What does everyone else think about it? I feel like when I play brits my tanks just don't have much impact against infantry and can only really fight other tanks (which they do pretty well).
Brit tank scatter
6 Jul 2018, 01:38 AM
#1
Posts: 3053
I feel like it's a bit much when my comet misses more than my sherman with AP rounds
What does everyone else think about it? I feel like when I play brits my tanks just don't have much impact against infantry and can only really fight other tanks (which they do pretty well).
What does everyone else think about it? I feel like when I play brits my tanks just don't have much impact against infantry and can only really fight other tanks (which they do pretty well).
 | Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
6 Jul 2018, 02:58 AM
#2
Posts: 44
I would reccomend never building comet because its trash. The benefits of anvil outweigh hammer even when ignoring how much better the churchill is than the comet.
The Cromwell and the churchill both need veterancy to be effective vs inf. If you think your opponent doesnt have at support, crushing with the Cromwell can still be very effective.
Having said that, the British tank roster is probably the weakest in the game atm. I wouldn't even go as far to say that they are effective in fighting tanks, as the firefly is probably the weakest TD. Brits really must rely on their strong infantry + commando cheese to be effective in the meta at a high level.
The Cromwell and the churchill both need veterancy to be effective vs inf. If you think your opponent doesnt have at support, crushing with the Cromwell can still be very effective.
Having said that, the British tank roster is probably the weakest in the game atm. I wouldn't even go as far to say that they are effective in fighting tanks, as the firefly is probably the weakest TD. Brits really must rely on their strong infantry + commando cheese to be effective in the meta at a high level.
6 Jul 2018, 03:06 AM
#3
Posts: 3053
I would reccomend never building comet because its trash. The benefits of anvil outweigh hammer even when ignoring how much better the churchill is than the comet.
The Cromwell and the churchill both need veterancy to be effective vs inf. If you think your opponent doesnt have at support, crushing with the Cromwell can still be very effective.
Having said that, the British tank roster is probably the weakest in the game atm. I wouldn't even go as far to say that they are effective in fighting tanks, as the firefly is probably the weakest TD. Brits really must rely on their strong infantry + commando cheese to be effective in the meta at a high level.
The only reason I build comets are because I think they trade well with panthers and mediums, and I just personally don't like using the firefly.
Believe me, I abuse commandos to the maximum.
| Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
6 Jul 2018, 03:21 AM
#4
Posts: 44
If you can use the comet effectively then more power to you, hopefully it gets some buffs in the future. Until then, you would be correct in your assumption that brit tanks are not as effective as some of the other factions vs inf
6 Jul 2018, 13:42 PM
#5
Posts: 16
Try getting 3 Churchills at around the 20 min mark, that combined with infantry with special weapons and you're opponent is really in trouble...
6 Jul 2018, 13:50 PM
#6
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Try getting 3 Churchills at around the 20 min mark, that combined with infantry with special weapons and you're opponent is really in trouble...
Was opponent AFK in his base for first 15 minutes of that to allow you to sit on 2 fuel points whole game and never attacking you and inflicting no menpower bleed at all to achieve that?
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
6 Jul 2018, 20:42 PM
#7
Posts: 3053
Try getting 3 Churchills at around the 20 min mark, that combined with infantry with special weapons and you're opponent is really in trouble...
3 churchills 20 minute mark?
I'll just back them up with my call-in unicorns and loch ness monster strafing run.
In all seriousness, if I had over 450 fuel by 20 mins I wouldn't need tanks because I'd have a map and a half of control.
| Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
7 Jul 2018, 02:42 AM
#8
Posts: 16
Was opponent AFK in his base for first 15 minutes of that to allow you to sit on 2 fuel points whole game and never attacking you and inflicting no menpower bleed at all to achieve that?
Not sure... the opponents was definitely playing tho but my point is having multiple Churchills can really deal heavy damage.
7 Jul 2018, 02:58 AM
#9
Posts: 1890 | Subs: 1
I agree, both Cromwell and Comet have been nerfed to below average after being OP for so long. Comet definitely needs either a price reduction or scatter buff IMO- it's just not worth the price when you consider Hammer Cost. Cromwell fares slightly better after the recent price reduction and can do decently well if you maximize it's speed in tank battles (here Hammer is worthwhile for War Speed) but it's a total RNG cannon for infantry when you compare it to Sherman HE or OKW P4. I think even buffing it's hull MG is worth considering to make it a bit more consistent like T34.
7 Jul 2018, 04:08 AM
#10
Posts: 5279
Not sure... the opponents was definitely playing tho but my point is having multiple Churchills can really deal heavy damage.
having mulitple almost any tank will cause alot of damage. being able to fully tech and then build multiple high cost tanks by the 20 min mark means the game was decided when the players were loading in.
#stalinwept
7 Jul 2018, 16:33 PM
#11
Posts: 1930
I feel like it's a bit much when my comet misses more than my sherman with AP rounds
What does everyone else think about it? I feel like when I play brits my tanks just don't have much impact against infantry and can only really fight other tanks (which they do pretty well).
the main gun on the comet and cromwell actually have identical scatter as the panzer 4, but the panzer 4 also have better reload speed and mg to make them better against infantry.
Related:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/80056/the-cromwell-need-buffs/page/2#post_id687045
the average reload time of the comet is 6.4-5.9 seconds (6.15 avg), with identical AOE and scatter to the cromwell.
7 Jul 2018, 16:35 PM
#12
Posts: 5279
the main gun on the comet and cromwell actually have identical scatter as the panzer 4, but the panzer 4 also have better reload speed and mg as well.
Related:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/80056/the-cromwell-need-buffs/page/2#post_id687045
the average reload time of the comet is 6.15 seconds, with identical AOE and scatter to the cromwell.
well they should have know that adding a non doc pershing with no limit they would end up over nerfing the tits out of it....
changing vet seems like a good direction for the brit tanks tho
aside- as long as tommys have so much potential i am cautious of bringing the cromwell up to AI "standards" for profile, even if that is a logical direction
#stalinwept
7 Jul 2018, 16:47 PM
#13
Posts: 1930
well they should have know that adding a non doc pershing with no limit they would end up over nerfing the tits out of it....
changing vet seems like a good direction for the brit tanks tho
the pershing have one of the best AOE in the game. The comet 's AOE were never anywhere close.
And really the comet is the allies's counter part to the panther tank. I stated my suggestion for the cromwell in the thread I linked, but I will post a short summary here:
cromwell:
reload time to 5.5-5.1 seconds (5.3 avg)
size to 20
penetration to 90/100/120
vet2 reload bonus replaced with .85 received accuracy (size to 17)
and for the comet:
pop to 16
reload time to 5.9-5.5 seconds (5.7 avg)
.90 reload speed for vet 2
1.30 penetration buff for vet 3
7 Jul 2018, 22:55 PM
#14
Posts: 5279
the pershing have one of the best AOE in the game. The comet 's AOE were never anywhere close.
And really the comet is the allies's counter part to the panther tank. I stated my suggestion for the cromwell in the thread I linked, but I will post a short summary here:
cromwell:
reload time to 5.5-5.1 seconds (5.3 avg)
size to 20
penetration to 90/100/120
vet2 reload bonus replaced with .85 received accuracy (size to 17)
and for the comet:
pop to 16
reload time to 5.9-5.5 seconds (5.7 avg)
.90 reload speed for vet 2
1.30 penetration buff for vet 3
the comet WAS a a no limit pershing. it didnt have the AOE but it was supremely accurate, even on the move, could melt infantry/ team weapons (AT GUNS) from a mile away, had the same durability, was faster, had cost free blitz and the commander which was over performing.... it WAS broken, thats what i was referring to. its relic. is there a single unit that didnt design poorly and then nerf out of the game to rot for at least a year in patch cycles?
hell, it BARLEY lost to a panther despite its better AI in the gun and utility and what not.
imo they could easily undo most of the nerfs it received and limit to 1 on the field at a time (same for the churchill) as the unit itself wasnt problematic, it was the level of critical mass it could atain. it was panther spam without the drawbacks of the AT centred panther...
although i dont like your proposals.
i wish they would overhaul target siizes entirely tho to make different ones more meaningful
#stalinwept
7 Jul 2018, 22:58 PM
#15
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Not sure... the opponents was definitely playing tho but my point is having multiple Churchills can really deal heavy damage.
More than 1 churchill, means that you will end up wasting more time repairing than attacking. If you are playing outside of teamgames, you don't have enough pop to support the rest of your army, cause anything more than 1 churchill means that you'll need +3 RE to repair.
My controls weren't working
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
And if they were, you were playing dishonorably,
And if you weren't, you were playing without skill,
And if you were, it's not fun to play that way,
And if it is, you only care about winning.
Bible of Scrublord, Psalt 3:16.
16 Jul 2018, 14:09 PM
#16
Posts: 64
Permanently BannedCromwell needs mg buff to put it's AI dps at least on par with t-34/76
16 Jul 2018, 15:15 PM
#17
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Cromwell needs mg buff to put it's AI dps at least on par with t-34/76
Your choice of words is a bit funny since T-34 have some of the best hull/coaxial hmg.
16 Jul 2018, 16:19 PM
#18
Posts: 64
Permanently Banned
Your choice of words is a bit funny since T-34 have some of the best hull/coaxial hmg.
Why is it funny? Cromwell is not worth the cost for AI. Sherman gets HE and better mg's, t-34 does good mg damage and is cheap.
So what are you paying extra fuel and lack of AI for? Slightly faster turret rotarion and speed?
I would rather have a tank that could kill things
16 Jul 2018, 16:52 PM
#19
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Why is it funny? Cromwell is not worth the cost for AI. Sherman gets HE and better mg's, t-34 does good mg damage and is cheap.
So what are you paying extra fuel and lack of AI for? Slightly faster turret rotarion and speed?
I would rather have a tank that could kill things
Because you make it sound like T-34 has average DPS on mgs and thus Cromwell should get at least average DPS on the hmg.
You area actually talking about:
x160-175% buff to DPS for coaxial
X240-232% buff to DPS for hull
Those are very big buffs.
In addition if you think that the difference between T-34/76 and Cromwell is "Slightly faster turret rotarion and speed" you should check their stats, abilities and tech cost again.
16 Jul 2018, 17:05 PM
#20
Posts: 102
Because you make it sound like T-34 has average DPS on mgs and thus Cromwell should get at least average DPS on the hmg.
You area actually talking about:
x160-175% buff to DPS for coaxial
X240-232% buff to DPS for hull
Those are very big buffs.
In addition if you think that the difference between T-34/76 and Cromwell is "Slightly faster turret rotarion and speed" you should check their stats, abilities and tech cost again.
It depends on how you look at it. If the cromwell needs 175% and 232% buff to reach the t34 levels then that just shows you how bad the cromwell mgs are.
0 user is browsing this thread:
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1099614.642-1
- 5.280162.633+8
- 6.305114.728+1
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.271108.715+22
- 9.721440.621+3
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1231
Board Info
488 users are online:
488 guests
0 post in the last 24h
6 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
6 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49060
Welcome our newest member, starkindustries
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, starkindustries
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM