Profile of Esxile

Everything might have been a slight hyperbole, but the general point still stands: Attacks from the rear are meant to be more effective so that armor matters. Armor still matters in most of the setups, especially in those involving heavily armored tanks and in next to all involving the Elefant which was taken here as an example for debate.
From a design and intuition stand point, it is good that the attack direction matters because it intuitively makes sense that shots at the front armor do not penetrate as often.


I am not sure if I am missing something here, but unless you have been pushed back heavily or pushed the enemy, units generally stand in the middle of the map. So it should not matter that much if you attack from the front or the back, or what am I not getting here? Why is this more special for 3v3/4v4 than for small modes? Large modes generally have more delay on plane based attacks, I just don't get why the direction is that important if units are fighting in the middle of the map anyway. If you could elaborate on that, that would be good.

So shall we apply this logic to all rocket/cannon strafe? There are some Stuka strafe that deal equal damage to front and rear and that require 0 skill.

Imo, just reduce the cost and remove the limit to one, it is not anymore a heavy tank so it should be considerate as such.

The reason is that CA is an ability you will always have access to if you have a Pershing (Barring edge cases, such as if you recover an abandoned Pershing, but that's obviously not relevant), and it directly benefits the unit in question. The ability is perfectly able to be considered when speaking of the unit due to accessing the Pershing being strictly predicated on access to CA.

If, for the sake of argument, the only OKW (assume OST don't have a Tiger I) doc that had a Tiger I was Elite Armoured, then if you were talking about the AT capability of the Pershing vs the Tiger, you would absolutely be right in factoring HEAT shells into the argument.

What you say doesn't make any sense, Stuka is an ability you always has available with your tiger if you select the right commander.
Or you're comparing unit like pershing and tiger in a vacuum or you're comparing their role inside their respective army composition but you don't start a vacuum comparison picking up abilities from army composition to build your argumentation, that's bullshit argumentation.

What I see here is zero relevant argument to explain why the Pershing has to be inferior and still cost the same to the Tiger. The Pershing has been demontrated to be barely superior to Tiger in AI under specific conditions that are not representative of how the game is played.
The Pershing is inferior in a vacuum but still cost the same price.

As for how is integrated those units inside their respective army composition, There no match in favor of Ostheer with its complete stock army letting any player decided how to support their Tiger. Playing pershing as USF lock you out from Rocket arty support.
This situation wouldn't be a problem if the Pershing were in fact the superior unit but it is not, it is an inferior unit locking you out from other units only accessible with other commanders.

My point is that the majority of engagements are going to be at max range or while (stop) moving. Situations in which the MGs deal no or barely any damage. This is where the Pershing is better than the Tiger because its AOE is significantly better. Tiger has better durability and AT, Pershing has better AI, access to CA as well as mobility and the skill shot. I've been using both extensively lately and especially after the planned buffs to the Pershing, I think they are / will be on par.

Why are you again counting CA? Shall we count Stuka to count for Tiger AT capabilities?

Jacksons with 200 damage and 250-300 pen HVAP.

Assuming you're counting 2 jacksons and talking about frontal exchange that's 800 manpower, 290 fuel and 60 munitions to take down an elefant and probably losing one jackson in the process. You're trully desillusional if you think to convice us that 2 jacksons are counter for the Elefant or the JT.
I mean if was the case, this forum would be fullfiled with complains about it and we wouldn't be seeing Jaeger armor picked any single teamgame with USF in the party, and the Pershing would see much more use on teamgame, it would go rampage with 2 jacksons on its ass. But no, true counter to JT or Elefant in USF roaster are calliope or priest by allowing the player to isolate the Elefant or Jt from it support a let other tanks to circle the elefant to its death.

And you comparing this with a single panther taking on a pershing?

If we're considering in-game scenario, Ostheer is built around strong staying power on the field and rapid reaction with blitz on their tank meaning they, contrary to USF, can use those to rapidely take out a single target even if there are support around it.
And this is even more easy to do since USF is armed with paper armored tank. There is absolutely 0 risk to bounce on their armor.