Profile of leithianz

Jump back to quoted post17 May 2021, 11:13 AMSander93

Isn't its AOE significantly better than the Tiger's?
Serealia gives it an AOE score of 28 vs the Tiger's 21.

The MGs are not that reliable in a real match, as they will lose significant value when moving, with other damage sources (where the AOE instantly killing damaged models will surprise your enemy more), with alpha strikes being more dominant over prolonged stationary engagements, and when enemy infantry vets up or the battlefield becomes light cover. They also have less range (35 vs 45 of the main gun) and no possibility to micro for better results unlike using attack ground with the main gun.

I would personally rather have a reliable and strong main gun over stronger MGs.

Jump back to quoted post17 May 2021, 08:54 AMApplejack

I doubt any changes would affect its match ups either since Brits are sitting at a fairly low win-rate across all game modes.

Jump back to quoted post17 May 2021, 08:36 AMApplejack

What would you say is the problem for Brits?

I'm speaking strictly from a team games perspective. The firefly is really lacking compared to other TD options and doesn't perform well for its cost. As you've mentioned, its not mobile enough to respond to threats especially massed Panther pushes on a single lane. The slow turret rotation doesn't help its case either. I hate the tulip rocket gimmick and wish it could be balanced and replaced with a flat stat buff to make it more reliable vs gimmicky.

As I've mentioned in other threads. I really want to 'fix' how easy it is to get value with Panthers without actually nerfing them. There needs to be stronger counters to the Panther while the Panther retains its great AI and AT potential for its cost. A more mobile Firefly, I believe would be a great start.

Jump back to quoted post17 May 2021, 07:55 AMMMX

this is pretty much what i would expect. on average both shouldn't be much apart with respect to AI in a setup like the one you used in your test (no cover, no RA bonuses and wide unit spacing). i haven't tested this yet but here the tiger should even be a tiny bit better than the pershing since it has almost 50% more MG DPS at this range and the target has no RA bonus. things change, however, when you go to more clumped formations and add cover or target size reduction from vet. in those cases the pershing is superior in terms of alpha damage/kills and also sustained DPS/KPS (albeit also not by a landslide).

Jump back to quoted post17 May 2021, 06:13 AMAugust1996

I dont understand why everyone suddenly want USF to crutch on Pershing 99% of all 1v1s like it used to be. We finally have good doctrine variety and people want Pershing to 1v1 dedicated tank destroyers and win on top of amazing AI. The only reason why Heavy Cav isnt meta is because people dont want to twiddle their thumbs until CP12 to call in their heavies.