its a premium medium first not a tank destroyer...
The Panther is definitely a tank destroyer at this point. The way the faction designs have ended up, it serves the same role as the Jackson.
Wehr weak penetration
- This thread is locked
18 Oct 2019, 12:32 PM
#201
Posts: 3260
The Panther is definitely a tank destroyer at this point. The way the faction designs have ended up, it serves the same role as the Jackson.
18 Oct 2019, 12:38 PM
#202
Posts: 711
Why not made from P5 tank destoyer similar to Jackson or FF, if 60 range TD so crucial for OST? Low mobility, 60 range, lower HP, increase penetration to level of other TD. Enough armor to not fear stock mediums, while not effective against other TD.
18 Oct 2019, 12:38 PM
#203
Posts: 3260
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 it working as intended and I do not see why you are complaining.
The only other option is to completely remove the RNG factor...
I see nothing wrong in principle with a tank destroyer having a 100% chance to hit and penetrate another vehicle.
I see no value in adding a 5% chance to bounce just for the sake of it not being zero.
18 Oct 2019, 12:40 PM
#204
Posts: 4474
More specifically panther is a tank hunter , like puma ,Stuart, etc
katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
18 Oct 2019, 12:44 PM
#205
Posts: 711
More specifically panther is a tank hunter , like puma ,Stuart, etc
Stuart - tank hunter? Hunter for kubels, p2 and halftrucks? These guys barely could be called "tanks". Tank destroyer - armor unit that have high effectivness against any armor units, main factor - good accuracy and penetration.
18 Oct 2019, 12:45 PM
#206
Posts: 1979
The scenario you describe with Panther and KT running supreme is support by anything.
then ill ask you... name a cost efficient and reliable way of damaging panthers and king tigers at long range non doctrinally other than allied tank destroyers...
and if u say AT guns well thats a horrible idea since theyre quite easy to counter...
then ill ask you... suppose we remove the panther from the game... name a nondoc allied unit that cannot be countered by any other unit except the AT gun... this is a difficult one as aside from the churchill there is literally no unit fitting this criteria... and that unit hasits own drawbacks as well...
lastly ill ask you ...
name a non doctrinal allied unit the panther cannot solo... again this is a difficult one as aside from thechurchill at close range there are no contenders...
The Panther is definitely a tank destroyer at this point. The way the faction designs have ended up, it serves the same role as the Jackson.
remove its 2+1 machineguns then ill call it a tank hunter...
18 Oct 2019, 12:46 PM
#207
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
I see nothing wrong in principle with a tank destroyer having a 100% chance to hit and penetrate another vehicle.
I see no value in adding a 5% chance to bounce just for the sake of it not being zero.
Than I have to guess that you do not appreciate the impact the difference between 100% and 95% when it comes to multiple requirements.
100% means that 2 JP4 will delete a Sherman in 5 secs and in 3.5 at vet 4.
The same 2 JP4 with 95% would only have 81% chance of doing so.
I also find weird that complain about penetration and actually hitting the target or why you are asking for more accuracy for ISU/ELE/JT that will penetrate most targets but will not hit them.
The game is RNG based and there is little reason to completely remove the RNG factor from a class of units. People who do not like RNG can play AOE.
18 Oct 2019, 12:46 PM
#208
Posts: 1979
Stuart
what? the stuart is not a tankhunter..........
18 Oct 2019, 12:49 PM
#209
Posts: 3260
remove its 2+1 machineguns then ill call it a tank hunter...
If that's your logic, I suppose the Firefly and StuG are premium mediums too.
what? the stuart is not a tankhunter..........
It's not an anti-infantry specialist like the Luchs, and it's not a generalist like the T-70.
What's left?
18 Oct 2019, 12:50 PM
#210
Posts: 1979
Than I have to guess that you do not appreciate the impact the difference between 100% and 95% when it comes to multiple requirements.
100% means that 2 JP4 will delete a Sherman in 5 secs and in 3.5 at vet 4.
The same 2 JP4 with 95% would only have 81% chance of doing so.
exactly... but when the dynamic is in equilibrium that 5% difference means upsetting the balance
unless you are in favor of the concept of "the panther is somehow too easily countered" your suggestion to nerf allied TDs would have been countermanded with an equivalent panther nerf aswell...
18 Oct 2019, 12:51 PM
#211
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
...
No I am not in mood for mental gymnastic.
I have made a suggestion and supported with fact. Have little to add and people have better thing to do then reading you trying to prove me wrong. You are entitled to disagree with me.
Bye bye.
18 Oct 2019, 12:52 PM
#212
Posts: 3260
I also find weird that complain about penetration and actually hitting the target or why you are asking for more accuracy for ISU/ELE/JT that will penetrate most targets but will not hit them.
I don't recall ever saying the Elefant needs to be more accurate.
I said I have no problem with a tank destroyer having 100% chance to hit and penetrate a vehicle. They don't need a token bounce chance for the sake of it.
I did not say all tank destroyers need 100% chance to hit and penetrate. That's absurd.
18 Oct 2019, 12:54 PM
#213
Posts: 1979
If that's your logic, I suppose the Firefly and StuG are premium mediums too.
the stug gets 0+1 machineguns... also the DPS of tanks against infantry was already done in tests a few posts back and the panther with 2+1 machineguns does quite alot of damage... its equal to the T-34`s 2 machineguns (which are known to deal alot of damage) albeit without the main gun...
It's not an anti-infantry specialist like the Luchs, and it's not a generalist like the T-70.
What's left?
the T-70 is actually specialized against infantry aswell... although it is also a soft counter to LVs unlike the specialized luchs....the stuart which is a harder counter to LVs while maintaining anti infantry capability.... hence the designation generalized.... the real tank hunter here is the puma...
18 Oct 2019, 12:56 PM
#214
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
exactly... but when the dynamic is in equilibrium that 5% difference means upsetting the balance
unless you are in favor of the concept of "the panther is somehow too easily countered" your suggestion to nerf allied TDs would have been countermanded with an equivalent panther nerf aswell...
Nice theory (although not supported). We can debate again and again but it will be quite pointless.
If you want I can simply make you a mod where the SU-85/JP and FF have the same accuracy as M36 at max range and you can test to see if the Panther suddenly becomes OP.
I can even lower their ROF a bit at max range so you want test that also.
18 Oct 2019, 12:58 PM
#215
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
I don't recall ever saying the Elefant needs to be more accurate.
I said I have no problem with a tank destroyer having 100% chance to hit and penetrate a vehicle. They don't need a token bounce chance for the sake of it.
I did not say all tank destroyers need 100% chance to hit and penetrate. That's absurd.
And why do you seem to have a problem with some and not with others?
Which ones are Ok to have 100% chance to hit and penetrate and which are not?
And against what vehicle and with what criteria?
18 Oct 2019, 13:05 PM
#216
Posts: 1979
Nice theory. We can debate again and again but it will be quite pointless.
i mean im already trying to make it as simple as i can... if something is in balance... changing something has a chance of breaking that balance... and thats not a theory... thats a fact...
my opinion dictates however that its far better to just leave it alone...
If you want I can simply make you a mod where the SU-85 and FF have the same accuracy as M36 at max range and you can test to see if the Panther suddenly becomes OP.
I have even lower their ROF a bit at max range so you want test that also.
i still dont see the purpose to this unless the panther and the m36 recieves a similar nerf aswell... youre gimping the FF and SU-85 for an invalid reason... these units are balanced and gimping these units for reasons as shallow as "to not make it 100%" has the risk of breaking balance...
tldr;
balance once broken is a difficult thing to achieve again
18 Oct 2019, 13:09 PM
#217
Posts: 3260
I think we're talking at cross-purposes here.
When I call the Panther OST's tank destroyer, I'm not saying the Panther is a dedicated AT unit.
I'm saying it fills the tactical role of tank destroyer in OST's lineup. You build it for the same reasons USF builds a Jackson.
Yes, it can double as anti-infantry support, just like the SU-76 can double as indirect fire. But you'd never build it for that. You build it to kill mediums and heavies.
When I call the Panther OST's tank destroyer, I'm not saying the Panther is a dedicated AT unit.
I'm saying it fills the tactical role of tank destroyer in OST's lineup. You build it for the same reasons USF builds a Jackson.
Yes, it can double as anti-infantry support, just like the SU-76 can double as indirect fire. But you'd never build it for that. You build it to kill mediums and heavies.
18 Oct 2019, 13:11 PM
#218
Posts: 3260
And why do you seem to have a problem with some and not with others?
Which ones are Ok to have 100% chance to hit and penetrate and which are not?
And against what vehicle and with what criteria?
It's okay for a vehicle to have 100% to penetrate if its penetration value is greater than the target's armour value.
18 Oct 2019, 13:12 PM
#219
Posts: 1273
We're diverging from the topic with endless arguments about schematics and trying to define what exactly the Panther is - which has been done to death in all previous threads about similar topics. Why not get back to the topic at hand instead of nitpicking on things completely out of context?
18 Oct 2019, 13:13 PM
#220
Posts: 1979
I think we're talking at cross-purposes here.
When I call the Panther OST's tank destroyer, I'm not saying the Panther is a dedicated AT unit.
I'm saying it fills the tactical role of tank destroyer in OST's lineup. You build it for the same reasons USF builds a Jackson.
Yes, it can double as anti-infantry support, just like the SU-76 can double as indirect fire. But you'd never build it for that. You build it to kill mediums and heavies.
semantics aside the panther is perfectly capable of killing infantry quite efficiently... (since its 3 MGs are equivalent to the T-34s MG)... to treat it like the dedicated TDs and lumping it with them while ignoring its anti infantry capability is unrealistic at best...
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
77 | ||
 |
|
|
69 | ||
|
|
|
|
9 | ||
|
|
|
|
4 | ||
|
|
|
|
31 | ||
|
|
|
|
17 | ||
|
|
|
|
17 | ||
 |
|
|
6 | ||
|
|
|
|
5 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.611220.735+5
- 3.34957.860+14
- 4.1110614.644+11
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.916405.693-2
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1236
Board Info
868 users are online:
868 guests
0 post in the last 24h
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
7 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49120
Welcome our newest member, truvioll94
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, truvioll94
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM