What Role Should Heavy Tanks Serve?

Heavy tanks have something of an identity crisis. They're in the game because they existed, but they don't cleanly fit into the game's design.

The majority of units have a clear role. You've got dedicated infantry killing vehicles, you've got dedicated tank killing vehicles, and you've got generalist vehicles that do both but not as efficiently as specialists.

At the moment, the defining trait of heavies is being nigh uncounterable without a dedicated tank destroyer or another heavy. If the opponent has the silver bullet to kill your werewolf with, they're just not worth it.

As the result, their strategic role has become 'surprise unit': rush one out and roll over an opponent without their silver bullets handy. The current balance direction is reinforcing this design, making them hit the field earlier without changing their performance.

I think this approach is wrong: it's just reinforcing the tank destroyer meta without solving any of the problems with heavy tanks' lategame viability. The answer I've been given is heavies are being taken in this direction because there isn't any other possible role for them.

So here's my question: what do you think heavy tanks should be for?

• What sort of enemy army composition should they be good against?
  
• What should they be able to counter?
  
• What should counter them?
  
• When should they be available?
  
• Where do you think they should fit into the game?

I struggle to believe there's no option other than as shock units.

There is no "tank destroyer" meta. Allied mediums and even "advanced mediums" are garbage, there is hardly any point in fielding them as they become redundant as Panthers start to roll out, fielding Tigers instead of Panthers does not change anything.

Nothing has fundamentally changed aside of useless allied units becoming more useless (and even more after similar changes will be done to allied heavies)

The real question what is the point of allied mediums in first place if they get hard-countered minutes after rolling out, as if T-34-85 losing to magical OKW P4 and its near Panther level armor wasnt enough

same role as v coh and real world

more efficient with popcap than normal tanks and more armor, they are supposed to be countered by mass TD or swarm to the rear

There is no "tank destroyer" meta. Allied mediums and even "advanced mediums" are garbage, there is hardly any point in fielding them as they become redundant as Panthers start to roll out, fielding Tigers instead of Panthers does not change anything.

Nothing has fundamentally changed aside of useless allied units becoming more useless (and even more after similar changes will be done to allied heavies)

The real question what is the point of allied mediums in first place if they get hard-countered minutes after rolling out, as if T-34-85 losing to magical OKW P4 and its near Panther level armor wasnt enough

any proof ? like stats or other things ? or did u come up with it from ur ass ?

There is no "panther" meta. Axis mediums are garbage, there is hardly any point in fielding them as they become redundant as soon as Jacksons/Churchills/T34/85s start to roll out.

The real question what is the point of axis mediums in first place if they get hard-countered minutes after rolling out

There is no "panther" meta. Axis mediums are garbage, there is hardly any point in fielding them as they become redundant as soon as Jacksons/Churchills/T34/85s start to roll out.

The real question what is the point of axis mediums in first place if they get hard-countered minutes after rolling out

P4 counter all allied mediums in normal fight, they also easily can 1v1 all allied tank destroyers in direct combat. Panther simply does it better, hardly any point in P4 when you can field Panther from same tier.

P4 counter all allied mediums in normal fight, they also easily can 1v1 all allied tank destroyers in direct combat. Panther simply does it better, hardly any point in P4 when you can field Panther from same tier.

ok some proof ? like stats ? or u actually playing axis ?

btw so P4 counter TD and medium and P5 counter it even better ? why doesn't axis have 100% win rate ?

ok some proof ? like stats ? or u actually playing axis ?

Are you saying T-34 and Shermans win over P4 in direct combat? Go troll somewhere else
Also it's common fact that P4's can easily win over fireflies and SU-85's in direct combat without kiting

Are you saying T-34 and Shermans win over P4 in direct combat? Go troll somewhere else

p4 has less pen for more armor, t 34 cost 20 less fuel, sherman beats p4 most of the time thanks to high pen and 0.75 moving accuracy

if u mean okw p4, that cost 140 fuel, if im not wrong that's easy 8 price, do we even need to compare the 2 ?

p4 has less pen for more armor, t 34 cost 20 less fuel, sherman beats p4 most of the time thanks to high pen and 0.75 moving accuracy

if u mean okw p4, that cost 140 fuel, if im not wrong that's easy 8 price, do we even need to compare the 2 ?

Ost P4 does not have worse pen, it's pen is simply favors long ranges so it's just better armor vs similar pen and P4's do not need to deal with Panthers on allied side, lets see who is at bigger disatvantage between Axis and Allied mediums

Keep it civil please. Insults are not arguements

Ost P4 does not have worse pen, it's pen is simply favors long ranges so it's just better armor vs similar pen and P4's do not need to deal with Panthers on allied side, lets see who is at bigger disatvantage between Axis and Allied mediums

p4 180 armor Sherman 160 armor
p4 Penetration near
125
Penetration mid
115
Penetration far
110
Sherman Penetration near
140
Penetration mid
120
Penetration far
100

now add the 0.75 moving accuracy and all other things Sherman has (smoke, repair, etc)
Sherman does not have to deal with FF and jacksons

Are you saying T-34 and Shermans win over P4 in direct combat? Go troll somewhere else
Also it's common fact that P4's can easily win over fireflies and SU-85's in direct combat without kiting

The Sherman and Cromwell are pretty evenly matched with the Ostheer P4 in a tank fight.

The T-34/76 and OKW P4 are a different matter.

As the result, their strategic role has become 'surprise unit': rush one out and roll over an opponent without their silver bullets handy.

I think that's somewhat the point, though. Heavy/SuperHeavy tanks are expensive, single units - they're supposed to be powerful. If your opponent is saving for them (200+ fuel), that means they're not building mediums, which leaves them pretty vulnerable.

• What sort of enemy army composition should they be good against?
  
• What should they be able to counter?
  
• What should counter them?
  
• When should they be available?
  
• Where do you think they should fit into the game?

I struggle to believe there's no option other than as shock units.

1. They should be very good against a specific 'type' of unit: either vehicles or infantry.
2. They should counter pretty much everything of that type.
3. They should be countered by moderate amounts of things NOT of that type (i.e. tanks vs. AI focused heavy).
4. Mid-game if rushed, late game otherwise.
5. Pretty much where they are now is fine, although I think the build time should go up a fair bit.

P4 counter all allied mediums in normal fight, they also easily can 1v1 all allied tank destroyers in direct combat. Panther simply does it better, hardly any point in P4 when you can field Panther from same tier.

The M36 is faster than the P4, more accurate on the move, and does more damage. Unless both are standing still, there's no way this is true - and unit comparisons in a vacuum (flat ground, no movement, no support) are somewhat pointless.

Also it's common fact that P4's can easily win over fireflies and SU-85's in direct combat without kiting

and another thing from ur ass, FF has 60 range and 100 chance to pen so it will always shoot first and deaL DAMAGE , then it has 160 armor so p4 has to pen while ff doesn't, even with the longer reload time it beats the p4
su85 same story but it has faster reload than p4 while having 140 armor so again it has to pen the su-85 while the su 85 does not have this problem

if Ur argument is going around, then news flash 1 t-34 can beat an elephant by going around, same for Sherman vs a p4 and etc

so what's this common knowledge ?

and another thing from ur ass, FF has 60 range and 100 chance to pen so it will always shoot first and deaL DAMAGE , then it has 160 armor so p4 has to pen while ff doesn't, even with the longer reload time it beats the p4
su85 same story but it has faster reload than p4 while having 140 armor so again it has to pen the su-85 while the su 85 does not have this problem

if Ur argument is going around, then news flash 1 t-34 can beat an elephant by going around, same for Sherman vs a p4 and etc

so what's this common knowledge ?

Do you even read post completely or it's some kind of pavlovian reflex to respond only to highlighted parts you pick? I'm pretty sure I mentioned direct combat, as in - both in range to fight each other

Now regarding reversed situation you mentined before - shermans also would fare pretty well against brittle tank destroyers meant to kite, thats not the same as Panthers making allied mediums waste of upkeep. Thats a fact - thats why next to noone uses mediums in team games, the larger the game mode the rarer those become.

I think that heavies should basically be panthers with better AI. Give them similar health and armor to panthers, similar cost, same range and AI as current heavies. Keep them capped at 1 to encourage unit diversity.

Basically, if you pick a doctrine with a heavy, it should be accessible and affordable, but counterable enough that it isn’t oppressive. I feel like heavies should be just another cog in a combined arms machine and not an all in that you sit on.

Oh, I should also mention I feel like the frontal armor on panthers (and heavies) should be decreased a bit from 300 so that AT pen values can be played with. Maybe not needed though. Is-2 is the worst offender in this with its 360 frontal or whatever the heck it is.

Do you even read post completely or it's some kind of pavlovian reflex to respond only to highlighted parts you pick? I'm pretty sure I mentioned direct combat, as in - both in range to fight each other

Now regarding reversed situation you mentined before - shermans also would fare pretty well against brittle tank destroyers meant to kite, thats not the same as Panthers making allied mediums waste of upkeep. Thats a fact - thats why next to noone uses mediums in team games, the larger the game mode the rarer those become.

u first said p4 easily beats all medium (false) then u said it beats all TD(false again) and then said the P5 does everything the p4 does but better (false) btw panther is 180, that’s 2 t 34

Btw even with same range (which is unfair as u are cutting stats from the TD) they do win cause of their armor and 100% chance to pen

u first said p4 easily beats all medium (false) then u said it beats all TD(false again) and then said the P5 does everything the p4 does but better (false) btw panther is 180, that’s 2 t 34

Btw even with same range (which is unfair as u are cutting stats from the TD) they do win cause of their armor and 100% chance to pen

I did, both P4 are superior to allied mediums in AT and AI. OKW P4 is overall better tank than doctrinal T34-85 you can argue against as much as you wish I'm not going to waste my time persuading you otherwise

I never claimed Panther does everything better than P4 (another trend of yours - making things up then arguing against them), I just claimed it's better against TD's

Can you guys go back to topic?