Hello everyone,
I wanted to ask for everyone’s opinion on Tank Hunter tactics. I gave this doctrine a go in the past with mixed results, as the shortcomings of the T34/76 were magnified thanks to a lack of tank in the doctrine.
To that end, I wanted to propose a change that would improve the commander thematically and make it viable in online play. I think the ML20 artillery piece needs to be replaced by a 0CP T34/85 built at T4. This would provide a good generalist brawler tank which would also fit the tank hunter theme.
Tank Hunter tactics change
11 Oct 2019, 19:32 PM
#1
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
 | Playercard of T.R. Stormjäger | |||||||||||||||
|
11 Oct 2019, 20:13 PM
#2
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
I like this commander, but I would like replace Conscripts PTRS with the Conscripts "Reactive Rifle" - Bazooka. The USSR already has too many PTRS.
M10 or a captured Panther would be more thematic for this commander.
M10 or a captured Panther would be more thematic for this commander.
11 Oct 2019, 20:37 PM
#3
Posts: 1954
We discussed this quite a bit in this thread:
https://www.coh2.org/topic/97861/bring-b4-howi-back-to-tank-hunter-tactics
Most people wanted a T34/85 in the doctrine. It needs a lot of other changes. The PTAB is glacially slow to arrive (around 9 seconds) so it isn't worth it at any price. The howitzer is out of place. The camo wasn't implemented well and ends up being a net negative for SU85's if you use it. No Mark Target or Guards make it hard for Cons to do anything besides scare a medium tank.
https://www.coh2.org/topic/97861/bring-b4-howi-back-to-tank-hunter-tactics
Most people wanted a T34/85 in the doctrine. It needs a lot of other changes. The PTAB is glacially slow to arrive (around 9 seconds) so it isn't worth it at any price. The howitzer is out of place. The camo wasn't implemented well and ends up being a net negative for SU85's if you use it. No Mark Target or Guards make it hard for Cons to do anything besides scare a medium tank.
11 Oct 2019, 21:45 PM
#4
Posts: 711
PTAB could get little buff to damage and make engine crit like regular snare. Right now it have the same damage to vehicle as Fragmentation bombing run for OST, while don't make any serious damage to infantry.
11 Oct 2019, 21:48 PM
#5
Posts: 711
It's tank hunter doc, while don't instead t-3485 give "premium su-85" or HEAT shells? It should fit thematic of commander better than light AT mines.
11 Oct 2019, 21:56 PM
#6
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Well just replacing the useless ML20 with T34/85s would be a very fast and easy change for 0 effort, which would easily make the commander usable, so I think the balance team would appreciate its simplicity.
| Playercard of T.R. Stormjäger | |||||||||||||||
|
11 Oct 2019, 22:05 PM
#7
Posts: 556
>>Change ML-20 with mark vehicle.
>>Let the memes flow.
>>Let the memes flow.
Grens are finally good.
11 Oct 2019, 22:08 PM
#8
Posts: 4928
If only we could have an SU-100 as an analogue to the Elefant.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
12 Oct 2019, 00:06 AM
#9
Posts: 1954
PTAB could get little buff to damage and make engine crit like regular snare. Right now it have the same damage to vehicle as Fragmentation bombing run for OST, while don't make any serious damage to infantry.
It would need to hit as fast as the "totally not OP" fragmentation bombing run to have any chance of hitting a tank. Right now, it's around 6 seconds slower. It does some damage to infantry but doesn't wipe anything so its okay in that regard. If it hit a little harder and did an engine crit it would be okay.
12 Oct 2019, 02:18 AM
#10
Posts: 810
Problem
1. Conscript PTRS upgrade is not useful and there is more to lose than to gain
lose AI power and 7 man upgrade but also AT power is not good
2. PMD-6 mine is useless
This commander is a commander who can't even hunt down tanks, but he can't cope with AI.
Who will use this uncertain commander?
Is there any reason to choose this commander over other good commanders?
Solution
1. delete PTRS and give bazooka to conscript
other skills are remain + add PMD-6 mine
2. add Mark target
1. Conscript PTRS upgrade is not useful and there is more to lose than to gain
lose AI power and 7 man upgrade but also AT power is not good
2. PMD-6 mine is useless
This commander is a commander who can't even hunt down tanks, but he can't cope with AI.
Who will use this uncertain commander?
Is there any reason to choose this commander over other good commanders?
Solution
1. delete PTRS and give bazooka to conscript
other skills are remain + add PMD-6 mine
2. add Mark target
12 Oct 2019, 03:13 AM
#11
Posts: 97
Mark Target in place of the ML-20 is the most thematically correct solution.
PMD-6M should also be replaced by a heavy anti-tank mine, equivalent to those employed by other factions (the Soviets had them, even if they weren't really using them late in the war). The TM-44 mine was pretty much the same as the Teller mine.
PMD-6M should also be replaced by a heavy anti-tank mine, equivalent to those employed by other factions (the Soviets had them, even if they weren't really using them late in the war). The TM-44 mine was pretty much the same as the Teller mine.
12 Oct 2019, 03:23 AM
#12
Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1
The PTAB airstrike is very good. If you can get engine damage or a ram, its really easy to get good hits on the larger targets. It is really not that slow, unless you only play on massive 4v4 maps. In 1v1 and 2v2 it hits plenty
AT conscripts are also very good, the snare is amazing and the 3ptrs are still pretty good against lights and mediums
This commander is not bad, at most it should get mark target instead of a howitzer
AT conscripts are also very good, the snare is amazing and the 3ptrs are still pretty good against lights and mediums
This commander is not bad, at most it should get mark target instead of a howitzer
12 Oct 2019, 08:41 AM
#13
Posts: 1389 | Subs: 1
I don't like this overengineerd upgrade for cons, which turning them into totally different squad. I would like to see this upgrade reviewed into separate call-in, as AT IS for UKF.
And ML-20 should be changed into something more Anti-tank, like B-4 or ISU-152 or M10, like was mentioned above. USSR got near by 50 of them, and they have a real usage on the front.
I think it should be enough, PTAB and tank camouflage are really cool imo.
And ML-20 should be changed into something more Anti-tank, like B-4 or ISU-152 or M10, like was mentioned above. USSR got near by 50 of them, and they have a real usage on the front.
I think it should be enough, PTAB and tank camouflage are really cool imo.
12 Oct 2019, 08:59 AM
#14
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
If only we could have an SU-100 as an analogue to the Elefant.
Yes that would be really great
12 Oct 2019, 09:36 AM
#15
Posts: 711
The PTAB airstrike is very good. If you can get engine damage or a ram, its really easy to get good hits on the larger targets. It is really not that slow, unless you only play on massive 4v4 maps. In 1v1 and 2v2 it hits plenty
You can see how it good...
Comparsion of bombing runs from Fragmentatio run topic
2:48 -PTAB
3:30 -Frag run
12 Oct 2019, 09:50 AM
#16
Posts: 4474
again maret , is bugged, report it, there was no nerf in the patch notes
katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
12 Oct 2019, 15:39 PM
#17
Posts: 97
If only we could have an SU-100 as an analogue to the Elefant.
It has been said that it can't be done because, they can't create any new models. For me, that just shows a lack of imagination.
If it were up to me, I'd create an SU-100 by using the SU-85 model and giving it the Tiger Ace treatment: a special & distinctive skin, a unique icon and modified stats to reflect its higher performance. Alas, I lack the modding skills to make it happen.
But where there's a will, there's a way. Any modders care to take up the challenge?
12 Oct 2019, 16:34 PM
#18
Posts: 1954
again maret , is bugged, report it, there was no nerf in the patch notes
As someone else already noted, the patch notes are not complete. The change happened at a major patch. I don't remember which one, but it was back in 2016 or 2017. It isn't bugged.
12 Oct 2019, 19:10 PM
#19
Posts: 4474
frick u are dense, the video I posted is of 2018
As someone else already noted, the patch notes are not complete. The change happened at a major patch. I don't remember which one, but it was back in 2016 or 2017. It isn't bugged.
Edit: just checked all updates log, no mention of any changes for PTAB
katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
12 Oct 2019, 19:51 PM
#20
Posts: 4928
It has been said that it can't be done because, they can't create any new models. For me, that just shows a lack of imagination.
If it were up to me, I'd create an SU-100 by using the SU-85 model and giving it the Tiger Ace treatment: a special & distinctive skin, a unique icon and modified stats to reflect its higher performance. Alas, I lack the modding skills to make it happen.
But where there's a will, there's a way. Any modders care to take up the challenge?
It's not really lack of imagination, the SU-100 had a much larger gun and some modifications to the superstructure like a sponson on the right side where the commander's copula was installed. It'd be easy to make an SU-100 from the SU-85 model, but you'd still need a modeller to do so.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
70 | ||
 |
|
|
2 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.655231.739+15
- 2.842223.791+5
- 3.940410.696+6
- 4.35459.857-1
- 5.599234.719+7
- 6.278108.720+29
- 7.307114.729+3
- 8.645.928+5
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
11
Download
1265