Wehr weak penetration

Balance might or might not be fine but having TDs that can hit and penetrate anything that is not a KT from range 60 with chances close to 100% is bad design resulting in reducing game diversity.

Reducing the effectiveness of long range TDs at max range will be an improvement to the game.

Sure but only if we gut the panther's health hp speed or dps aswell...

We would also need to make the KT doctrinal aswell... dont want it to become an i win button

It also risks absolutely breaking the current meta with a new experimental one... but its worth a shot...

Balance might or might not be fine but having TDs that can hit and penetrate anything that is not a KT from range 60 with chances close to 100% is bad design resulting in reducing game diversity.

Reducing the effectiveness of long range TDs at max range will be an improvement to the game.

I don't agree with that.

It'd just be adding more frustrating low probability bounces and making heavy armour even stronger.

Your switchable rounds concept is a much better idea for weakening tank destroyers against medium armour.

Balance might or might not be fine but having TDs that can hit and penetrate anything that is not a KT from range 60 with chances close to 100% is bad design resulting in reducing game diversity.

Reducing the effectiveness of long range TDs at max range will be an improvement to the game.

What diversity?
Allies have nothing else to contest panthers.
There is no diversity here, because there isn't meant to be any.
ATGs are unreliably to both damage and kill panthers and can't exactly chase even for a little, so something needs to pick up the slack.

So what diversity you're talking about?
Getting SU-76 or regular shermans against panthers instead?

Not panthers specifically, I can give you that much.
But that being said, allied TDs are designed to kill everything from P4 and above with the obvious exception of axis super heavy TDs.

Actually allied TDs can kill everything from a kubel to KT especially once they get accuracy bonuses.

Its armor, as many people mentioned before already wasn't relevant against TDs and health helps tremendously, allowing for more forgiving pushes as you have a buffer of damage instead of unreliable and not in your favor chance to bounce.

Glad that agree that your statement was an oversimplification and that Panther become tougher at vet 0 and weaker at vet 0.

Actually Panther used to be one of the few vehicle that its armor bonus actually made a difference vs TDs since at least some of them would bounce.

I don't agree with that.

It'd just be adding more frustrating low probability bounces and making heavy armour even stronger.

Your switchable rounds concept is a much better idea for weakening tank destroyers against medium armour.

I do not not what a "frustrating low probability bounces" is armor is there to protect the unit no matter the probability else lest scrap the mechanism. Armor can then reduce damage instead...

Actually what I personally find frustrating is having to pay top dollar for getting armor on vehicle and having to vet it to get even more, only to be penetrated with 100% chance even at max range.

Lowering accuracy and ROF at max range does not make shot bounce. It makes shot miss and giving the units with sorter range a chance to fire back without having to spend the rest of the game repairing.

Heavy armor generally has bigger target (or should change to have) so the change will have minimum impact on heavy armor. And in my opinion heavy armor need to be delayed.

The idea is that heavy armor get hit but has a chance to bounce the shot lower armor vehicle will be penetrated but have a chance to avoid being hit.

Glad to see that you like the different ammo suggestion.

Sure but only if we gut the panther's health hp speed or dps aswell...

We would also need to make the KT doctrinal aswell... dont want it to become an i win button

It also risks absolutely breaking the current meta with a new experimental one... but its worth a shot...

Actually no, the lowering performance of all TD at range 60 will hardly make KT or Panther OP. You are simply exaggerating most fight do not even take place at range 60.

Actually no, the lowering performance of all TD at range 60 will hardly make KT or Panther OP.

allied heavy TDs are the main counterbalance to the KT and panther... nerfing them without the latter will upset balance


besides why is it youre opposed to an axis nerf but in support of an allied nerf? the factions have been at their most balanced state in years and reeintroducing the trend of OKW overkill is hardly my definition of fun...

as i said your attention is misdirected... the lategame is definitely NOT a problem... there is no lategame issue thus far with balance and it is most perfectly ok past the point when each faction gets a medium...

the real issue with axis is the midgame where they absolutely get swamped by the T-70/stuart/AEC without an analogue of their own...

What diversity?
Allies have nothing else to contest panthers.
There is no diversity here, because there isn't meant to be any.
ATGs are unreliably to both damage and kill panthers and can't exactly chase even for a little, so something needs to pick up the slack.

So what diversity you're talking about?
Getting SU-76 or regular shermans against panthers instead?

With statements like this that, that are completely false the debate can progress.

In addition the suggestion is not to make allied TDs useless vs Panther, it is to reduce their performance in the range that they out-range their targets.

With statements like this that, that are completely false the debate can progress.

Ok, which other vehicles can contest panthers then outside of end tech TDs?

In addition the suggestion is not to make allied TDs useless vs Panther, it is to reduce their performance in the range that they out-range their targets.

Are you willing to apply the same logic to panthers, making them considerably less effective at 40+ ranges, so it actually will brawl as its meant to instead of snipe meds and heavies?

allied heavy TDs are the main counterbalance to the KT and panther... nerfing them without the latter will upset balance

No that is your assumption without anything to back it up. I have made suggestion that will have little impact on balance and other people may come up with better ideas.

besides why is it youre opposed to an axis nerf but in support of an allied nerf?

That is another assumption, I clearly wrote all long range TD and that includes the axis one also.

the factions have been at their most balanced state in years and reeintroducing the trend of OKW overkill is hardly my definition of fun...

Balance and diversity are different issue, they claim that "factions have been at their most balanced state" is rather arbitrary unless supported by stats and the idea that my suggestion will upset balance is a speculation.

For instance if SU-85 man range chance to hit a Panther at range because the same at the M36 it will hardly have a big impact unless you want to claim that M36 is UP vs Panther.

Or if FF chance to hit a panther drop below 100% that would hardly make FF UP.

as i said your attention is misdirected... the lategame is definitely NOT a problem... there is no lategame issue thus far with balance and it is most perfectly ok past the point when each faction gets a medium...

the real issue with axis is the midgame where they absolutely get swamped by the T-70/stuart/AEC without an analogue of their own...

The fact that according to you there is problem in mid game does not make high chance to hit a non problem. They are actually separate issues.

...
Are you willing to apply the same logic to panthers, making them considerably less effective at 40+ ranges, so it actually will brawl as its meant to instead of snipe meds and heavies?

I don't have to Panther is already less effective

Chance of Panther scoring a hit at range 50:
Cromwell 70%
T-34/76 77%
Sherman 80.5%

Panther hardy snipes it is the allied TDs that sniper from +10 range.

No that is your assumption without anything to back it up.

this statement
"Actually no, the lowering performance of all TD at range 60 will hardly make KT or Panther OP. You are simply exaggerating most fight do not even take place at range 60."

is an assumption aswell with little substance...

but unlike my statement one can see truth in my words by taking a look at the stats allied TDs... the fact they are the only tool that can reliably damage panthers at long ranges indicates that they fill an important role... hence this assumption is grounded on basis unlike yours...

I have made suggestion that will have little impact on balance and other people may come up with better ideas.

No that is your assumption without anything to back it up.

That is another assumption, I clearly wrote all long range TD and that includes the axis one also.

but you opposed panther nerfs... like somehow shermans T-34s cromwells or even zis/6pdrs 57s are are reliable enough to do damage against panthers...

Balance and diversity are different issue, they claim that "factions have been at their most balanced state" is rather arbitrary unless supported by stats

for starters winrates are pretty close for allied and axis factions with OST being the exception...
my assumption

1. is since the current meta is LV meta... which alot of people seem to agree with the statement...
2. ost LVs does not have the shock power of OKW and allied LVs (despite the good timing and cost)... a statement which is testable
3. therefore ost underperforms simply because its LVs arent as strong as OKW or allied LVs...

and the idea that my suggestion will upset balance is a speculation.

your idea that it wont is speculation aswell

For instance if SU-85 man range chance to hit a Panther at range because the same at the M36 it will hardly have a big impact unless you want to claim that M36 is UP vs Panther.

what?

Or if FF chance to hit a panther drop below 100% that would hardly make FF UP.

no but you risk upsetting balance unless you nerf the other side aswell... 1% may be tiny but every drop raises the ocean.... even 1% may mean the difference between a hit or a miss... which may dictate engagements...

The fact that according to you there is problem in mid game does not make high chance to hit a non problem. They are actually separate issues.

ive made polls on the panther and on axis lategame... most people agree that it is a non issue.. and logical deduction (as stated before) indicates that the issue is not with the lategame...




lastly @vipper you seem to have the issue of claiming that the opposing argument is unsubstatiated... but fail to put substance in your own claims aswell...

Actually what I personally find frustrating is having to pay top dollar for getting armor on vehicle and having to vet it to get even more, only to be penetrated with 100% chance even at max range.

By a dedicated tank destroyer.

That armour makes those heavy vehicles all but immune to medium tanks, forcing the opponent to invest a lot of resources in a tank destroyer or a Panther that'll make little or no contribution to the manpower battle.

Armour isn't for bouncing tank destroyers. It's for bouncing everything else.

Actually Panther used to be one of the few vehicle that its armor bonus actually made a difference vs TDs since at least some of them would bounce.

I remember the panther bouncing the su85 su76 zis3 t3476 kv1 is2 (if it could even hit it) quite reliably all the time at vet 0 before the td buff. And with armour bonus from vet 2 it was almost a garanteed bounce.
It made little difference as i remember them. The p4 armour bonus made a bigger impact imo.

The KT being non doc screwed over the td balance massivly. The panthers also played a big part. With axis mediums paying the price.

Its bad design putting premium mediums and heavy/superheavy on 1 side next to better at. And only mediums tops and at capable of dealing with mediums fine but anything above unreliable at best on the other side.

By a dedicated tank destroyer.

But that is the crux of the problem. Panther is also a tank destroyer that can be destroyed by tank destroyes while they are out of range. Usually, it's better to have range than armour in such case. Also pricewise it is more effective to buy a jackson than a panther.

Another problem is that those tank destroyers are balanced against doctrine heavies or king tiger. They are far too powerful against ostheer stugs, pazer 4s, ostwind, etc. as they outrange them plus, on top of that, deal ridiculous amounts of damage to tier 3 ostheer vehicles, and are extremely accurate. If you don't have the heavy tank you are totally at their mercy. You will never be able to balance that. Only stug with further range could help here imo. It would be much worse than jackson, su85 or firefly but they would at least have sth that could shoot at them from equal distance. It would lead to making them more careful and punished if they don;t pay attention, which would be enough. They would still beat stug decisively in 1v1 scenario.

But that is the crux of the problem. Panther is also a tank destroyer that can be destroyed by tank destroyes while they are out of range. Usually, it's better to have range than armour in such case. Also pricewise it is more effective to buy a jackson than a panther.

There isn't a faction in the game that can choose between a Jackson and a Panther.

The Panther competes with the JPIV and the Panzer IV, the Jackson competes with the Sherman and the Scott.


As for the Panther/Jackson matchup, the Panther's armour doesn't do much, no.

What does do a lot for it is its extra HP: it kills a Jackson in four hits whereas a Jackson kills a Panther in six.

In a head to head battle, the Panther has a slight edge.

Only stug with further range could help here imo. It would be much worse than jackson, su85 or firefly but they would at least have sth that could shoot at them from equal distance. It would lead to making them more careful and punished if they don;t pay attention, which would be enough. They would still beat stug decisively in 1v1 scenario.

Not for current stug stats - 160 dmg per shot, high accuracy, 540 HP (it still need 4 shots to die) and 90 fuel cost.
Also OST have 60 range tool that completely counter any stock ally TD - pak40. It always penetrate them and have enough accuracy to not miss.

But that is the crux of the problem. Panther is also a tank destroyer that can be destroyed by tank destroyes while they are out of range. Usually, it's better to have range than armour in such case. Also pricewise it is more effective to buy a jackson than a panther.

Another problem is that those tank destroyers are balanced against doctrine heavies or king tiger. They are far too powerful against ostheer stugs, pazer 4s, ostwind, etc. as they outrange them plus, on top of that, deal ridiculous amounts of damage to tier 3 ostheer vehicles, and are extremely accurate. If you don't have the heavy tank you are totally at their mercy. You will never be able to balance that. Only stug with further range could help here imo. It would be much worse than jackson, su85 or firefly but they would at least have sth that could shoot at them from equal distance. It would lead to making them more careful and punished if they don;t pay attention, which would be enough. They would still beat stug decisively in 1v1 scenario.

its a premium medium first not a tank destroyer...

it also wins any engagement with allied TDs provided they dont begin to run... no its armor may not bounce allied TD rounds but its large HP pool and high speed means it can duel with allied TDs cost effectively in good hands... in bad hands yeah its gonna lose... but moreso for the allied TDs

and dont forget that the panther as a premium medium can actually do damage vs infantry... allied TDs cant do that...

...
for starters winrates are pretty close for allied and axis factions with OST being the exception...
my assumption

Can you pls provide a link to these winrates and the analysis that comes to that conclusion since the last ptach? Because allot of user seem complain that acutal UKF are UP.

...
lastly @vipper you seem to have the issue of claiming that the opposing argument is unsubstatiated... but fail to put substance in your own claims aswell...

If you want to debate any "issues" that in your opinion I might have I suggest you do it in PM and not in a balance thread.

I have supported my arguments with stats, M36 has significant lower chance to hit a Panther at max range and it hardly bad at countering it, it actually one of the best TDs. That is a strong indication that lowering the accuracy of the SU-85 or the FF will have little impact on balance.

The scenario you describe that making su-85 have the same far accuracy as the m36 would result with Panther and KT running supreme is not support by anything.

By a dedicated tank destroyer.

That armour makes those heavy vehicles all but immune to medium tanks, forcing the opponent to invest a lot of resources in a tank destroyer or a Panther that'll make little or no contribution to the manpower battle.

Armour isn't for bouncing tank destroyers. It's for bouncing everything else.

So in you opinion all TDs should have 100% chance to hit and penetrate every target at max range?

Because you are complaining about "frustrating low probability bounces", if a unit can bounce a shot even will low probability that is it working as intended and I do not see why you are complaining.

The only other option is to completely remove the RNG factor...