September Balance Patch preview [SPBP] - general discussion

the difference of all the examples you have put is that churchil can defeat a tiger 1 vs 1

Can? Yes, but only with astronomically unlikely RNG.

The Churchill Mk VII has 240 frontal armor and 1400 health, meaning that it takes 9 penetrating Tiger hits to kill it. The Tiger has 300 frontal armor and 1040 health, meaning that it takes 7 penetrating Churchill hits to kill it. But the Tiger has between 200 and 240 armor penetration while the Churchill only has between 105 and 135 armor penetration. We can do some simple math here to see the average number of hits it will take each tank to kill the other. Taking armor/penetration gives the average number of hits it takes to get one penetration, so in the case of the Tiger hitting the Churchill that's 240/240 to 240/200 but to be simple here I'm just going to take both tank's medium range penetration values, so 220 for the Tiger and 120 for the Churchill. So 240/220 = ~1.1 hits per penetration against the Churchill. 300/120 = 2.5 hits per penetration against the Tiger.

We can now multiply the hits per penetration by the total number of penetrations necessary to kill each tank to get the average number of hits to kill. For the Tiger shooting at the Churchill this is 1.1*9 = ~9.8. For the Churchill shooting at the Tiger this is 2.5*7 = 17.5. So on average it takes the Churchill almost twice as many hits to kill the Tiger. But this calculation is only for number of hits, so it doesn't take into consideration accuracy (which slightly better for the Tiger at every range due to better range) or the significantly better reload rate of the Tiger (5.25 for the Tiger and ~6.8 for the Churchill). In addition, the Tiger actually out-ranges the Churchill, giving it another advantage in combat. The Churchill has much better acceleration but a lower top speed, so the Tiger will struggle to kite the Churchill effectively but can disengage if it needs to. But as we saw, the Tiger should easily win a 1v1 even if they are both in range.

Can? Yes, but only with astronomically unlikely RNG.

The Churchill Mk VII has 240 frontal armor and 1400 health, meaning that it takes 9 penetrating Tiger hits to kill it. The Tiger has 300 frontal armor and 1040 health, meaning that it takes 7 penetrating Churchill hits to kill it. But the Tiger has between 200 and 240 armor penetration while the Churchill only has between 105 and 135 armor penetration. We can do some simple math here to see the average number of hits it will take each tank to kill the other. Taking armor/penetration gives the average number of hits it takes to get one penetration, so in the case of the Tiger hitting the Churchill that's 240/240 to 240/200 but to be simple here I'm just going to take both tank's medium range penetration values, so 220 for the Tiger and 120 for the Churchill. So 240/220 = ~1.1 hits per penetration against the Churchill. 300/120 = 2.5 hits per penetration against the Tiger.

We can now multiply the hits per penetration by the total number of penetrations necessary to kill each tank to get the average number of hits to kill. For the Tiger shooting at the Churchill this is 1.1*9 = ~9.8. For the Churchill shooting at the Tiger this is 2.5*7 = 17.5. So on average it takes the Churchill almost twice as many hits to kill the Tiger. But this calculation is only for number of hits, so it doesn't take into consideration accuracy (which slightly better for the Tiger at every range due to better range) or the significantly better reload rate of the Tiger (5.25 for the Tiger and ~6.8 for the Churchill). In addition, the Tiger actually out-ranges the Churchill, giving it another advantage in combat. The Churchill has much better acceleration but a lower top speed, so the Tiger will struggle to kite the Churchill effectively but can disengage if it needs to. But as we saw, the Tiger should easily win a 1v1 even if they are both in range.

In fact, I like someone to try things for real and provide real data, the truth is that you are right and I never said that churchill outperformed the tiger but if by rng I could beat him 1 vs 1 and it is not as rare as it seems, just rng.

Thank you very much for your effort

Imo fussi upgrade should be 60-70 muni, your already paying resources for a shitty squad that only becomes viable once they have said upgrade, whatever cost you pay less in muni is more or less exchanged for worse early game.

Imo fussi upgrade should be 60-70 muni, your already paying resources for a shitty squad that only becomes viable once they have said upgrade, whatever cost you pay less in muni is more or less exchanged for worse early game.

The upgrade is incomparably more potent then volks stg, why should it cost the same or less?
Especially now that volks and PFs cost almost exactly the same.

The upgrade is incomparably more potent then volks stg, why should it cost the same or less?
Especially now that volks and PFs cost almost exactly the same.

????

????

Do you even patch notes?
Volks are 260, PFs 270.
That's less then 4% cost difference.

The upgrade is incomparably more potent then volks stg, why should it cost the same or less?
Especially now that volks and PFs cost almost exactly the same.

Do you even patch notes?
Volks are 260, PFs 270.
That's less then 4% cost difference.

Did we fix the overwatch flares and I think the soviet flares from creating cover when they're triggered?

Did we fix the overwatch flares and I think the soviet flares from creating cover when they're triggered?

Overwatch flares used to create a small patch of red cover, this has been fixed and now they create a small patch of yellow cover (because of the trap explosion).

The upgrade is incomparably more potent then volks stg, why should it cost the same or less?
Especially now that volks and PFs cost almost exactly the same.

???
Because the fussiler early game is so incredibly fucking weak that its retarded, they don't beat anything early game aside from ~~maybe~~ engineers but even those get close once flamers come out.
Not only that but if you go t2 you actually sacrifice getting the medkits for the army, or even worse, forces you into not using nades at all for the early game.

So basically it.
A pigeonholes you into the shitty t1 unless you want to make some major sacrifices for ultimately a very minor gain.
B Isnt that much more potent
C Is doctrinal.

???
Because the fussiler early game is so incredibly fucking weak that its retarded, they don't beat anything early game aside from ~~maybe~~ engineers but even those get close once flamers come out.
Not only that but if you go t2 you actually sacrifice getting the medkits for the army, or even worse, forces you into not using nades at all for the early game.

So basically it.
A pigeonholes you into the shitty t1 unless you want to make some major sacrifices for ultimately a very minor gain.
B Isnt that much more potent
C Is doctrinal.

LOL. fussilers fine. They break the early sovet tactics with a scout car. Because they have AT grenade from the beginning.

LOL. fussilers fine. They break the early sovet tactics with a scout car. Because they have AT grenade from the beginning.

im sorry if the opponent has to go with a doc to counter a very cheesy and easy tactic

im sorry if the opponent has to go with a doc to counter a very cheesy and easy tactic

Just like only going volks wich invalidate cons and maxims from the moment they get flame nade and stg,s? Wich is pretty easy to as well.

A doctrinal unit bring somwthing extra not replace the entire build order. Fussies bring minute 1 faust wich volks lack early on, they are not meant to replace volks entirely. What doctrinal inf does that?

im sorry if the opponent has to go with a doc to counter a very cheesy and easy tactic

Oh, Why? Did you forget about the AT-gun in t0?

Oh, Why? Did you forget about the AT-gun in t0?

the rackten ?

Just like only going volks wich invalidate cons and maxims from the moment they get flame nade and stg,s? Wich is pretty easy to as well.

A doctrinal unit bring somwthing extra not replace the entire build order. Fussies bring minute 1 faust wich volks lack early on, they are not meant to replace volks entirely. What doctrinal inf does that?

pretty different situation, by ur logic penal invalidates volks, rifle invalidates volks etc

LOL. fussilers fine. They break the early sovet tactics with a scout car. Because they have AT grenade from the beginning.

Playercard?

the rackten ?

And what is wrong? Are you uncomfortable playing with this?

And what is wrong? Are you uncomfortable playing with this?

if it actually hit something u would be right, but it has the weirdts projectile in the game