Login

russian armor

Panther armor rebalance.

12 Jun 2019, 11:30 AM
#21
avatar of Selvy289

Posts: 366



But chruchills pens has to be nerfed a little bit.


jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jun 2019, 11:10 AMmrgame2
This proposal actually make comet more useful without changing brit


I have a feeling this thread is going to derail very quickly.

Anyway, as someone said if you reduce the front armour further than current, this would open up allowing premium mediums to eat it alive.

Panther availability for ostheer is its main problem, this should be better when heavies are tied to tech. I honestly think its moving accuracy penalty should be decreased to allow it to dive a get a connecting shot off.

12 Jun 2019, 11:54 AM
#22
avatar of Musti

Posts: 203

I have no idea why would you want to nerf Panther like that, but fair enough I guess.
12 Jun 2019, 12:38 PM
#23
avatar of WAAAGH2000

Posts: 731

No……in fact 110 or 121 rear armor when they face AT weapon almost the same……And reduce front armor is big nerf for panther
12 Jun 2019, 13:37 PM
#24
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392


I have a feeling this thread is going to derail very quickly.


If you nerf Panther's frontal armor there will be some units to nerf too. Churchill will be able to pen Panther to easy.
12 Jun 2019, 15:21 PM
#25
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

That's a nerf to proper PV micro.


12 Jun 2019, 15:39 PM
#26
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

Now because it's bugging me, 260(0.1) + 260 = 286, not 284. just saying, that value is wrong.

Ontopic: I don't see why it needs changing. The panther currenly sits on its throne made of stock mediums. Why make it more vunerable to what it deals with without even nerfing the TDs which shut it down anyways?
12 Jun 2019, 15:41 PM
#27
avatar of Jae For Jett
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1002 | Subs: 2

That's a nerf to proper PV micro.



As an aside, that kind of thing isn't always necessarily bad. If a unit overperforms at a high level, but underperforms at a low level, that kind of change helps address both. My (again, off topic) point is that theres more than just "does this unit overperform/underperform." There's "how does this unit perform at each skill level," and there are ways to selectively adjust its performance at certain parts of the spectrum. I think most people just see a number change and think of it as a blanket nerf to all levels when theres usually more nuance to it than that.
12 Jun 2019, 16:17 PM
#28
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392


As an aside, that kind of thing isn't always necessarily bad. If a unit overperforms at a high level, but underperforms at a low level, that kind of change helps address both. My (again, off topic) point is that theres more than just "does this unit overperform/underperform." There's "how does this unit perform at each skill level," and there are ways to selectively adjust its performance at certain parts of the spectrum. I think most people just see a number change and think of it as a blanket nerf to all levels when theres usually more nuance to it than that.



Thumbs up. That is CoH2 balancing the last years. xD
12 Jun 2019, 16:45 PM
#29
avatar of Dangerous-Cloth

Posts: 2066

Don't touch it again until a thorough rework of all tanks is to be done.
12 Jun 2019, 16:50 PM
#30
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260


As an aside, that kind of thing isn't always necessarily bad. If a unit overperforms at a high level, but underperforms at a low level, that kind of change helps address both. My (again, off topic) point is that theres more than just "does this unit overperform/underperform." There's "how does this unit perform at each skill level," and there are ways to selectively adjust its performance at certain parts of the spectrum. I think most people just see a number change and think of it as a blanket nerf to all levels when theres usually more nuance to it than that.


While I understand the thinking, slightly raising the Panther's rear armour isn't going to change much balancewise. It'll add low probability bounces which are frustrating when they happen but make barely any difference to actual durability.

It's like abandons: they're so rare they don't make a difference in the majority of games, but it's not a good experience being on the receiving end when they do.
12 Jun 2019, 22:27 PM
#31
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

Panther shouldn't be bouncing shots from its ass. That's the point of its low rear armour. It should be bouncing shots from its front though, and that's the purpose of its front armour... Not really sure why this needs explanation...
13 Jun 2019, 05:04 AM
#32
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1794

Except it has a big weakass rear though. And the front dont scale into late games. Hence we are researching how to best distribute its armor. To make it work better for its 3Ts costs, to give it a clearer role, something that scales better against the rigor of heavy armour and ranged Td that got good scaling.

The present armor skirts feel short changed, a lack of reward for growing up with xp. And more importantly, dont scale progressively than the number looked.

How about 220/95 vet0. 286/124 vet2. +30%. Yes the numbers look big buff at vet, sure to cause allies players some noise.

But look closer, vet2 still makes no difference against it hard counter. We still want it to grow stronger against med tanks and heavy armour. It's weaker at vet0, meaning there is a dynamics for allies to kill it faster and for axis to feel rewarded keeping it alive, knowing its xp can distanced against max range meds.

To supplement this, i think comet can get cheaper, -5% fuel and 16 pop, to make it sit between cromwell and panther, and give Brit a choice between Churchill and it at 16 pop. To kill panther faster or dig in with Churchill..
13 Jun 2019, 09:15 AM
#33
avatar of achpawel

Posts: 1351

I guess all you guys write makes perfect sense. I'd go for decreasing penetration on some allied vehicles' guns such as churchill rather than experiment with panther. My understanding of the problem is that some allied vehicles are too reliable against both armour and infantry at the same time. Panther is kind of funny because it is crap against infantry and lacks range to fight tank destroyers or has too much trouble (for its cost and tech requirements) with typical infantry tanks such as churchills, kvs, etc. The churchill is just crazy imo.

I'd rather see panther sort of anti-tank plus a bit anty-infantry unit. In contrast churchills, kvs, kv1, and is2, pershing should kill infantry with ease (like they do now) but should have some more trouble with a panther. Since it is a very delicate matter i'd start with buffing panther anty infantry slightly and see how it works (to the level of say some light vehicles from the allies rooster such as stuart/t70/scout cars). This way panther would have trouble with say churchills or kv tanks but would make up for it by being more of a threat to infantry.

(I'm writing about ost panther)
13 Jun 2019, 11:38 AM
#34
avatar of Felinewolfie

Posts: 868 | Subs: 5


Real life Panther has 110' angled frontal armor (90')
Side and rear are around 45'-50' vertical. That's worse than T34 armor.

COH2 Panther has amazing better than Tiger armor on 180' covering because
of lack of 'side' armor. And you want to buff the rear 180' armor way
above historical values?

Already, it had 4 gears forward and 1 gear rear, and it can turbo
blitzkrieg in reverse behind instant smoke for insane survivability.

You just don't want it to have - any - weaknesses.
13 Jun 2019, 11:43 AM
#35
avatar of Felinewolfie

Posts: 868 | Subs: 5

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2019, 05:04 AMmrgame2
Except it has a big weakass rear though. And the front dont scale into late games. Hence we are researching how to best distribute its armor. To make it work better for its 3Ts costs, to give it a clearer role, something that scales better against the rigor of heavy armour and ranged Td that got good scaling.

The present armor skirts feel short changed, a lack of reward for growing up with xp. And more importantly, dont scale progressively than the number looked.

How about 220/95 vet0. 286/124 vet2. +30%. Yes the numbers look big buff at vet, sure to cause allies players some noise.

But look closer, vet2 still makes no difference against it hard counter. We still want it to grow stronger against med tanks and heavy armour. It's weaker at vet0, meaning there is a dynamics for allies to kill it faster and for axis to feel rewarded keeping it alive, knowing its xp can distanced against max range meds.

To supplement this, i think comet can get cheaper, -5% fuel and 16 pop, to make it sit between cromwell and panther, and give Brit a choice between Churchill and it at 16 pop. To kill panther faster or dig in with Churchill..


==============

- The Panther front AND rear armor got hard nerfed last time axis demanded allied TDs to be nerfed.
They got their wish. And Panther, StuG, hulldown, and command Panzer 4 all got nerfed at same time as
a result.

Side note : Panther got a nice health buff, however.

As for the Comet, it's a dead tank. As in dead, dead, dead.
No one uses it. If we triple the comet fuel cost, can we further nerf the Panther?
Bris won't care. No one even remembers what a Comet looks like at all.
Cromwell and Chuchill spam. Hammer is overwhelmingly underwelming so hard it's dead.
13 Jun 2019, 11:45 AM
#36
avatar of Felinewolfie

Posts: 868 | Subs: 5

Panther shouldn't be bouncing shots from its ass. That's the point of its low rear armour. It should be bouncing shots from its front though, and that's the purpose of its front armour... Not really sure why this needs explanation...


I agree. Especially when it was notorious for having poor armor on sides/rear.
It had better armor than the tiger. Yes. But on the 90' angle front. Not the COH2 180' angle front.
The COH2 has 2x more armor coverage than the real life Panther - And they want it increased.

Panther armor loss was for the hard allied nerfing demanded last patch.
13 Jun 2019, 12:57 PM
#37
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1794

But allies td are still dominant and scales better late game, no?
I dont quite remember what the hard nerfs to allies td, expect making jackson more expensive.
They are all still very strong, add in high armor tanks and fast med tanks, hence this topic is suggested.
And panther did not get health buff, it just got moved forward.
While we can do historical records, this wont work in game thanks to td, panther 3Ts and the likes.
13 Jun 2019, 12:59 PM
#38
avatar of Sander93

Posts: 3166 | Subs: 6

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Jun 2019, 12:57 PMmrgame2
And panther did not get health buff, it just got moved forward.


The effect it had was most definitely a buff for the Panther.
13 Jun 2019, 13:09 PM
#39
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1794

I think reason why comet is less use, is the cost since relic raised it. Churchill is cheaper and much easier to micro and still do damages to all targets.

If you look closer, this change makes panther weaker at vet0-1, and scale better from vet2, providing armor and mobility to deal with allies heavy. I think its also good to reduce pop from 18 to 17, since nerf on new built. Ost is primarily pop cap limited imo
13 Jun 2019, 13:10 PM
#40
avatar of mrgame2

Posts: 1794



The effect it had was most definitely a buff for the Panther.


I think they made it more expensive too.
And also removed some okw vet bonuses
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

975 users are online: 975 guests
2 posts in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
40 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49074
Welcome our newest member, Kintz652
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM