Firefly need to be cheaper

I tend to agree that at most FF needs a slight cost decrease in cost to reflect the nerfs it's gotten over time - otherwise it's a solid TD when supported. The only other thing is that it may just be me but I feel like Tulips can be pretty buggy - I know that they are a skill shot but sometimes I feel like elevation and such can really mess with them. If they were a bit more consistent that wouldn't be terrible.

I will say this again and again, a well micro'd firefly is scary.

Brits aren't supposed to snare. Axis will always dive in with tanks anyways, that's why brits have emplacements.

none of which is properly represented in your outdated chart. Even with the high accuracy the FF's dps is still substantially lower than the jp4.

the tank commander is also another upgrade that add to the Firefly's already expensive cost.

This wouldn't be an issue if the Firefly isn't the most expensive tech TD in the game.

Isn't the commander like 30 mu? Thats pretty cheap..

Not Really, DPS without armor and target size value and at different ranges is not a very revealing comparison.

more here:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/62537/tds-vs-mediums-in-live-and-in-numbers

The chart in that thread kind of converges, though the specifics differ, that Stug is pretty dang powerful.

Though that does also compare su-76 and the others, so thanks for that

DPS = RoF. That has nothing to do with accuracy, target size, cost, utility, turret, damage and vet. If we were just going off DPS the StuG should win any tank v tank fight EVER

vipper's chart did use consistent target for the Firefly and jp4, and take into account accuracy, target size, and damage.

Technically it's cromwell and pz4, but it doesn't actually make a different for the two TD. they have the same size and same pen chance for the firefly and jp4 (> 100%)


and jp4 veterancy lean toward survivability. It's the only TD to get cloak as a vet ability and the only td to get a health boost. Like wise the Firefly is the only TD to get a damage boost. They have their own unique bonus instead of copy and paste.

I will say this again and again, a well micro'd firefly is scary.

Brits aren't supposed to snare. Axis will always dive in with tanks anyways, that's why brits have emplacements.

Brits having emplacements to counter axis dives would be great if it ever worked out that way, 17 pdrs are disposable panther killers at the moment. you build them for 70 fuel and it kills a panther for 175 fuel and then they kill it with artillery, rince and repeat and they burn more fuel than you do.

In team games right now if you don't possess the capability to counter LefH's then you will lose. End of. Emplacements are not valid right now in team games as a result, unless you fully sim city it, which again, if they are decent they will just counter.

Also I wouldn't give that as a valid reason for Brits not to have snares anyway, axis get the PaK43 and Jagtiger/elefant and get snares on every infantry nearly. The reason Brits didn't have snares is because when they were released, the firefly was god tier and had tulips that dealt stupid damage and temporary snared, the comet was straight up better than the panther in every way, the 6 pounder was and still is ridiculous, 4-6 piats could melt a king tiger like it was made of cheese and emplacements couldn't be countered.

Brits had the best anti tank in the game by a mile so snares weren't necessary, relic have nerfed every single one of those things into the floor so now all UKF is, is a faction with average, if not lacking AT and no snares.

The way I see it, unless they revert all of these nerfs (which would make brits OP again, the ONLY way brits will become a regularly picked faction in the competitive scene is if they get snares on at least 1 frontline unit.

Best suggestions I have seen for this is either make gammon bombs work like soviet satchels and stick to vehicles and snare or give sappers No.74 sticky grenades. Even just a tommy vet 1 AT rifle grenade would suffice to be honest.

Firesparks

show your playercard before all your ridiculous balance claims

none of which is properly represented in your outdated chart. Even with the high accuracy the FF's dps is still substantially lower than the jp4.

the tank commander is also another upgrade that add to the Firefly's already expensive cost.

This wouldn't be an issue if the Firefly isn't the most expensive tech TD in the game.

The point I was making with the link is that DPS for tank fights, needs to factor in armor and target size.

My point is and remains that FF is more accurate than JP, it also has allot more penetration.
(In addition it has 45 360 vie, can have access to trucking and war speed)

That is simply because you do not take into account Tulips.

A FF can snare and kill medium in around 8 sec if both Tulips land and that is one the highest DPS output of any TD.

DPS = RoF. That has nothing to do with accuracy, target size, cost, utility, turret, damage and vet. If we were just going off DPS the StuG should win any tank v tank fight EVER

Can we stop acting like the FF turret is worth anything when the JP can basically rotate faster than the shitty slow ass FF gunner?

any axis tank can eat the thing for breakfast flanking, just like allied tanks could flank a JP. They have the same weakness; if you drive around them they are toast (it's just a lot safer for Axis as brits lack snares).

That last point in brackets is why FF needs some love, everyone puts this thing in a vaccuum despite its weaknesses not being covered the same way Axis can. 6 pounders were nerfed, AT tommies were nerfed into uselessness, comet nerf, cromwell nerfs... British AT needs some lovin

Can we stop acting like the FF turret is worth anything when the JP can basically rotate faster than the shitty slow ass FF gunner?

any axis tank can eat the thing for breakfast flanking, just like allied tanks could flank a JP. They have the same weakness; if you drive around them they are toast (it's just a lot safer for Axis as brits lack snares).

That last point in brackets is why FF needs some love, everyone puts this thing in a vaccuum despite its weaknesses not being covered the same way Axis can. 6 pounders were nerfed, AT tommies were nerfed into uselessness, comet nerf, cromwell nerfs... British AT needs some lovin

Still has a turret that allows for poking in and out of cover or firing while retreating. It's slow but it exists and it's a perk. The KT is slow, should we treat it like an emplacement?

Still has a turret that allows for poking in and out of cover or firing while retreating. It's slow but it exists and it's a perk. The KT is slow, should we treat it like an emplacement?

FF has even slower turret rotation than a tiger, it's not a perk when the rotation is so bad you might as well just class the thing as a fixed gun TD. As I say rotation is so poor it suffers from same weakness as JP.

Going by your logic the FF also has great anti-infantry because it has two MG's and they exist, they might do the weakest DPS in the game but it's a perk and all those shreked pgrens better cower in fear.

Please look at my avatar in response to reading such grasping at straws.

Can we stop acting like the FF turret is worth anything when the JP can basically rotate faster than the shitty slow ass FF gunner?

any axis tank can eat the thing for breakfast flanking, just like allied tanks could flank a JP. They have the same weakness; if you drive around them they are toast (it's just a lot safer for Axis as brits lack snares).

That last point in brackets is why FF needs some love, everyone puts this thing in a vaccuum despite its weaknesses not being covered the same way Axis can. 6 pounders were nerfed, AT tommies were nerfed into uselessness, comet nerf, cromwell nerfs... British AT needs some lovin

You need to also factor in the rotation rate of the chasis when you think of the turret as well. Those can be stacked together for faster rotation, unlike fixed gun vehicles.

This list of brit viable AT includes both things that are being considered for nerfs, and post nerfs. Even if the 6 pounder and AT squads were nerfed, the 6 pounder will still be fine against mediums. I'm not on the balance team so I can't help with nerfs and buffs, I just try to educate so maybe the balance team doesn't repeatedly overnerf things.

vipper's chart did use consistent target for the Firefly and jp4, and take into account accuracy, target size, and damage.

Technically it's cromwell and pz4, but it doesn't actually make a different for the two TD. they have the same size and same pen chance for the firefly and jp4 (> 100%)


and jp4 veterancy lean toward survivability. It's the only TD to get cloak as a vet ability and the only td to get a health boost. Like wise the Firefly is the only TD to get a damage boost. They have their own unique bonus instead of copy and paste.

Even so, it doesn't mean it isn't a vet mess. Its XP value for vet 5 is 2x that of a vet 3 Su85. And the vet 5 is virtually useless against stock mediums. The 2 TDs also fill different roles. The JP4 is supposed to shoot at lower armored targets, so it lacks significant pen in exchange for RoF. The FF lacks RoF in exchange for pen. So while the FF cannot engage multiple targets and is prone to getting swarmed, the JP4 struggles with high armor targets.

Reminder that simple DPS is useless for Tanks.

1- Vehicles do not have to reload in order to fire it's first shot. That's the biggest time constrain in order to fire. Ready/Aim times are small. Wind up/down is only present in a select amount of vehicles.

2- Overkill is wasted damage.

3- Shots to kill/Time to kill is a better representation of the capabilities of a vehicle. Even more if you double the unit or mix it add with +100/+120/+160 to the equation.
This should be done against 560/640/720/800/1040/1280 (i think i got the HP pools correctly)

Tulips (and in a lesser way command tank upgrade) are always gonna be the biggest obstacle in balancing the unit.
It would be like having OLD stock TWP on Stug by default, but only working 33% of the time. When it works flawlessly, you kill a tank. When it doesn't, you miss and waste munition.

FF has even slower turret rotation than a tiger, it's not a perk when the rotation is so bad you might as well just class the thing as a fixed gun TD. As I say rotation is so poor it suffers from same weakness as JP.

Going by your logic the FF also has great anti-infantry because it has two MG's and they exist, they might do the weakest DPS in the game but it's a perk and all those shreked pgrens better cower in fear.

Please look at my avatar in response to reading such grasping at straws.

OH no not slower than a tiger! The turret exists and it does provide benifit ESPECIALLY to pathing. Being able to shoot things while navigating the shit ass pathfinding is a boon. I never said it was great but it exists. Don't play stupid. Just because it's not the OP Jackson doesn't mean it's not at a slight advantage over one's without a turret. The trait being there =\=, being the very best at it. You can use attack ground to get the turret mostly in place. Moving back and firing at a unit trying to flank you is a thing that can be done with a turret (no matter how slow it is) that can't be done without one.

OH no not slower than a tiger! The turret exists and it does provide benifit ESPECIALLY to pathing. Being able to shoot things while navigating the shit ass pathfinding is a boon. I never said it was great but it exists. Don't play stupid. Just because it's not the OP Jackson doesn't mean it's not at a slight advantage over one's without a turret. The trait being there =\=, being the very best at it. You can use attack ground to get the turret mostly in place. Moving back and firing at a unit trying to flank you is a thing that can be done with a turret (no matter how slow it is) that can't be done without one.

the trait being there doesn't mean it's useful if it's so damn slow it has next to zero impact (which is true when you compare to a JP that has faster rotation). If your argument was sound the FF wouldn't be a sitting duck the moment something gets close like all casemate Tank destroyers (again JP, stug etc) so it has the same weakness and is not worth calling a perk.

As for your argument it can fire on retreat that's laughable, any player worth their salt will reverse awayway where any TD can return fire with a bit of micro. It's not hard and this is how you deal with diving tanks, not doing a massive U-turn while the snailpace FF turret takes a millenia to turn to the back of the tank or your Stug whatever has their gun pointing away from the enemy.

You conveniently ignore my FF MG point, this I was hoping was where you would understand your leaky logic. What "perks" as you call them are worthless if there are no solid stats to make them useful, this is why I brought up the MG's. They are useless and the FF turret in the grand scheme of things is worthless too.

If you're still not convinced I implore you to look at that firesparks video earlier in the thread, you'll see the JP snapshotting targets and rotating to targets quicker than the 440mp 155fuel firefly.

Try this with a JP4

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/261489406

the trait being there doesn't mean it's useful if it's so damn slow it has next to zero impact (which is true when you compare to a JP that has faster rotation). If your argument was sound the FF wouldn't be a sitting duck the moment something gets close like all casemate Tank destroyers (again JP, stug etc) so it has the same weakness and is not worth calling a perk.

As for your argument it can fire on retreat that's laughable, any player worth their salt will reverse awayway where any TD can return fire with a bit of micro. It's not hard and this is how you deal with diving tanks, not doing a massive U-turn while the snailpace FF turret takes a millenia to turn to the back of the tank or your Stug whatever has their gun pointing away from the enemy.

You conveniently ignore my FF MG point, this I was hoping was where you would understand your leaky logic. What "perks" as you call them are worthless if there are no solid stats to make them useful, this is why I brought up the MG's. They are useless and the FF turret in the grand scheme of things is worthless too.

If you're still not convinced I implore you to look at that firesparks video earlier in the thread, you'll see the JP snapshotting targets and rotating to targets quicker than the 440mp 155fuel firefly.

Except the turret IS an advantage. If you are backing between some buildings or something and the tank is coming up 45° to your right you can do something about it. Hell YOU don't have to do anything the unit will do it itself.
I didn't mention the MG thing because it's stupid. The panzerwerfer has an MG too but if yuu are in a situation where it's even bothering to shoot you fucked up. The turret works at max range. And being able to back up full speed and shoot is better than spin shooting to get shots off. The kv-2has a slow turret too but there's no use pretending its just an isu.

It's way better to have a turret, even a slow one than not have one at all.

The point I was making with the link is that DPS for tank fights, needs to factor in armor and target size.

My point is and remains that FF is more accurate than JP, it also has allot more penetration.
(In addition it has 45 360 vie, can have access to trucking and war speed)

That is simply because you do not take into account Tulips.

A FF can snare and kill medium in around 8 sec if both Tulips land and that is one the highest DPS output of any TD.

the firefly might have better penetration, but its dps is so slow that it barely make the difference against the much higher dps jp4.


Alternatively, see how the jp4 fare against the highest armor unit for the british (290) verus how well the firefly fare against the panther.

as a simple calculation:
170/290 = .5862 * 28.16 = 16.507

210/320 = .6563 * 24.24 = 15.908

the DPS for the firefly is so low, that the lower penetration on the jp4 can keep up just by firing more shots.

assuming it's jp4 vs panther (which doesn't really happen)

170/320 = 0.5313 * 30.72 = 16.321536.

the long reload on the Firefly effectively keep its dps low. It's the great equalizer.

They also nerf the movement stun on the tulips, It's only 2.5 now.

It would be like having OLD stock TWP on Stug by default, but only working 33% of the time. When it works flawlessly, you kill a tank. When it doesn't, you miss and waste munition.

technically the tulips isn't on by default. You need to pay munition for it.

really, if nerfing the tulip damage to 80 per rocket and lower cost (~50 mu) mean the Firefly get a cost reduction to 350 mp 135 fuel 12 pop, it's a fair trade off.

Try this with a JP4

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/261489406

which is a poor example since the panther was stationary both time. The panther was sitting in front of a vicker trying to kill it, allow the firefly to take shot at it own leisure. Then it remain stationary as firefly drive up to it again

Even after taking both tulip rocket the panther still manage to back up, and would have likely retreated back to base if he didn't stop.

lastly, the panther was wounded already. 200+240+200 = 640, which isn't enough to kill the panther's 800 hp. The panther would have need to have been wounded already.

You did everything right, but it's not not a sign of how the firefly is worth 440 mp 155 fuel.

OH no not slower than a tiger! The turret exists and it does provide benifit ESPECIALLY to pathing. Being able to shoot things while navigating the shit ass pathfinding is a boon. I never said it was great but it exists. Don't play stupid. Just because it's not the OP Jackson doesn't mean it's not at a slight advantage over one's without a turret. The trait being there =\=, being the very best at it. You can use attack ground to get the turret mostly in place. Moving back and firing at a unit trying to flank you is a thing that can be done with a turret (no matter how slow it is) that can't be done without one.

Okay, the turret does provide advantage, but it is also important to acknowledge that even with a turret, the Firefly is still vulnerable to flanking.

Any axis player who used the tiger should know that having a turret doesn't make you immune to flanking. There's faster turret, and then there's slow turret. The firefly have a slow turret.

The firefly is as vulnerable to flanking as the tiger, given their turret speed and chassis speed are almost identical similar. It's not like the jackson whose fast turret and body make it "impossible" to flank.

Never said that the FF was immune to flanking, nor that the turret was game changing just that it is an advantage and should be taken into account. I agree that the FF isn't worth its current price ESPECIALLY with the broken strong Jackson running around with none of the drawbacks and even more perks for less.

the firefly might have better penetration, but its dps is so slow that it barely make the difference against the much higher dps jp4.
...

It all depend on the target armor as you can see here:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/56469/tank-destroyer-time-to-kill-stats

JP vs IS-2 time to kill
JP4 65.25 - 85.25
JP4 vet 3 50.74 - 66.27

FF vs KT
Firefly 82.75 - 107.50
FF vet 3 37.75 - 56.50
Firefly (Tulip) 66.25 - 91.00
FF vet 3 31.50 - 44.00

Also note how much better FF become with veterancy.

The firefly is as vulnerable to flanking as the tiger, given their turret speed and chassis speed are almost identical similar. It's not like the jackson whose fast turret and body make it "impossible" to flank.

No it is not because:
It has sight of 45 360
Can stun any tank to close in with Tullip
Can have war speed available from vet 0
get 15% speed at vet 1
get turret rotation at vet 2