What is this?
TL;DR;
Remove sight bonus / Cost 125 to 110 / CP 4 to 8
https://community.companyofheroes.com/discussion/247045/commander-update-preview-and-public-beta-2021
Combined Arms
Combined Arms is being changed to maintain its high combat bonuses, but will no longer provide vision bonuses. CP requirements have been increased to match other buff abilities, with its cost being slightly cheaper from its original iteration of 125 to compensate for the loss of sight.
Reload from -15% to -30%; reverted to original value
Infantry Accuracy from +15% to +30%; reverted to original value
Reverted removal of infantry reload bonus; returned to -20% reload.
Infantry sight bonus removed
Cost from 90 to 110
CP requirement from 4 to 8 |
ok, you confirm it is a heavy tank in game, so we will take it.
So if it is a heavy tank, why cant it have heavy tank stat in term of armor/hp, especially when other "advantages" it suppose to have is not enough ? 270/800 is clearly premium medium stat.
I can clearly see that's not how modder & axis player wants.
However, I believe we can give Pershing a better AI AND range +5 just like IS2 or Tiger.
I don't see any reason for Only Pershing to not have range +5 at vet 2. |
Absolutely: This! I too feel that the Pershing does a good job, it can be a super premium medium tank, but the cost needs to be severely adjusted to reflect that.
I have no knowledge of the history of changes in its cost, does someone know about this? How was it set initially? Because the equation "description says heavy so make it as costly as Tiger" does not work, as we have seen and discussed with multiple good arguments in this thread.
AFAIK cost iitself was only nerfed once. 600mp to 630.
The nerf to Pershing is majorly in the field of AI. Even prior to all heavy nerfs on 2020, Pershing's AI got nerfed in 2019.
Probably the reason tests show Pershing being similar(slightly better as others say) to Tiger in terms of AI unlike what most of people think. |
You clone the tiger and put the best TD in the game behind it and the best infantry squad in the game in front of it and the axis won't have a chance in hell. I'm interested in balance, not fan boyism. USF has compensations for squishy armour and you can't simply remove that and expect it to be balanced. There is a whole army surrounding the Pershing, one that is designed not to have a tiger.
The Pershing cost can absolutely be lowered, but it cannot become a tiger and the tiger itself is completely irrelevant. Different armies allow for different cost effeciency. As I've said if OKW and ost both had a doctrinal Panther with 4 levels of vet they would be different costs because they would be both superior and inferior to the stock options despite being the exact same unit. Such is the USF heavy tank. It has a differently balanced stock army that creates the necessity of heavy Armour being less resilient than other factions.
There are rules. These rules ensure balance is a possibility. This is why ost 5 man gren needs to remain less cost efficient than the lmg, this is why soviet should lose their FPR in airborne and why svts need further nerfs. You cannot simply shoehorn in something that has been compensated for them not having.
Well, you already see Tiger with best stock medium with best mg with best AT.
...Probably the reason you see Tiger on the field of ML? |
You don't see how recrewing is a pro? OK consider this:
You pop a partisan squad behind an enemy pwerfer and kill it. The werfer is gone.
You pop stormtroopers behind a lamdmatress and wipe it. Oh the enemy recrewed it and it's firing again...
You need to target the gun to kill it, making dives take a bit longer, the unit isn't great, but don't pretend that the ability to keep it shooting even if you lost it isn't a pro. It undermines your argument that it's bad when you don't acknowledge its pros.
When we are saying recrewing, it means it being a crewed weapon, instead of being a vehicle. As a crewed weapon, it can be decrewed with small arms, much slower in mobility, takes extra time to stop, or start moving. Not to mention it has shortest range with long minimum range. And LM is the only crewed weapon that can be decrwed instantly when weapon is destroyed. So tanks don't have to shoot it's crew.
So yes. I don't see how it's a pro. You mentioned partisan squad. I guess with schrek? Why not just destroy LM with schrek instead of decrewing wirh small arms?
Or is this about partisan with nothing but small arms destroyed my light vehicle? |
being able to recrew
Q) Does tank kill unit with one shot?
LM: yes
others: yes
Q) Does small arms fire decrew the squad?
LM: yes
others: no
I don't ksee how recrewing is pro....
Yes it does have largest AOE & fireing time. Is it pro? I don't think so...But one may see it as a area denial tool. |
|
Okay... I have done just a few tests.
"alpha strike" doesn't seems differ much.
However, Tiger indeed deals much less dmg. and takes longer time to wipe squad in one condition.
Tank must be at move while firing all the time. I think it's probably due to 50% vs 75% moving accuracy. |
The Pershing's AoE is absolutely superior to that of the Tiger, while scatter is a bit worse. I'm not sure how Serealia calculates the AoE score, but if it's something akin to average AoE damage times ROF divided by scatter area then the Pershing should still come out on top. The saving grace for the Tiger is the higher ROF, which as it turns out puts it quite close in terms of performance to its allied peers.
Yeah what I felt while doing some test is, ROF difference is much huge than I expected from seeing numbers.
I don't even know what AOE score is, but Faster ROF of Tiger helps deal much more dmg in both AI & AT than Pershing. |
Idea for Heavy Cav Commander:
In case the Pershing needs better repair and/or the current repair buff does not work out:
The Field defenses could be swapped out with the Urban assault kit. This way there would be proper benefit in having two REs on the field if one gets the grenade launcher.
However this change implies multiple other changes (less defensive to more offensive layout) that affects the whole commander just to "fix" the Pershing. So not sure overall, just a thought.
Since so many people are negative on giving Pershing durability of Tiger. I'd say give Pershing more AI dmg somehow. I do know many people "think" Pershing does more AI than Tiger. But the tests shows it does not. Or even if it does, very neglectable.
With current stat, Pershing is just inferior version of Tiger with 10mp difference in cost. |
I just gave many reasons why a stationary test is likely to be highly in favour of MG damage, when real match conditions are likely to be against it. Obviously the latter is impossible to objectively test though.
Better AOE on the main gun has many advantages over relying more on the MGs, that are not included in a stationary test at medium range.
Tiger doesn't fire MG at all in second test( https://youtu.be/ZeR8ZjeV_uM). Yet it won all 3 cases.
I have tested about 30 tests(including not recorded), and result of the first shot doesn't differ much between Pershing & Tiger. They snipe 1~2 model everytime they shoot. |
Korea, Republic Of
Caesar
Lazy Ren
-虎贲-PauL.a.D.-HOI-
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
Heartless Jäger 
