Login

russian armor

StuG and JPIV Penetration

PAGES (13)down
9 Jun 2019, 19:50 PM
#101
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2019, 19:19 PMLago

Doing away with the IS-2's frankly stupid 375 armour for example would go a long way. Why does it even have that much in the first place?


Because high armor is it´s selling point? IS2 with less armor would be garbage unless buffed in other aspects and then it wouldn't be unique anymore and boring. IS2 is completly fine. Only issue is the no-tech call-in problem but that goes for every heavy tank at the moment. (other than KT)
9 Jun 2019, 19:51 PM
#102
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Doesnt seem that dumb. Its the same armor as the KT which has more health and better gun. I think the IS2 was given that armor so that the allies would have something comparable to the KT. I dont think it always had that much


It costs the same as a Tiger, which is 300/140.
9 Jun 2019, 19:57 PM
#103
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2019, 19:51 PMLago


It costs the same as a Tiger, which is 300/140.


Tiger also reloads a lot faster, has less scatter, more range (at vet 0). It could probably still use a buff, but I really dont think 375 armor is too much for IS2.
9 Jun 2019, 20:06 PM
#104
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Tiger also reloads a lot faster, has less scatter, more range (at vet 0). It could probably still use a buff, but I really dont think 375 armor is too much for IS2.


It's not a simple scalar. At 300, the Panzer IV has to flank to be effective, the StuG/JP4 can work in numbers but isn't ideal, and the Panther usually wins.

At 375, the Panzer IV has to flank to be effective, the StuG/JP4 can't do shit, and the Panther usually wins.

All that 375 armour value achieves is killing the casemate as an option.
9 Jun 2019, 20:13 PM
#105
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2019, 20:06 PMLago


All that 375 armour value achieves is killing the casemate as an option.


Which is why we're talking about buffing the pen on JP4?

I dont think the stug needs it though, its not meant to be that effective against heavies
9 Jun 2019, 20:21 PM
#106
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Which is why we're talking about buffing the pen on JP4?

I dont think the stug needs it though, its not meant to be that effective against heavies


I'm not sure you need to if you tone down some of these stupidly high armour values. You could probably bring the penetration of the allied TDs down instead.

As for the StuG, it's a dedicated tank destroyer. Should it be less effective than the Panzer IV and Puma? Because against a 375/140 armour unit, it is.

Casemates can't circlestrafe.
9 Jun 2019, 20:30 PM
#107
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

A 90 fuel TD from T3 is not supposed to fight against a 230fuel heavy tank. Why would anyone ever build an IS2 if Stugs could penetrate it at a high%?
9 Jun 2019, 20:39 PM
#108
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2019, 20:21 PMLago


I'm not sure you need to if you tone down some of these stupidly high armour values. You could probably bring the penetration of the allied TDs down instead.


That's valid. If we're talking about bringing the armour down of all of the "super-heavies" or whatever you wanna call the over 300s, I can see your point. IS2 on its own is not the culprit here

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2019, 20:21 PMLago


As for the StuG, it's a dedicated tank destroyer. Should it be less effective than the Panzer IV and Puma? Because against a 375/140 armour unit, it is.

Casemates can't circlestrafe.


Cause they can fire from beyond the range of most of their targets instead? P4 is only more effective when you spam it. If you try to flank/strafe with just one it'll probably die or get snared before the IS2 goes down
9 Jun 2019, 20:41 PM
#109
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

A 90 fuel TD from T3 is not supposed to fight against a 230fuel heavy tank.


Name me one anti-tank vehicle other than the StuG and JPIV that doesn't have either

A: The penetration to reliably damage a heavy from the front.

B: The mobility and penetration to reliably damage a heavy from the rear.

C: Vet 0 secondary utility that lets it do something else useful (such as the SU-76's artillery barrage).


Why would anyone ever build an IS2 if Stugs could penetrate it at a high%?

Because you don't build a generalist heavy tank to fight StuGs? You build it to obliterate infantry and mediums.

It does that regardless of if StuGs can fight it or not.
9 Jun 2019, 20:47 PM
#110
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

That's valid. If we're talking about bringing the armour down of all of the "super-heavies" or whatever you wanna call the over 300s, I can see your point. IS2 on its own is not the culprit here


The IS-2 is the main culprit insofar as the StuG and JPIV are concerned.


Cause they can fire from beyond the range of most of their targets instead? P4 is only more effective when you spam it. If you try to flank/strafe with just one it'll probably die or get snared before the IS2 goes down


I'm talking a similar investment of resources. That's one Panther, two StuGs, two Panzer IVs, three Pumas.

I'm not suggesting a single StuG should counter an IS-2.
9 Jun 2019, 20:56 PM
#111
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



Doesnt seem that dumb. Its the same armor as the KT which has more health and better gun. I think the IS2 was given that armor so that the allies would have something comparable to the KT. I dont think it always had that much

Jp4 should trade some of its armour for pen. It doesnt need 230 armour. Maybe make it a little faster/give it faster rotation too.

It always had it.
It was the only durable allied tank for a loooong time.
Also, its gun is very bad compared to Tigers in reload and scatter and now in base range as well.
Tiger is basically oversized P4, while IS-2 is oversized KV-1.


Which is why we're talking about buffing the pen on JP4?

Which isn't going to happen, because that's panthers field of expertise.
StuG is very spammable and very efficiently hardcounters med and premium med tank spam, while JP4 actually counters allied TDs, especially with vet.

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2019, 20:41 PMLago


Name me one anti-tank vehicle other than the StuG and JPIV that doesn't have either

A: The penetration to reliably damage a heavy from the front.

B: The mobility and penetration to reliably damage a heavy from the rear.

C: Vet 0 secondary utility that lets it do something else useful (such as the SU-76's artillery barrage).

Name me one anti-tank vehicle other then panther that does have:
-200+ penetration
-enough range to outrange all medium and most vet0 heavy armor.
-massive mobility AND large frontal armor value AND 960 health, allowing it to always place itself in favorable position against all kinds of armor, be it flanking or just sitting in front of it

Not every vehicle is supposed to do everything, especially if there is a more powerful unit above it for the job.
If it was, SU-76 wouldn't have received penetration and RoF nerfs and its selling point, barrage, was gutted by nerfs to the point where its hardly a good idea to even use it outside of panic moments.

You want stronger StuG and JP4?
You have to give up something on the panther.

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2019, 20:47 PMLago


The IS-2 is the main culprit insofar as the StuG and JPIV are concerned.

Its ONE singular allied unit with 300+ armor.
One.
There is no more and its limited to TWO doctrines on one faction and its limited to ONE on field.
Its limited enough to not be any kind of culprit and if IS-2 isn't a justification of Panther, then Panther doesn't really have a place in this game either.

Your argument would hold any value, if IS-2 was a stock unit, you know, like KT is.

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2019, 20:47 PMLago
I'm talking a similar investment of resources. That's one Panther, two StuGs, two Panzer IVs, three Pumas.

I'm quite positive 5 SU-76 will lose badly to JagdTiger.
That's also similar investment of resources.
PaK40 will always lose to ZiS-3.
That's also similar investment of resources.
Tiger will also win against 3 T-70 rather easily.
That's also similar investment of resources.
Shreck PGs aren't going to have a happy time against dual BAR rifles.
That's also similar investment of resources.

See, just because you've invested a similar amount of resources, doesn't mean you got the right units.
9 Jun 2019, 21:17 PM
#112
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

You want stronger StuG and JP4?

You have to give up something on the panther.


No problem.

Swap the penetration values over.

If the Panther can't penetrate frontally, it can flank. It can circlestrafe. It can go kill some infantry with its okay-ish anti-infantry capability.

The StuG and JPIV are casemates. Penetrating frontally is all they can do. When they can't, they become worthless.

Even the SU-76 has an anti-infantry ability to fall back on.
9 Jun 2019, 22:43 PM
#113
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1


Ost has an excellent Pak, even the Stug faires well on paper, and then there are Panzergrenadiers that can deal with TDs very well. The problem is that the last two units have their own problems and therefore are not build which reduces OSTs current options to Pak and Panther. The problem is not the Panther but Panzergrenadiere and Stug in my eyes. If we also look at 1v1 frontal assault scenarios only (like you implicated with the SU85), the Panther does well against Jackson and Firefly (cost-corrected).
To clear things up: What is your suggestion? How much do you want to buff Panther / nerf SU85?

I think it is better so spread out the AT capacity over multiple units. We can see with USF what happens if the AT gun is trash against actual tanks and the bazookas are only mediocre: USF must completely rely on the Jackson from the mid-game onwards.

I am not suggesting to buff the Panther and nerf the Su-85.

I am simply making some points:
1)Unit should have role in the game.



2) Units should be balanced both in vet 0 and at higher vets. The relationship could change if there is a reason. A unit vetting slower might need to have superior vet bonuses.

3) Unit should be priced according to their role if the role of the JP is to counter enemy mediums and enemy tank destroyer the unit should cheaper than those units.

4) Tds should not have 100% chance to hit and penetrate enemy vehicles at range 60. Else they have little reason to engage in other ranges.
9 Jun 2019, 23:22 PM
#114
avatar of Balanced_Gamer

Posts: 783

It is rather a simple resolution.

Jagdpanzer OKW a TD should be better than Panthers penetration because it has zero Anti Infantry Capability. For its price also being around 140 fuel which is a lot for having just one purpose only.

Stug WEHR should be superior to PanzerIV pentration but somewhat inferior to Panther because of its reasonable price
10 Jun 2019, 00:58 AM
#115
avatar of Selvy289

Posts: 366

Can we wait until after the patch with the new buffs for the stug? The jagpanzer is a tricky one because it's in the same tech tree as the panther so buffing it's pen could make the panther redundant.

Also, anyone using the Is2 as the benchmark against the stug and jagpanzer is insane. As we see in this upcoming balance patch, it's most likely the next patch would include them in the tech tree.
10 Jun 2019, 03:22 AM
#116
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358


And people would still go for panther exclusively due to that high durability and AI.

I do really hope in CoH3 relic will hold back on axis megalomania and cut panther from stock roster-its nothing but trouble ever since coh1(PE panthers).


"Axis megalomania" but US forces are always the strongest and wins at the end...
Fight fire with fire they said...

As long as people keep denying their beloved factions OPness and strengts its worthless to discuss about balance.
10 Jun 2019, 06:28 AM
#117
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post9 Jun 2019, 21:17 PMLago

The StuG and JPIV are casemates. Penetrating frontally is all they can do. When they can't, they become worthless.


If you see your enemy getting T70 and nothing else you know it´s a IS2/KV2 stall and you prepare by getting a Panther unless you can obliterate your enemy before 13 CP and it doesn't matter.

If you see your enemy getting literally any other tank and you feel the need for mobile AT you use Stugs or JPV and they do fine.

What is the problem here? IS2 is the only allied tank with really high armor, and it´s doctrinal. So just because you can´t use Stugs and JP4s to counter it it must be nerfed? How does this make any sense?

The way Panthers and Stugs/JP4s are balanced right now is as close to perfect as it gets IMO. The only thing I would change is give the JP4 a vet1 timed ability to trade ROF for penetration. That would be fair considering it's price tag. The Stug on the other hand is totally fine.
10 Jun 2019, 09:07 AM
#118
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

The way Panthers and Stugs/JP4s are balanced right now is as close to perfect as it gets IMO. The only thing I would change is give the JP4 a vet1 timed ability to trade ROF for penetration. That would be fair considering it's price tag. The Stug on the other hand is totally fine.


If you do that, the StuG holds the special honour of being the only unit in the game that becomes completely useless if the opponent goes for a heavy tank.

Every other AT unit has either:

A: The penetration to damage heavies from the front.

B: A turret, meaning it can shoot the rear armour.

or

C: Additional functionality beyond exploding tanks.
10 Jun 2019, 09:11 AM
#119
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Jun 2019, 09:07 AMLago


If you do that, the StuG holds the special honour of being the only unit in the game that becomes completely useless if the opponent goes for a heavy tank.

A one, single, very specific, limited to 1 at a time, in 2 doctrines heavy tank.

What is a justification for buffing a unit to be able to deal with a single unit on opposing side between 3 factions, even tho there IS a dedicated unit in stock roster to specifically deal with that one specific tank again?

Pair of StuGs fare very well against any other heavy in game.
10 Jun 2019, 09:18 AM
#120
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

jump backJump back to quoted post10 Jun 2019, 09:11 AMKatitof
A one, single, very specific, limited to 1 at a time, in 2 doctrines heavy tank.

Pair of StuGs fare very well against any other heavy in game.


Perhaps I'm biased by the unrelenting stream of IS-2 stallers I've had to put up with since the last patch (and which this patch will just make worse), but I still think 375 is a stupid armour value for any unit.
PAGES (13)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

New Zealand 69
unknown 2
Germany 1

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

745 users are online: 745 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
28 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50019
Welcome our newest member, Valer828
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM