavy armor counter focus with low mobility, but high reliability, especially against heavies and is a top tier TD for soviets so that reliability is required as there is nothing above it.

JP4 is meant to poke primarily medium armor and TDs(given its self spotting without crippling mobility and own target size), it does not need to engage heavy armor, because that's specifically what panther is meant for.

Given stats of both, they clearly aren't meant to engage primarily the same types of targets.
And both are good for their designated roles-SU combating heavy armor and JP combating all medium.

Cost can not be used as an argument as OKW pays 25 fuel extra for everything medium and above as a tribute for other perks of faction(while not combat focused, vet5 still provides much more utility, especially for vehicles compared to other factions).

I think the question is AT weapon without fuel cost.

Unturreted guns tend to rely heavily on support to be effective. For OKW the options to support the JP4 are either fuel intensive, (P4s, Panthers, Pumas from Mechanized, Pak 43 from doctrine.) or are Raketenwerfers or Sturmpioneer panzerschrecks.

Thankfully Sturms can lay mines, but those are pretty strictly defensive. And they have no AT mine option like Ostheer. (A reigel mine for IR HTs would've been interesting to explore. Switching mines between axis factions would work too, and also an indirect buff to reigels for ostheer.) And OKW has snares.

So comparisons of SU-85s and JP4s or dissections of their stats aside: Is the raketenwerfer as proper an AT gun like the other 4 factions' option? Arguable. It makes up for its shortcomings with cloaking, retreat, and garrison options, but that difference, I think, does leave a gap that no other unit in OKW's arsenal quite covers. It also gives them a rather unique advantage with that cloaking.

TBH I think raketenwerfers are more of a doctrinal gimmick than a backbone for a faction.

Actually it is also about time to kill (T.T.K.) since you clearly wrote that

It's also about? What does that even mean? To me they are one in the same. I certainly said TTK was stupid, but the main point is that the results of a "test" with two units in a vacuum cannot be helpfully applied to a balance discussion without a whole lot of context. Your initial post included nothing but TTK.

Now TTK is used for ballistic weapons the same way DPS is used as for small arms fire.

And when was the last time you compared two units on dps alone? Most people calculate dps with a standard target size. You choose 2 different arbitrary targets and posted the the different times. The SU85 fights a KT astronomically more often than the Jp4 fights an IS2. OKW happens to have the panther to fight heavies.

So it is personal?

Only in this case the data does not come from me, I am only using them. They come from Mr.Smith if you do no not agree with his method feel free to debate the issue with him.

https://www.coh2.org/topic/56469/tank-destroyer-time-to-kill-stats

The numbers come from MR Smith. He did not select the Su85 vs KT and Tiger to compare to Jp4 vs IS2, he just posted a table full of numbers. I'd be willing to bet he looks at a great deal more than TTK when balancing these units.

There is little point in playing word games.

Then don't put words in "quotes" when it didn't say them? That's an easy fix.

ferwiner wrote:

To which I responded that SU-85 is not "much worse"(or that JP is "far superior" than SU-85).

So do you agree with ferwiner that Su-85 is much worse than JP or not and you arguing with me is simply personal?

I think the SU85 is only better against slow heavies. Everything else the Jp4 has an edge at because of its survivability. Much worse might be an exaggeration, but I think your comparison completely ignores the entire context of the actual game these units are a part of. The actual topic here is whether or not OKW needs more infantry AT. My point is no, because they already have more vehicle AT options than everyone else.

JP has a penetration 200/185/170
and
Su-85 has penetration of 240/230/220

In other word SU-85 has more penetration far than JP has close.

Good for the Su85, how many allied factions have the Panther stock? All those stock units the allies have with 200+ armor (brits are the only ones) must give the Jp4 such a headache.

(It also gets more accuracy and better reload modifiers than the JP)

No it does not. The Jp4 gets more accuracy (+35% total from vets 2 and 4) and more reload (-25% total from vets 3 and 4). It also gets 800 health at vet 2, only further separating its survivability from the Su85.

The discussion here is reaching a nonsense level that has never ever been seen...

@Katitof
@SkystheLimit

Stop it, nobody here ever said that jagdpanzer 4 should counter heavy tanks. Their point (true) was that as a mere medium counter, jagdpanzer 4 is extremely overexpensive.

The MINIMAL edge that jagdpanzer 4 has (at cost of lower mobility as well) against medium doesn't justify jagdpanzer costing MORE on top of being far worse against heavies (that's a huge gap in performances unlike su 85 medium countering performances gap).

"NO VACUUM BRO"
Yet you fully agreed to a post saying that su85 "is much worse"...

"Dude but the allied 200+ vehicle armor are doctrinal"
So were heavy TD, but that didn't stop the cut did it ?
But like i said, nobody here is asking for jp4 to counter is 2..but 135 fuel is way too much for a medium counter.
And that highlight another issue, panther being trash and not an heavy/medium/anything counter.

Regarding OP point, let me point out the irony here.
Okw was supposed to use shrecks to complement raketen and now is the only faction lacking viable handheld at.
I find amusing how everybody gets triggered as f..k when hearing about 2 shreck sturm.
It's not like panzergrens are the exact same thing and usf has recently got 6 men panzershreck airborne squads in 2 doctrines (that are cheaper to reinforce).

The discussion here is reaching a nonsense level that has never ever been seen...

Then I can only imagine how much worse its about to get with you here...

"NO VACUUM BRO"
Yet you fully agreed to a post saying that su85 "is much worse"...

I think the SU85 is only better against slow heavies. Everything else the Jp4 has an edge at. Much worse might be an exaggeration

Reading is hard

The Jp4s only problem is not its price but its location. It was in the battlegroup hq a long time ago, and really has no business being unlocked at the same time as the Panther. The mod team's unofficial preview with OKWs last tier being split in two is the best solution I've seen for that.

Reading is hard, I know.

The Jp4s only problem is not its price but its location. It was in the battlegroup hq a long time ago, and really has no business being unlocked at the same time as the Panther. The mod team's unofficial preview with OKWs last tier being split in two is the best solution I've seen for that.

"Hurr durr"
Keep up the ad hom m8.

Wtf does that mean ?
You are agreeing with su85 being worse (much and far is relative) than jp4, and based on what ? What is the criteria there ? Cost ? Mobility ? Versatility ? TTK ? Penetration ? It's all a +1 for su 85
Jagdpanzer 4 advantage is armor (only useful against generalist) and target size.
But somehow picking the huge list of advantages su 85 and saying su 85 is overall better is "vacuum hurr arh".
Saying that jp4 is better is fine.

Additionally the faster rotation/movement and ability to spot up to 60 range makes su 85 far better at getting panzers trying to escape or trying to flank (but you are constantly crying about looking at things in a "vacuum" while purposefully cherrypicking some stats and ignoring several more), so jp4 is not even a direct improvement as anti medium counter over su 85, and even unfavourable over stug or su 85 under specific circumstances.

And i could go on, taking the ridicolous vet xp requirements of jp4 as argument.
Like 90% of okw unit roster it gets insane vet 5 xp requireme ts compared to other factions counterparts (and this didn't change with vet 5 nerf).
Or outright ignoring the inability of jagdpanzer 4 to scale and get anywhere near vet 3 outside of 2 hours long games isn't looking at things in a "vacuuum" ?

"Hurr durr"
Keep up the ad hom m8.

Wtf does that mean ?
You are agreeing with su85 being worse (much and far is relative) than jp4, and based on what ? What is the criteria there ? Cost ? Mobility ? Versatility ? TTK ? Penetration ?

No I am not agreeing with that. If you are going to misrepresent my argument completely, and write gibberish every other sentence, I'm not wasting my time. What the heck is "hurr durr"? Grow up

No I am not agreeing with that. If you are going to misrepresent my argument completely, and write gibberish every other sentence, I'm not wasting my time. What the heck is "hurr durr"? Grow up

"I think the SU85 is only better against slow heavies. Everything else the Jp4 has an edge at."
"Much worse might be an exaggeration"

Of course you weren't agreeing when you said jp4 has an edge against basically everything but heavies and that jp4 being much better may be an exaggeration

Yeah of course.
Backpedaling against your own previous posts followed by a cheap get away seems the best solution.
Going on would actually mean you have to go through the process of debeating against legit arguments taking the discussion outside the "muh armor and target size advantage" (kinda ironical since you were crying over Vipper focus on TTK and penetration) and bring arguments on your side, and you definetly seem unable to do it (with me or Vipper).

Hell you can't even google basic stuff and start a post without an ad hom.. i was definetly asking too much..

"I think the SU85 is only better against slow heavies. Everything else the Jp4 has an edge at."
"Much worse might be an exaggeration"

Of course you weren't agreeing when you said jp4 has an edge against basically everything but heavies and that jp4 being much better may be an exaggeration

Yeah of course.
Backpedaling against your own previous posts followed by a cheap get away seems the best solution.
Going on would actually mean you have to go through the process of debeating against legit arguments taking the discussion outside the "muh armor and target size advantage" (kinda ironical since you were crying over Vipper focus on TTK and penetration) and bring arguments on your side, and you definetly seem unable to do it (with me or Vipper).

Hell you can't even google basic stuff and start a post without an ad hom.. i was definetly asking too much..

Kinda sad how happy you get from winning arguments with strangers online. Can't even post without taunting. I can backpedal AND choose not to waste my time with the forum troll. Too things can be true at once. Sayonara

Show Spoiler
In the end of the day what exactly are you are you trying to argue?
1) You have agreed with me in the original point that SU-85 is not "far worse" than JP4
2) And you by now must have accepted that I did not make a "vacuum scenario" as you claimed.
3) And you by now must have accepted that TTK can be used for tanks as DPS is used for infantry.

In my opinion outside of them both being 60 range TDs are incomparable as they serve 2 different sub roles.

SU-85 is meant as all-rounder TD with heavy armor counter focus with low mobility, but high reliability, especially against heavies and is a top tier TD for soviets so that reliability is required as there is nothing above it.

JP4 is meant to poke primarily medium armor and TDs(given its self spotting without crippling mobility and own target size), it does not need to engage heavy armor, because that's specifically what panther is meant for.

Great theory but it has flaw that make it completely wrong.

Su-85 can counter PzIV (meduim) and the Panther (TDs) at least as cost efficient (if not more) as the JP4 can deal with mediums or TDs.

The units can be compared, and the SU-85 is simply not "much worse" than JP.

In addition SU-85 has higher mobility than the JP4 and the difference in target size is small (1).

Finally the SU-85 does not "have" to engage the mediums , because that's specifically what SU-76 is meant for.

Given stats of both, they clearly aren't meant to engage primarily the same types of targets.
And both are good for their designated roles-SU combating heavy armor and JP combating all medium.

That is you theory-crafting about single purpose roles. In game both units, once built, they might have to deal with mediums or heavily armored tanks. In either case the SU-85 is simply not "much worse" than the JP4.

Cost can not be used as an argument as OKW pays 25 fuel extra for everything medium and above as a tribute for other perks of faction(while not combat focused, vet5 still provides much more utility, especially for vehicles compared to other factions).

Once more that is you theory-crafting.

(unless you find a a reference from Relic that:" OKW pays 25 fuel extra for everything medium and above as a tribute for other perks of faction" it did not happen.)

Cost can and should be used when 2 units are compared.

In the end of the day what exactly are you are you trying to argue?

I was wrong. Congratulations you were correct. Maybe it is personal, but i really don't care anymore

I was wrong. Congratulations you were correct. If you see that already I'm not sure why you're still writing that much

Actually I am the one that has to congratulate you, there are very few people in this forum that admit that they wrong. Well done man.
(My apologies for writing so much, in my defense I also have to deal with some people (actually one) who simply refuse to admit any error)

In my opinion outside of them both being 60 range TDs are incomparable as they serve 2 different sub roles.

SU-85 is meant as all-rounder TD with heavy armor counter focus with low mobility, but high reliability, especially against heavies and is a top tier TD for soviets so that reliability is required as there is nothing above it.

JP4 is meant to poke primarily medium armor and TDs(given its self spotting without crippling mobility and own target size), it does not need to engage heavy armor, because that's specifically what panther is meant for.

JP4 has no vision increases anymore, whereas SU-85 does. Furthermore Su 85 has better mobility.

So uh... I've been wondering if opening these threads means anything at all... I mean, do the mod makers actually take these threads seriously? If they do then I hope a new balance patch will come out soon to fix OKW...

Man, this is the exact same subject my thread was about. Guess what? People still bring up the poor excuse of a TD that is the JP4. Why the heck do I need a ton of armor and ant-like target size for a TD? They should do what they are designed to do: either deal a lot of damage per shot or shoot a lot at long range to threaten enemy tanks. The JP4 has... nothing, in terms of firepower. Then it must have something up its sleeve right? Like a lot of mobility to make up for its shortcomings... Nope.

So I ask again. Why not give double schreck upgrade to OKW? It's not like double schreck SPs (maybe Obers) are cheap and have enough AI power to blob and obliterate your beloved rifle and conscript blobs.