Why do people keep using the underperformance of the SU-76 in ages past as a justification for it's current performance?
Literally no one is saying that. If you're referring to one of my earlier posts, I'm suggesting that it my misleadingly appear to overperform now because it so severely under performed previously, though in fact it is perfectly fine now. Not "it was bad before, so it must be über OP now." |
I don't understand why the people saying "it's a poor ability" are the same people saying "don't take it away". If it was that bad, why would you care?
It's more like, "please don't make a small and unnecessary nerf to a unit that is not actually over performing."
|
|
I suspect part of the reason that barrage feels too good now is that we're all so used to the SU-76 being practically an auto-lose option for the player building it. Personally, I have lost tanks, units, and perhaps also entire games by forgetting that SU-76s are no longer a noob trap unit. In past game versions, I would see 3 SU-76s approaching and then just laugh manically and effortlessly kill them all with one P4.
Now that they can take on Tigers and Panthers, it's weird, but I think it helps to remember that an SU-76 horde is a major investment. Four of them cost 300 fuel - that's even more than a Tiger or an Elefant, while also being profoundly more difficult to micro than one super heavy unit.
Everyone expects a Tiger to be difficult to deal with, so why can't we have the same expectations for an SU-76 horde?
|
Soviets don't need to avoid tiers at all, and USF only does because Captain is objectively better in every way. Like the issue is that even if you rush AT guns as Ostheer you still can't stave off light vehicles, and in the case of the Quad you can easily kill the offending AT gun.
You're still not really supposed to build every tier as Soviets. If you have some examples of good players doing that, I'll concede that point. As USF going captain then LT has disadvantages compared to getting major next, though I'll admit that people do that sometimes and it does work. Regardless, if we're talking about restrictive game play, having to go captain first to counter the Luchs still qualifies, surely?
It's just that Axis lacks early game mobile AT. Allies don't have this problem because Axis just doesn't have early game light vehicles that are mobile and hard hitting. The flak track has a set up time, and that's about it for AI Axis light vehicles. The P2 comes after the "light vehicle window"
The P2 does arrive a bit late but it can arrive before the first soviet T3 vehicle. And the flak track is also pretty effective. Good players use it late game, even.
The ML-20 is much more impactful and hard hitting than the LefH. Mostly due to the fact Allies don't rely heavily on defensive emplacements, trucks, and whatnot ans so forth. Not having a guaranteed LeFH counter as Allies isn't an automatic game loss.
Hell, OKW doesn't even have a doctrine with a counter
Not having a guaranteed ML-20 counter isn't an auto loss for Axis either. The point is that for both sides, unless you want to just get shot at by a howitzer the entire game (which isn't fun even if the LeFH isn't as powerful as the ML-20), you have to pick certain doctrines.
|
So to clarify my original question:
A vehicle with great AI like the Ostwind has no AT capability.
A TD like SU-85 has great AT but no AI capability.
A generalist like a PIV has medium AI and medium AT capability.
So why does the SU-76 have great AT but also come with a free AI barrage? There should be a trade-off.
The trade off is that barrage is not very effective and takes the place of an ability that could actually help the SU-76 in its AT role. For instance, the SU-76 could have aimed shot or some such option. Instead it gets an ability that makes it into also an extremely weak and unreliable AI unit (besides its AT role).
Let me ask you this - would you rather face SU-76s with aimed shot or TWP, or SU-76s with barrage? |
Oh I think 4 SU-76s should destroy tanks, just not KTs.
And I'm pretty sure the SU-76 is faster in a straight line than a KT is reversing.....
Vehicles reverse at the same speed they go forward.
Four SU-76s cost more than a KT costs, and they have a worse AI performance even with the barrage. If they didn't have a better AT performance than an equivalent amount of fuel spent on other tanks, they'd be useless, just as they've been for the past year and a half. |
Except there are tons of guard commanders you can get rather than being forced into 1-2 commanders. And you can always go for quick T2 or T3 in response that gives you guaranteed counters. The Axis factions really don't have a lot of light vehicles regardless.
And I never asked for a "superior" PTRS, so I don't get were you getting THAT from.
Yeah, just like how you can always get an early AT gun. My point is that there's nothing uniquely axis about having to counter pick people. You don't have to give up anything significant (like avoid a particular tier, as US or soviets are forced to) to get an AT-gun.
You were asking for three per squad - that's where I got that from. But fair enough.
Like jesus, I'm trying to suggest ways we can allow Allies to keep the light vehicle fun times without it being to punishing for Axis, why does this make people so upset?
I'm not upset; I just disagree with what you are saying.
EDIT: And for the record, USF doctrines have multiple LefH counters and the Soviet howitzer can beat it by just straight up shooting at it.
Yeah, so it's the same as axis countering howitzers - you have to pick a particular doctrine to do it. Soviet howitzers are also a doctrinal counter. |
4. By the time the KT comes out, 3-4 SU 76s can reliably kill a KT from the front (alright with an IS-2 as well)
Yeah this thing is waaaaay too strong, its endgame performance seriously needs to be toned down. The kicker is that the SU-76 only eats 8 pop, meaning even after building 4-5 or those, you still get to maintain an army after.
4 SU-76s = 300 fuel spent on tank destroyers ... you don't think that 300 fuel spent on tank destroyers should destroy a tank? That's more than an Elefant costs.
Not to mention that unlike an Elefant, the SU-76s lose 1/4 of their DPS (and 75 fuel) every two times the KT fires. If the KT knocks one of them out and then retreats the soviet player loses 75 fuel and 280(?) MP while the OKW player has lost nothing.
|
Except that's a series of poor decisions one on top of each other. If you go for a T1 start there are tons of good guard commanders you can pick from, if you got for a T2 start their are tons of shock commanders you can pick from. And you can always go for T3 quickly now which gives you the SU-76 or T-70.
That's not a series of bad decisions, it's just "didn't pick guard commander" and "didn't build option B (tier 2) for soviet start."
Basically you are saying:
Soviets needing tier 2 or guards to counter light vehicles = fine
OH needing mobile defense or rush of AT gun that is always part of their stock teching progression = overly constricting, plz buff axis with superior PTRS.
If you don't counter ISU with an Elefant or Jadgtiger, chances are on several maps your just fucked.
I'm not convinced this is much different from fighting axis heavy tanks with soviet stock units. Also, what is USF supposed to do against an Elefant? Zooks and US AT-gun can't penetrate it very well, and Jacksons are strong but don't fare well against Elefants...
If you don't have a howitzer counter, your fucked.
Allies don't have non-doc counters to LeFH either ... not to mention USF against PAK-43s.
If you don't have an AT gun ASAP pray he fucking runs into a mine because that Quadmount is going to fuck your ass into the next millennium.
The quad I'm not so sure about, but both axis factions always have AT gun access every game so needing one by the time soviet T-3 rolls out isn't unreasonable, but maybe the quad is too good - I don't think I'm qualified to say.
Once upon a time Allies ALWAYS had to counter pick to Axis, but the roles have switched towards were you have a certain amount of MANDATORY Axis commanders you simply cannot refuse to take because they include counters to stuff that you see almost every game because they are in multiple commanders.
|
It's not just the M5 that's the issue, it's that the Axis factions are pigeonholed into ALWAYS going for something to counter the enemy at every stage of the game or you lose; and this is extremely true in the case of light vehicle rushes were you can easily get pushed right off the map or lose a large part of your army simply because your enemy can pump our light tanks/vehicles artificially before you can regardless of map control.
This is true of all the factions - what do you think happens to soviets who go T1 and a shock doctrine against OKW rushing a Luchs? |
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
