Profile of drChengele

After playing several more games as and versus OKW I must say the LeIG is still powerful. Not like before but I feel you get too much for cost. It still suppresses and pretty frequently instapins. The "micro tax" so many people mentioned isn't really a factor, even on my level of play, which is nothing to write home about.

Maybe it is not overpowered. Maybe it's a different problem, one of playstyle. In my opinion, it is unfair that a single unit dictates how to play with and against a faction, which is what 1v1s come down to. That is supposed to be a support gun, and instead we have the entire faction supporting the LeIGs which pick a chunk of the map to "support", i.e. cause consistent, reliable manpower bleed and pins every several seconds.

Ostheer revolves around the MG42 support, and it is executed masterfully in-game. There is so much you can do to counterplay an MG42 (smoke and flank, anyone? ) . Not much you can do versus a LeIG except abandon a part of the map or make a direct attack on it, which OKW players of course have learned to expect and turn to their advantage.

Imba or not, LeIG is still a crutch that prevents the rest of the faction from being evaluated fairly and maybe even buffed, it's the same issue with Rifle Company. Remove Rifle Company for two weeks and you would see 1v1 win rate for USF plummet.

make a similiar list for comet for comparison ( cant comment on that, dont have brits)

I can't be arsed to dig stats to check which tank is faster but the general consensus seems to be that Panther has better maneuverability, Comet has better top speed, Comet fires approximately 13% faster, Panther has roughly 10% higher armour and penetration. Their range is identical. The two tanks are pretty comparable in AT role, with Panther having a slight edge that can be undermined by RNG. Both get insanely useful vet1 bonuses, although it could be argued that Comet gets War Speed for free as part of the Hammer tech.

The only considerable edge Comet has over the Panther is that its main gun is vastly superior in an anti-infantry role to a Panther, so I suppose that's the angle people come from, since Panther is AT only it should be better.

Also worth considering that at Vet2 Panther becomes basically a different tank. It has an insane vet2 bonus, from that point onwards it will so far outclass a Vet2 comet or any comparable armour that it isn't even funny. Whether that is something that should be taken into consideration is a different matter.

I see the thread kinda turned to Panther's intended role in the meantime, but first we need to be clear on whether or not the cost thing was satisfactorily resolved.

Things Panther has:
- Speed,
- Accelleration
- Range
- Frontal armour higher than the Tiger.
- Fantastic veterancy bonuses, starting at level 1
- Tolerable DPS versus infantry (MGs)

Things Panther doesn't have:
- Good Rate of fire

And of course people complain about what? Its rate of fire.

My question is : what else do people want for 175 fuel, exactly?

Oh and OP, I see you are active in this thread. So, can you give me a reply to this?

Your argument has one crucial flaw: The Ostheer Panther. Does it cost 232 fuel? No? In fact it costs exactly as much as the OKW Panther does. This is a clear indicator that a unit of Panther's effectiveness is considered to be worth 175 fuel. Do you have a counterargument to this?

In my experience people who are quick to accuse others of cheating are mostly people who can't come to terms with the fact they lost fair and square and have little to no idea about game mechanics. My favourite was when I was accused of "fire rate cheat" because I used a vet2 su85 to chew through a rather stationary Panzer IV.

There is a million reasons someone should go over first before even considering cheating. When they immediately go to cheating accusations, that speaks scores about them.

feel free to write a short mathematical proof why my assumption is incorrect 0o

if tommorow, there'd be a new patch and USF got only 50% fuel income with vehicle costs staying exactly the same, wouldn't everyone here state the obvious, that the vehicles now cost twice as much fuel?

If Relic wanted them to cost more fuel, Relic would increase the fuel cost. Simple as that. OKW fuel penalty is not meant to reflect that the unit is more effective.

Your argument has one crucial flaw: The Ostheer Panther. Does it cost 232 fuel? No? In fact it costs exactly as much as the OKW Panther does. This is a clear indicator that a unit of Panther's effectiveness is considered to be worth 175 fuel. Do you have a counterargument to this?

You want mathematical proof? You want to talk effective income? Okay. Let's talk teching costs of prerequisites to field OKW Panther and Comet.

OKW T2/3 + T4 - starting fuel = 80 OKW fuel (around 112 "regular" fuel)

Brit T2 + T3 + Hammer - starting fuel = 200 fuel

This is assuming nobody goes for any sidegrades (in reality, Brits will probably spend even more fuel on HQ infantry upgrades), whereas nobody going for a Panther would go for a tiering sidegrade).

It is unfair to price the OKW Panther at 232 fuel, i.e. at every step calculate in the penalties OKW has, but turn a blind eye to all the advantages the OKW gets, such as incredibly cheap and flexible teching when compared to the other factions, especially ostheer/soviets. Teching in effect further mitigates OKW fuel penalty.