Profile of Esxile

Avatar Area

Offline unknown
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

General Information
Steam: 76561197961387624


Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?17 May 2021, 10:35 AM Jump back to quoted post17 May 2021, 10:24 AMSander93 Where did I say it was? I just gave advice on how to get the fastest repair times. Become we all know it is so easy to do and using you jackson to vet up your RE squad is more important than actually vetting up your jackson crew's to face panther/tigers. Your suggestion just remember a famous invented one in France. - They don't have bread, then give them brioche. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?17 May 2021, 09:57 AM Jump back to quoted post17 May 2021, 09:21 AMSander93 Just some advice here, for anyone, since it will help out a ton in this regard: you can stick your (new) RET in a Sherman or Jackson and they will be vet 3 within a couple of shots. It's a bit of a chore but you'll get the vet 2 and 3 repair bonuses in no time and that will significantly reduce the repair times on your Pershing. Lol seriously that the solution to make the pershing relevant? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?17 May 2021, 07:21 AM 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. Nobody wants to crutch on the Pershing on 1vs1, we're only pointing that if the Pershing is downgraded it's only because balance team doesn't want to make it top pick on 1vs1 and this is not normal. Either way the pershing should be on par with other heavies on its stats or if it's just a Panther with IA, then cut its price to panther/comet level and remove the limitation. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?17 May 2021, 06:11 AM Jump back to quoted post17 May 2021, 04:53 AMMMX Not sure if I understand everything you wrote here correctly, but to answer your points once more: 1) The Pershing wasn't able to pump more AT DPS before or during the heavy meta and this hasn't changed at all up to now. Literally the only thing that has changed since the 2019 AoE nerf is that all heavies (except the KT and KV-2) were made less effective in sniping full-health models while still spreading massive HP damage across all members of a squad. And here the status quo also remained largely unchanged; both the IS-2 and Pershing deal significantly more AI DPS per shot If we can't compare the Pershing to the Tiger, then don't compare it to IS2. IS2 has its strengh which is durability even if it lose to a Tiger in a vacuum test. The potential the Pershing is given doesn't match its cost and all the lacklust its doctrine comes with: No arty, no loiter. For what it worth CA could be replace by 188mm arty barrage from mechanize doctrine that would make the doctrine more appealing. Balance team doesn't want to buff the pershing because it would make the doctrine top1 on 1vs1. But Tiger doctrines are already Top1 for Ostheer and it never made them blind an eye also it took them years to finally do something about special ops for OKW. That's just double standard. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?16 May 2021, 19:53 PM Jump back to quoted post16 May 2021, 19:37 PMthedarkarmadillo The tiger is a different tank in a different faction with a different economy. It's not 1=1 balance. The tiger has no capacity for Jackson support not dual BAR support. The tiger doesn't have self healing armour to support it. The Pershing doesn't fact allied TDs. The Pershing loses in a slugging match with the tiger because it's SUPPOSED TO. And in the end What the tiger is and can do is frankly irrelevant. What matters is that the Pershing is balanced in its own faction for its own cost. Usf tanks are specifically not intended to outlast enemy armour. The entire faction is built around this concept. The Pershing is basicly a Panther with AI. Not a tiger of any strain. The Pershing is a meaty tank for USF standards and is priced according. I WOULD like to see some ability that allows its mobility to be highlighted but frankly it's combat potential (especially with CA) is quite good its a reliable tank. You cannot ignore the power spike that CA brings when balancing the Pershing. USF doesn't have Brumbar or Panther or Pzwerfen equivalent to stand by the Pershing. --- Pershing becoming the ultimate doctrine on 1vs isn't either an argument, 90% of doctrine picked as Ostheer on 1vs1 include a Tiger. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?16 May 2021, 18:19 PM Jump back to quoted post16 May 2021, 17:54 PMSupport Sapper While at here, i also want to point out how funny that Pershing + CA is referred to as Scarry stuff while all tiger doc come wih at least an ability that either delete or force at gun to move (frag bomb/light arty), force rd away td (at strafe) or an escape route (pz tac). seeing how CA is being nerfed to the ground it is not even a valid argument anymore. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another infantry spam post15 May 2021, 18:24 PM Jump back to quoted post15 May 2021, 17:26 PMNigelBallsworth of course. So a follow-up question might be how better players handle this. I use mines, MGs, AI vehicles, but in team games, you often see two or more players combined their swarms. Is this why high-level players don't play team games ? They do the same but more eficiently. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Is 3:26 balanced as timing for 1st Pzgren to hit the field?14 May 2021, 20:46 PM Jump back to quoted post14 May 2021, 20:21 PMMarkedRaptor They come in incredibly early and are very good units, but if you see this (aka notice his lack of grens at the start, his PG bulletins) and you use any sort of early light vehicle it's gg. What's he gonna do? Spend 120 muni + 340 MP just for 2 shreks? Lack of faust is a big deal, ask brits. Converting them to Shrek squads defeats the point of why you went the build in the first place. Fight cheese with cheese I suppose. I know way back in the day I experimented with Agrens. 2mgs, 1 pio 2 Agrens, Then into Pgrens. Two 222s were mandatory a long with littering the place with teller mines. Can it work? Yea it can but you rely on luck (mines) and you rely on not any of your 222's or you can't even face a Stuart equivalent. On 1vs1 I agree since you'll be flanked if you stay with so few infantry line unit. But on 2vs2 you don't face this issue and can get your 222 really fast. I mean allied faction are far from their own light vehicle at 3.30 minutes. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: Brummbar performance14 May 2021, 11:21 AM Jump back to quoted post14 May 2021, 09:04 AMSander93 I assume you mean in teamgames. People rush T4 there because T3 in teamgames is bad. Apart from the occasional Ostwind rush. It has little to do with the Brummbar being supposedly OP, more with it being the only reliable option. How fortunate Brumbar can just shit on everything that comes at it since T3 is bad. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Brummbar performance14 May 2021, 06:41 AM If Brumbar weren't OP we wouldn't see so many Ostheer players rushing for it even if their opponent already has a medium tank on the field. In: COH2 Balance