Login

russian armor

M10 tank destroyer (and other stuff) - A different approach

Would you like if those changes were tested and eventually implemented
Option Distribution Votes
28%
56%
17%
Total votes: 18
Vote VOTE! Vote ABSTAIN
31 Aug 2018, 09:28 AM
#1
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

Before i start: This is not a "x op, y up" thread at all. I made this thread to point out easy solutions (at least imho) to a few (mainly tech trees) design issues.
This is not the holy book or the quran, if i made a mistake, types wrong stats, or you think my ideas are simply bad feel free to correct me and share your opinion.


1) US always had the issue of having one non doctrinal tank destroyer. My idea is that the "Armor Company" M10, that is currently being reworked, could be placed within the Major tier of USF.
Now USF has a stopgap at vehicle that can take on panzers

2) To incentive the use of both, the Major tier could be split: the first 60 fuel unlocks the major, the m8 motor carriage and the m10, while a sidetech of 60 fuel could unlock the offmap abilities of the Major, the M36 and the Sherman

3) Same could be made for OKW Flak Truck, 60 fuel would unlock the Obersoldaten and the JagdPanzer IV/70-(v), while the Panther and Panzer 4 could be unlocked by sideteching

4) OKW could also see their tier1 and 2 trucks changed so there's more room for backteching and the trucks sideteching. Trucks set up could cost only 15 fuel, and automatically unlock the healing/repair station. If the player requires those units it could sidetech paying the exact same price as he pays now for simply setting the truck up.
31 Aug 2018, 09:37 AM
#2
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

3) Same could be made for OKW Flak Truck, 60 fuel would unlock the Obersoldaten and the JagdPanzer IV/70-(v), while the Panther and Panzer 4 could be unlocked by sideteching


I like this idea, for the Obersoldaten at least. While they are potent infantry they've always had the problem of arriving too late, giving them a significant veterancy disadvantage. This solution is easier than shuffling units around tier structures. I'm not so sure about the Jagdpanzer since it would become so cheap it would deny all Allied early armor. I'd put that one into the sidetech as well.
31 Aug 2018, 09:42 AM
#3
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660



I like this idea, for the Obersoldaten at least. While they are potent infantry they've always had the problem of arriving too late, giving them a significant veterancy disadvantage. This solution is easier than shuffling units around tier structures. I'm not so sure about the Jagdpanzer since it would become so cheap it would deny all Allied early armor. I'd put that one into the sidetech as well.

If jagdpanzer would be too powerful then it should be NERFED and placed still 60 fuel before.
Okw doesn't need an high tier tank destroyer other than Panther, but a stopgap at like stug.
31 Aug 2018, 10:55 AM
#4
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

The m-10 is actually a good unit and there is little reason to buff it. The problem start from the fact that m-36 can do everything.

So there is a number of way to deal with the issue:
1) Keep M-36 good vs vehicles above P4 but lower its ability vs P4 and bellow. That can be achieved by lowering the accuracy of the unit. Now M-10 can be designed as a unit best used against vehicles up to P4.

2) Make M-10 available as call-in unit so that strategies that skipped T4 become viable. That would mean that no AI tank should be available to the commander, in other words swapping M-10 for Sherman 76 from armour to mechanised. The unit should still be available to be built from T4 at a lower price.
31 Aug 2018, 11:06 AM
#5
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

It's a neat idea that's come up before but I don't think it's likely at this point.
31 Aug 2018, 11:48 AM
#6
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2018, 10:55 AMVipper
The m-10 is actually a good unit and there is little reason to buff it. The problem start from the fact that m-36 can do everything.

So there is a number of way to deal with the issue:
1) Keep M-36 good vs vehicles above P4 but lower its ability vs P4 and bellow. That can be achieved by lowering the accuracy of the unit. Now M-10 can be designed as a unit best used against vehicles up to P4.

2) Make M-10 available as call-in unit so that strategies that skipped T4 become viable. That would mean that no AI tank should be available to the commander, in other words swapping M-10 for Sherman 76 from armour to mechanised. The unit should still be available to be built from T4 at a lower price.


If it needs to be adjusted it will, putting it at the same exact timing with jackson will, inevitably, end up making players choose one if the two and cement meta.

The m36 jackson changes you are proposing is optimal and not mutually exclusive with splitting tier 4. They perfectly fit the introduction of medium centered at.

Keeping m10 doctrinal doesn't solve the issue that m36 jackson still needs to be good vs anything or usf needs to rely on mp based at like at guns to counter panzer 4.
31 Aug 2018, 11:49 AM
#7
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2018, 11:06 AMLago
It's a neat idea that's come up before but I don't think it's likely at this point.

There's probably much less work to do with this than to create doctrines or even just rework some.

But i see what you mean
31 Aug 2018, 12:34 PM
#8
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


Keeping m10 doctrinal doesn't solve the issue that m36 jackson still needs to be good vs anything or usf needs to rely on mp based at like at guns to counter panzer 4.


Imo the TD should be separated to "medium TDs" that good vs medium tanks and not really effective vs Super heavies and the "heavy Tds" that effect vs Super heavies but less effective vs mediums. Imo M-36 being able to counter effectively every vehicle from a Kubel to a JT is bad design.

Imo USF have enough option to counter P4 even without the M-36. (Although I do find the P4's gun a bit too good vs infantry)

One can also try to make M-10 the stock unit and M-36 the doctrinal one.
31 Aug 2018, 12:51 PM
#9
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 1220

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2018, 12:34 PMVipper


Imo the TD should be separated to "medium TDs" that good vs medium tanks and not really effective vs Super heavies and the "heavy Tds" that effect vs Super heavies but less effective vs mediums. Imo M-36 being able to counter effectively every vehicle from a Kubel to a JT is bad design.

Imo USF have enough option to counter P4 even without the M-36. (Although I do find the P4's gun a bit too good vs infantry)

One can also try to make M-10 the stock unit and M-36 the doctrinal one.

Then u must be crazy. M 10 maybe is good vs panzers or even stugs but struggle when fight againts panthers or heavy tanks.

This level of bulshit is like suggestion that wermaht dont need panthers because stug.

I dont know why your opinion is so biased, USF faction lacks hard without commander and for u they dont need even jackson. If u dont know that thing makes USF decent/playable without it GG.

Why OKW need panther anyway when they have jagpanzer ? Maybe we should make panther doctrinal for okw asymetrical to wermaht
31 Aug 2018, 12:57 PM
#10
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6


This level of bulshit is like suggestion that wermaht dont need panthers because stug.


Uhm no, he is suggesting it should be exactly like OH's Stug and Panther, with the M10 serving as a cheaper/intermediate TD to counter light-medium tanks and the M36 to counter heavy tanks or TD's. Which makes sense because right now the M36 is great against literally any vehicle which removes any reason to ever get an M10 instead.
31 Aug 2018, 13:50 PM
#11
avatar of YRon²y

Posts: 221

idk what i all read here but, fak it all.

why not make it so m10 can only be spawned if LT and CPT are teched?
this will create new strategies,...
it would also instantly fix the problem of the m36 overshadowing the m10,

BUT

you will ofcourse have the problem that LT and CPT combined only cost 110 fuel.
the major and lets say LT combined cost 170 fuel.
now how do we fix that?

maybe put a second tech on the CPT and LT wich both cost 30 fuel,
but when teched you can make an m10.

all this suggesting of the m10 becoming something like a panther is bs in my opinion cause it doesn't have close to the armor points of a panther and what are you with something that only can fight pz4 but nothing above that? the m36 overshadows the m10 with almost everything(i know you wanne proof me wrang. it has speed blabla).
ostheer has a shit tech don't make another one. (another thing you can talk about)

now jagd wolf nr2 idea is good cause here you also have a use with m10 and you can tech to m36 later, but what if you don't have the commander?

3d idea is stupid tho. why start changing the okw tech?
sideteching for a pz4 is crazy as in 1v1 you almost always go for that pz4.
just don't change the tech...
31 Aug 2018, 14:26 PM
#12
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2018, 13:50 PMYRon²y

3d idea is stupid tho. why start changing the okw tech?
sideteching for a pz4 is crazy as in 1v1 you almost always go for that pz4.
just don't change the tech...


Did you even read it? With this suggestion the Panzer IV will stay exactly like it is now, with the exact same cost and timing. The only thing that would change is that the T4 HQ structure itself can be built earlier so Obers can come out earlier, which is a sensible thing.
31 Aug 2018, 15:54 PM
#13
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 450

The m10 is so much better at flanking than the jakson. The problem is not with the m10 but with the bulldozer. They added an ability to the m10 which makes no sense on this unit. All they need to do is give the dozer the same barrage ability the brumbar has and take away the m10's new ability. The new dozer competes with the scott and sherman. Why not just make it unique?
31 Aug 2018, 16:17 PM
#14
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

The m10 is so much better at flanking than the jakson. The problem is not with the m10 but with the bulldozer. They added an ability to the m10 which makes no sense on this unit. All they need to do is give the dozer the same barrage ability the brumbar has and take away the m10's new ability. The new dozer competes with the scott and sherman. Why not just make it unique?


And jackson does not need to flank.

M10 needed its own gimmick and a unique one to not be constantly overshadowed by jackson.
31 Aug 2018, 18:28 PM
#15
avatar of insaneHoshi

Posts: 911


If jagdpanzer would be too powerful then it should be NERFED and placed still 60 fuel before.
Okw doesn't need an high tier tank destroyer other than Panther, but a stopgap at like stug.


The Hetzer dream is real
31 Aug 2018, 18:47 PM
#16
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 450

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2018, 16:17 PMKatitof


And jackson does not need to flank.

M10 needed its own gimmick and a unique one to not be constantly overshadowed by jackson.



I like m10s but hate the commander they are in. The m10 is probably the best tank for flanking other tanks, but paks and reketans are a pain in the butt for the armored commander. The dozer could help clear or scare paks away with a barrage ability. Then you move in with your m10s to clean up the armor.

31 Aug 2018, 22:58 PM
#17
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2018, 13:50 PMYRon²y
idk what i all read here but, fak it all.

why not make it so m10 can only be spawned if LT and CPT are teched?
this will create new strategies,...
it would also instantly fix the problem of the m36 overshadowing the m10,

BUT

you will ofcourse have the problem that LT and CPT combined only cost 110 fuel.
the major and lets say LT combined cost 170 fuel.
now how do we fix that?

maybe put a second tech on the CPT and LT wich both cost 30 fuel,
but when teched you can make an m10.

all this suggesting of the m10 becoming something like a panther is bs in my opinion cause it doesn't have close to the armor points of a panther and what are you with something that only can fight pz4 but nothing above that? the m36 overshadows the m10 with almost everything(i know you wanne proof me wrang. it has speed blabla).
ostheer has a shit tech don't make another one. (another thing you can talk about)

now jagd wolf nr2 idea is good cause here you also have a use with m10 and you can tech to m36 later, but what if you don't have the commander?

3d idea is stupid tho. why start changing the okw tech?
sideteching for a pz4 is crazy as in 1v1 you almost always go for that pz4.
just don't change the tech...


I don't get the complaint.
Nothing time and fuel wise wpuld change for OKW panzer 4, except that you need to click a second button. Panzer 4 is still behind 120 fuel of Tier 3 + 4
31 Aug 2018, 23:05 PM
#18
avatar of jagd wölfe

Posts: 1660

jump backJump back to quoted post31 Aug 2018, 12:34 PMVipper


Imo the TD should be separated to "medium TDs" that good vs medium tanks and not really effective vs Super heavies and the "heavy Tds" that effect vs Super heavies but less effective vs mediums. Imo M-36 being able to counter effectively every vehicle from a Kubel to a JT is bad design.

Imo USF have enough option to counter P4 even without the M-36. (Although I do find the P4's gun a bit too good vs infantry)

One can also try to make M-10 the stock unit and M-36 the doctrinal one.


The main issue is still present. Until jackson usf has only softcounters to panzer 4.

All factions but usf (and uk) get a nondoctrinal stopgap at, i don.t see the issue with usf having one

1 Sep 2018, 01:19 AM
#19
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



The main issue is still present. Until jackson usf has only softcounters to panzer 4.

All factions but usf (and uk) get a nondoctrinal stopgap at, i don.t see the issue with usf having one


Sooo 60% have stop gap AT
As in just over half
And even then, okw doesn't really if they go med truck.
Coincidentally the only factions without stop gap AT are also the only factions that can make any infantry squad they get (even ones they might get for free) into an AT platform. I'm sure it's just an oversight tho...
1 Sep 2018, 07:23 AM
#20
avatar of CODGUY

Posts: 888



Uhm no, he is suggesting it should be exactly like OH's Stug and Panther, with the M10 serving as a cheaper/intermediate TD to counter light-medium tanks and the M36 to counter heavy tanks or TD's. Which makes sense because right now the M36 is great against literally any vehicle which removes any reason to ever get an M10 instead.


This is because the devs didn't leave it as a call in. If they hadn't screwed it up by requiring you to tech to Major and then build it at the Battalion CP it would have a purpose.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

856 users are online: 856 guests
0 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49117
Welcome our newest member, topcsnvncom
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM