Spring Update - Balance thread

Well clearly mitigating and manipulating RNG is not a valid form of gameplay. :/

The Panther's swapping armour for health. Armour in this game affects the probability of a shot penetrating, health is how many penetrating shots it can take before it dies.

Against units that don't reliably penetrate the Panther this change makes it more consistent: a bad run of luck isn't going to result in your Panther going down quickly. Increased reliability isn't bad.

Against things that reliably penetrate the Panther this is an outright buff.

When they have to write that the Panther is in the best spot yet, I have trouble believing in that.

That's a recurring joke. Dane also didn't get it, apparently.

Why the hell did shreks got buffed and ptrs got nerfed? Don't the ostheers already have enough disgusting infantry with at abilities, do they all really need to run around with shreks now?

Also the buff on 222 is disgusting, just imagine 2-3 of these demonic creatures running around in team games bum fucking everything in their path because you can't scratch them anymore, couldn't you just make it a little more lethal and leave it at that?

Also the nerf on ptrs that already cost 70 munitions on penals is disgusting. I mean even when you spam guards they still barely scratch medium-heavy armor compared with other handheld at.


Why the hell are you nerfing so many soviet units? I don't get it, especially in team games they already have a mediocre mid-late game, so why are you shitting on their AT capabilites?

Even with these changes Panther imo is still not worth it for either faction as why bother with a unit that can't chase nor do a significant amount of damage. Every time I get a Panther as OKW I regret not getting a P4 or JP and as OST, not getting double Stugs for cheaper. Yes Stugs are getting nerfed but only a small rate of fire change so for AT purpose double Stugs will still be more desirable.

One can make the argument of it being a stand off tank and having greater durability than Stug or Jagdpanzer but what's the point of it taking up such a large amount of pop cap if it's only purpose to ward off tanks NOT being able to chase and destroy them while not being that effective against infantry.


Sure buff it's overall durability but if it can't destroy or chase enemy tanks effectively than it'll still be never used outside of Command Panther. Course this is solely in ones so maybe team games it's stronger but find it never paying off in ones especially as OST.

Do you know what RNG is? Do you know how armour works in COH2? Did you ever use Churchill pre its armour/hp swap? Do you know what consistency means?

obviously, more than you...

VET 0 and 1

800hp 320 armour
vs 120 pen:
120/320 = 0,375
1/0,375=2,6667 x5(shoots required to kill 800hp)= 13,333 shoots
vs 240 pen:
240/320= 0,75
1/0.75= 1,3333x5(shoots required to kill 800hp)= 6,667 shoots

960hp 260 armour
VS 120 pen
120/260 = 0,461
1/0,461 = 2,169 x6(shoots required to kill 960hp)= 13,015 shoots
VS 240 pen
240/260 = 0,923
1/0,923 = 1,083 x6(shoots required to kill 960hp)= 6,5 shoots

VET 2 and 3

960hp 320 armour
vs 120 pen:
120/320 = 0,375
1/0,375 = 2,667x6(shoots required to kill 960hp)= 16,002 shoots
vs 240 pen:
240/320 = 0,75
1/0.75 = 1,333x6(shoots required to kill 960hp)= 7,998 shoots

960hp 286 armour
VS 120 pen:
120/286 = 0,419
1/0,419 = 2,386 x6(shoots required to kill 960hp) = 14,319 shoots
VS 240 pen:
240/286 = 0,839
1/0,839 = 1,191 x6(shoots required to kill 960hp) = 7,151 shoots

can you understand this? maybe I'm wrong or maybe you are a little troll, but numbers don't lie
even in vet 0 and 1 this change is a nerf in survivability of the panther, and in vet 2 and 3 its a huge NERF specially against medium tanks.

I'd call that one a slippery slope.

It was more of a joke.

obviously, more than you...

VET 0 and 1

800hp 320 armour
vs 120 pen:
120/320 = 0,375
1/0,375=2,6667 x5(shoots required to kill 800hp)= 13,333 shoots
vs 240 pen:
240/320= 0,75
1/0.75= 1,3333x5(shoots required to kill 800hp)= 6,667 shoots

960hp 260 armour
VS 120 pen
120/260 = 0,461
1/0,461 = 2,169 x6(shoots required to kill 960hp)= 13,015 shoots
VS 240 pen
240/260 = 0,923
1/0,923 = 1,083 x6(shoots required to kill 960hp)= 6,5 shoots

VET 2 and 3

960hp 320 armour
vs 120 pen:
120/320 = 0,375
1/0,375 = 2,667x6(shoots required to kill 960hp)= 16,002 shoots
vs 240 pen:
240/320 = 0,75
1/0.75 = 1,333x6(shoots required to kill 960hp)= 7,998 shoots

960hp 286 armour
VS 120 pen:
120/286 = 0,419
1/0,419 = 2,386 x6(shoots required to kill 960hp) = 14,319 shoots
VS 240 pen:
240/286 = 0,839
1/0,839 = 1,191 x6(shoots required to kill 960hp) = 7,151 shoots

can you understand this? maybe I'm wrong or maybe you are a little troll, but numbers don't lie
even in vet 0 and 1 this change is a nerf in survivability of the panther, and in vet 2 and 3 its a huge NERF specially against medium tanks.

Practical vs Theoretical, you can't play around RNG and numbers in COH2. You'd know this if you actually played the game at a competent level

https://clips.twitch.tv/EnchantingTangentialLyrebirdTooSpicy

Just happened upon this in ed's stream, maybe you can do the math on KT being penned 3 times in a row max range by SU85s, or 2 pens in a row from a ZIS. I'll take the 100% predictability of HP thanks

Practical vs Theoretical, you can't play around RNG and numbers in COH2. You'd know this if you actually played the game at a competent level

this is not RNG this is the average value, can you understand this?

in practical its even worst, because all of this number are taken in close range penetration, in practical most of battles are in long range, the nerf in long range its much more big

do not try to pretend to be a professional player when every time you speak you looks like an ignorant...

...Should call this the Spring Hubris Patch.

...

If this game work perfectly, that would make sense. When you have a game on which on a frontal engagement shells land on the side or behind the tank, effectively negating your armor. Or when you have tanks phasing each other. Or you are getting hit on the side, you are really gonna prefer having a large HP pool than a bit higher armor value.

You can play around having a higher HP pool. If you are getting hit by a single or 2 sources, you can manage the damage you are taking. Let me rephrase, would you rather have the same survivability been achieved through armor or HP?

Vet2 onwards is indeed a nerf on survivability, but that's intended when the Panther is no longer in the group of units with a nefarious RoF. Not too long ago it was only 0.5s behind the FF (IIRC). Nowadays it practically has the same RoF as a Jackson (0.1s dif), on the category of most medium tanks (around ±6s).

The thing now is, does the OH version needs a 10f cost increase ?

do not try to pretend to be a professional player when every time you speak you looks like an ignorant...

xd

I'm a little confused on why people are complaining about swapping armor for hp on the panther. Considering the Panther is likely to come out around the same times as allied TDs armor basically become unimportant as allied tds already have a high armor pen. Therefore adding hp to the panther gives it survivability against its biggest counter - TDs. Also having another shot to survive in tank duels is the difference between winning and losing. One of the biggest issue with the Panther is that if you manage to get luck with bounces/rng then its nice but if not it gets melted. This should give the panther better consistency.

The only thing really up for debate as ElChino7 said was if the price increased was actually necessary.

do not try to pretend to be a professional player when every time you speak you looks like an ignorant...

can you understand this? maybe I'm wrong or maybe you are a little troll, but numbers don't lie
even in vet 0 and 1 this change is a nerf in survivability of the panther, and in vet 2 and 3 its a huge NERF specially against medium tanks.

You are not accounting for the 200+ dmg of USF and Firefly (which the panther struggles against currently IMO)

Plugging that into your formula:

Shots to kill @ 240 pen and 200 damage

	Prepatch	Post
Vet 0	75% chance to pen, 5.33 shots	92.3% chance to pen, 5.2 shots
Vet 2	75% chance to pen, 6.4 shots	83.9% chance to pen, 5.72 shots

Or we can calculate it for Firefly:

Shots to kill @ 210 pen far and 200 damage

	Prepatch Armour	Post
Vet 0	65.6% chance to pen, 6.09 shots	80.7% chance to pen, shots 5.94
Vet 2	65.6% chance to pen, 7.31 shots	73.4% chance to pen, shots 6.53

Or AP jackson

Shots to kill @ 250 pen far and 200 damage

	Prepatch	Post
Vet 0	78.1% chance to pen, 5.12 shots	96.1% chance to pen, 4.99 shots
Vet 2	78.1% chance to pen, 6.14 shots	87.4% chance to pen, 5.49 shots

or Su85 or normal jackson (same pen) for completeness
Shots to kill @ 220 pen far and 160 damage

	Prepatch	Post
Vet 0	68.7% chance to pen, 7.27 shots	84.6% chance to pen, 7.09 shots
Vet 2	68.7% chance to pen, 8.73 shots	76.9% chance to pen, 7.80 shots

For the record:

	Prepatch	Post
Vet 0	800hp 320 armour	960hp 260 armour
Vet 2	960hp 320 armour	960hp 286 armour

Sure post patch the panther may be more tough vs medium tanks, but that isn't going what make panthers a poor unit at the moment.

I'm a little confused on why people are complaining about swapping armor for hp on the panther. Considering the Panther is likely to come out around the same times as allied TDs armor basically become unimportant as allied tds already have a high armor pen. Therefore adding hp to the panther gives it survivability against its biggest counter - TDs.

I dont think thats necessarily true against 200 allied TDs (or even the su85). Against the firefly and AP Jackson, it looks like the panther may be worse off.

Did I mess up my math here? Because seems to me that the numbers say that panthers will be worse off vs tank destroyers contrary to what the mod makers have said.

this is not RNG this is the average value, can you understand this?

in practical its even worst, because all of this number are taken in close range penetration, in practical most of battles are in long range, the nerf in long range its much more big

do not try to pretend to be a professional player when every time you speak you looks like an ignorant...

Average values are an oversimplification here. Tanks don't fire fast enough for everything to average out.

Take the following scenario: a Jackson starts attacking your Panther at maximum range.

The Jackson has a far penetration value of 220 and a damage per shot of 160 which means it has a 69% chance to penetrate the old Panther and an 85% chance to penetrate the new Panther. The old Panther has 800 HP meaning it takes five penetrating Jackson shells to kill and the new Panther has 960 meaning it takes six penetrating Jackson shells to kill.

Whether or not a shell penetrates is a biased coinflip and therefore you can apply the binomial distribution to it.



This I believe illustrates the difference between the two Panthers more clearly than average values do. The new Panther will survive five hits from a Jackson no matter what whereas the old one has a 15.4% chance to be destroyed. The new Panther is also slightly more likely to survive an engagement where the Jackson hits it six times. In engagements where a Jackson has time to fire off seven or more shells the old Panther is slightly more likely to survive.

That's not a bad tradeoff: as you'll usually withdraw your Panther once it gets too beat up I'd say the extra survivability in shorter engagements is preferable to the extra survivability in longer ones. There's also lot to be said for the sheer reliability of being guaranteed to survive an extra hit over the old version.



You see a similar pattern against medium tanks. Here I've replaced the Jackson's weapon values with those of the Panzer IV, a typical medium tank with 120 penetration. The new Panther is slightly more survivable until you get into much longer engagements.





Where the new Panther falls short is at Veterancy 2.



A +10% armour buff to 260 armour is 286, not the old Panther's value of 320. At Veterancy 2 the new Panther is strictly inferior to the old one.


Overall I'd say this is a net buff to the Panther's survivability. There's undeniable value in the reliability of extra health and the armour reduction only cancels this out in very long engagements.

Lagos is the most correct in this matter as he has visual aids.

Show Spoiler

You are not accounting for the 200+ dmg of USF and Firefly (which the panther struggles against currently IMO)

Plugging that into your formula:

Shots to kill @ 240 pen and 200 damage

	Prepatch	Post
Vet 0	75% chance to pen, 5.33 shots	92.3% chance to pen, 5.2 shots
Vet 2	75% chance to pen, 6.4 shots	83.9% chance to pen, 5.72 shots

Or we can calculate it for Firefly:

Shots to kill @ 210 pen far and 200 damage

	Prepatch Armour	Post
Vet 0	65.6% chance to pen, 6.09 shots	80.7% chance to pen, shots 5.94
Vet 2	65.6% chance to pen, 7.31 shots	73.4% chance to pen, shots 6.53

Or AP jackson

Shots to kill @ 250 pen far and 200 damage

	Prepatch	Post
Vet 0	78.1% chance to pen, 5.12 shots	96.1% chance to pen, 4.99 shots
Vet 2	78.1% chance to pen, 6.14 shots	87.4% chance to pen, 5.49 shots

or Su85 or normal jackson (same pen) for completeness
Shots to kill @ 220 pen far and 160 damage

	Prepatch	Post
Vet 0	68.7% chance to pen, 7.27 shots	84.6% chance to pen, 7.09 shots
Vet 2	68.7% chance to pen, 8.73 shots	76.9% chance to pen, 7.80 shots

For the record:

	Prepatch	Post
Vet 0	800hp 320 armour	960hp 260 armour
Vet 2	960hp 320 armour	960hp 286 armour

Sure post patch the panther may be more tough vs medium tanks, but that isn't going what make panthers a poor unit at the moment.



I dont think thats necessarily true against 200 allied TDs (or even the su85). Against the firefly and AP Jackson, it looks like the panther may be worse off.

Did I mess up my math here? Because seems to me that the numbers say that panthers will be worse off vs tank destroyers contrary to what the mod makers have said.

good contribution, all the numbers says the same, this change its a small nerf even in vet 0 and 1 and a big nerf in vet 2 and 3. its simple this is not a survivability buff.

Take the following scenario: a Jackson starts attacking your Panther at maximum range.

nice work but....

Jackson
We are removing the M36’s extra sight bonuses and slightly reducing its range. The Jackson will still be an effective tank destroyer due to its high mobility, penetration and damage.
• Range reduced from 60 to 55
• Sight reduced from 40 to 35
• Vet 2 sight bonus removed

220 is the Jackson's far penetration value.

And of course this is comparing a vet 2 panther to a vet 0 tank destroyer. Once you throw that into the mix, things just get worse.