"Fine in the current state" - I wouldn't say this about Panther. Further, I really don't undrstand why sould be differences between OKW Panther and WM Panther UNLESS they specificaly name them more accurately: For instance one is Panther D and the other Panther G.
I see Panther's problem solvable in a few ways:
1. Let it like this, but decrease costs ffs. And not by 5 fu and 10 mp. Otherwise it will be as used as until now (especially in WM side); It will be more "spamable" but also easy to dispose of it, like it is now;
2. Let the cost like it is now, but increase the AI capacities (closer to P4 while not being the same); this way, people will be tempted to build it, because it will be a stronger all around tank than P4 and it will justify its price, while not "spamable"
3. Let the cost like it is now, but give it more health. This way, it's survivability will improve and, again, it will justify its price while not "spamable".
4. Let the cost like it is now but rework the features that are not verry visible in a toe to toe combat, but will slightly increase its performance: ROF, scatter, rotation speed.
The idea is: something must be done.
Hmm, even for all that options it's still going to be underdog... Im 100% sure i wont build Panther if he gets better against infantry, or price reduction. I got tiger for that, and he can do both job better and safer(against armor and infatry). Only way for the panther to work is to make him proper tank hunter. More DPS, better accuracy and maybe small buff to HP. I mean, ostheer needs proper tank hunter, PAK cant chase ISU or IS-2, same thing for stug. Heck, u can nerf Panther AI if that is what it takes to buff it versus armor. |
T4 doesn't need a teching cost decrease.
The panther just needs better anti infantry at close range (given that it has 50 range), that's it.
Hmm, yea. This is the fix for underperforming tank that main role is hunting other tanks. Tank that is built for just one reason, and that is to damage and destroy other tanks, very expensive metal box with low dmg and bad acc just need better AI. Cant wait to build panther to damage some infantry...
You, sir, are a genius!
Back on topic, i wouldn't mind if they put panther to do ZERO damage against infantry, better acc and more DMS so it can tackle other tanks and im happy! |
This is not what a bug is. It's a result of design choices, and we know about it.
Well ok then, edited to exploit. Hope for a fix soon? |
I'm not justifying it
Post was for people who said if it cant be used in 1v1 then it can stay. |
And I still have yet to see a single 1v1 or 2v2 rep where it mattered.
Well, it is a bug exploit*, it can be abused, it is abused sometimes. Then why dont put fix? Fast hotfix and it is done. I don't know why some people try so hard to justifie this exploit, is it abused? Yes! Maybe not on high level of play, but it can be abused. And it IS ABUSED. And some people try SO HARD to let this exploit slide. WHY? It is easy to abuse this in 3v3 and 4v4, maybe even in 2v2, alot of players play this modes. WTF is wrong with this community?
|
Very good game 2v2 against mixed allies. USF hit very hard at start and drove me from map, while my teammate tried his best to hold his ground. 15-20 min into the game trying to take a grip and bleed enemy rifle's. Fell to cca. 20-25 VCP agains their's 300* when we start to control the game.
Hope u enjoy!  |
Thread: Elefant27 Jul 2014, 19:59 PM
The problem I see is that if the elefant gets a range buff, the ISU becomes obsolete when the elefant hits the feild, and with scopes other tanks will become serously thretened again
my solution is give elefant 85 range and reduce damage from 320 to 160 whilst keeping the same penetration value.
this will allow other tanks to not get 2 shotted and move away.
Wow, it's more a nerf then if ur going to reduce it damage by that much... Even with more range ISU won't become obsolete. And, elephant is pure AT vehicle, if ISU can deal infantry with ease and have power to deal with any tank, then i think elephant should have atleast better range than ISU, and keep same damage against vehicles. That would bring it to balance somehow. If that is too much then hell, give him same range, AI and AT damage as ISU, ISU can have more HP and ferdi more armor... |
Same goes for the Tiger/IS2.
True, i don't even remember the last time i went for the P4, even worse for panther, maybe once in last 25 games.
I usually go for assault support, cuz air support helps with countering blobs and ofc tiger...
So, grens-mg (sniper vs usf), pak, and wait for tiger... Almost every single time.
That seems like a huge drawback for OH, cuz it is the only(?) true effective way to win a game for me. Shrecks? Nope, inf too expensive and fragile for its price to use, this isn't vCoh so u can't mix it very effective (atleast for Ostheer)... Well, something is clearly wrong with teching for ostheer, and F me if they nerf tiger even more :=
Only cost effective tank in Ostheer arsenal. |
|
Just played a OMG game on Lienne Forest, very intense and based on some luck. Me and 2 other friend, one lost connection and we two stuck with bot against allies. U can find alot of mistakes made and/or unlogical decisions by us cuz of pressure and combined arms of allies. :/
Very intense (and long) game. Hope u enjoy it!
There is not chat in-game because we were on Teamspeak FYI
EDIT: It looks like replay is broken for some reason, it says "Error loading replay. The replay file may be invalid" |
You do realize at 9cp with OKW Elite Armored Doctrine you get 2 P IV's for 360 mp and 105 fuel each...
Compared to E 8's 380 mp and 135 fuel, with a little bit of extensive calculus, you can conclude that OKW has access to cheaper tanks at the same time USF gets the E 8.
Your argument is invalid.
Go home
Well even two p4 are risk to take on E8, and if the price per one P4 is 105 fuel then u need to save 210 fuel for calling them, and u know about fuel penalty for OKW? 720 mp and 210 fuel for two p4, big no (for OKW). |
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
