They cost pretty much the same (630mp + 230fuel vs 640mp + 230fuel), but tiger has been spotted many times in ML, and none(AFAIK) of the Pershing in field. And I believe there is a good reason to it.
Pershing's stat is simply not worth it after the last nerf.
1) Armor & health
Tiger: 1040 health + 300 armor
Pershing: 960 health + 270 armor
Even Panther & Brummbarr has same or (higher after vetted) armor than "HEAVY" tank that costs 230fuel.
2) gun
Pershing has pen. of +20 on every range. And deals better in AI. But Tiger shoots faster.
How fast? Combined with 1), Tiger vet.3 wins over Pershing vet.3 in any range. Even vet.0 Tiger has 50:50 on vet3 Pershing.
3) vet
Pershing / Tiger
vet1: acceleration + 30% / Blitzkrieg
vet2: turret rotation + 20% + unlock grenade / range +5 + accuracy + 20% + turret rotation +30%
vet3: accuracy + 20% + reload -30% / reload - 30% + rotation + 20% + max. speed + 20% + acceleration + 20%
This TBH is just way in favor of Tiger. It gets range +5 while Pershing gets to throw grenade....
Really revamp needs to be done here in the Pershing's favor.
Overall, Pershing is inferior in all ways except for the AI a little.
As I've mentioned, Vet3 Pershing lose to the vet0 Tiger.
I haven't seen Pershing commander in any mode recently. Any thoughts on this topic?
I've played against it in 3v3's. The AI seems to be pretty good and it isn't easy to kill. It's just usually not a good 4v4 tank.
The Tiger seems okay. I got an OKW one to vet 5 yesterday, but it was on Essen. Even at that, I had to use the mechanized repairs and a vetted sturmpio constantly. It has the same repair problem that the Pershing does and is so-so against blobbers at low vet. |
This has been happening to me randomly for the last year but within the last couple months or so it has gotten even worse. I'd say close to 1/5 games now I start a match with no commanders, bulletins or skins. What's strange is that I don't believe it is a computer problem as I recently upgraded to an entirely new PC. Has anyone else had this problem or know if there is anything I can do to fix it?
When playing with friends, it sometimes happens when the host starts searching too quickly before someone joins the lobby. If it's happening to you when solo, maybe try waiting a few seconds to hit search. |
I'm just curious what other players target with this unit? I usually only build it in meme games when I want to spice things up rather than build a katy. It seems to be very hit or miss and very easy to dodge the volleys. Even against bunkers the scatter of each shell is so high that I'd rather have a close range katy volley. What's the point of this unit over a katy?
It's not really good at anything compared to a Katy. It vets faster if you shoot it at infantry, unless you're close enough to shell their base with it. It's not quite as much of a meme unit as a B4, but not far from it. |
Good morning all,
Was in a discord call the other day and was chewed out by some other randoms about how retarded I was for using a 4 cons build in a 4v4 gamemode and how you should use penals instead.
Now I'm well aware that penals are better early game, but I'm also aware that they cost more to upkeep and have less utility all throughout the game. I've been tinkering a bit between doing only cons, only penals, a mixture of the two (for mainline infantry of course, I use support weapons always) and penals always seem to get the shaft late game where they feel like papiér mache against axis tanks where conscripts can hold the line and keep my MGs and AT guns in the fight.
So really I wanted to know what everyone else thought of this question and maybe I could get some interesting insights that I didn't think of. Thanks!
It depends a bit on the map. If you're in Lienne and in the woods with its short sight lines, Penals often seem better. On Red Ball, flanking opportunities are limited so you'll be manpower-starved all game. It also depends on your opponent. If there are two OKW on your side, Penals usually make a better start. Late game, 7-man cons generally seem better than penals. |
Thread: RK 43 6 May 2021, 02:22 AM
The reason for rage is a 3 rak blob is effectively a schreck blob. Pop a shot, try for 2, then retreat at the first sight of pain. Its not necessary good, just incredibly aggravating.
Its not a great AT gun.
I'll have to try that. I've just been using two of them. They work a lot better if you use them behind upgraded JLI's or Panzerfusiliers. It's not really my favorite but it's better than most people are claiming.
Also, every time I see people whining about the Rak, I remember this game:
(I can't tell if others are seeing the link- but in this game, my MVP as USF was the Raketen while my meat shield was the 57.) |
Thread: RK 43 5 May 2021, 02:36 AM
I don't think the RAK is as bad as some people make it out to be. I notice it being too slow to fire sometimes but it's only a little worse that other AT guns. I'm not a big fan of the retreat. I'd much rather have a reverse with it (or wish I could just get a Pak 40 instead).
The 57 is okay in 2v2 or less, and maybe some 3v3 maps. They end up decrewed in 4's so much that they're nearly useless, plus they turn into huge ammo sinks. If you're not floating ammo, they're not very good. There's a reason why you see ranger/zook blobs in 4v4's. The worst thing about the 57 is that if you lose it to an Axis player, the thing becomes godly because they don't have to use the ammo to pen tanks, and the rate of fire makes it terrible to play against as USF.
I'm not sure why this thread got started. The Pak 40, ZIS, and 6 pounder are all clearly better. |
One of the things that would help 4v4 balance would be to adjust all the MG arcs down to the 50 cal (nerf the Vickers, MG34 and MG42). There are lots of people that have complained about set-it-and-forget-it units like mortars, but MG's aren't that different and the wide arc makes it way to easy to shut down lanes on maps like Red Ball.
MG comparison
The DSHK & Maxim probably should be buffed. They are so narrow that they almost don't act like MG's.
I don't think caches have anything to do with the imbalance, especially given that OKW can't build them yet have the highest win rate.
People have been hating on the general quality of UKF players in automatch. While there may be an issue there, the problem seems worse than that because it seems like the better Allied players of all factions aren't playing now. One thing that sticks out to me is that my team of 3 went from rank 42 to 28 while LOSING three matches in a row. That means that either a lot of the better teams stopped playing or they're playing more and losing. Either way, it isn't a healthy indicator for balance. |
Is it outside the realm of possibility to make either tank hunters buildable after a platoon command post or at least 1 CP? I feel like being forced to build an AEC every game to counter a 222 or luchs pigeonholes British build orders. Least this way they have a way to slightly fend off light vehicles. Spending a precious Tommy squad to fend off vehicles hurts the British player like it does upgrading a penal squad.
Platoon post would be okay. They never make sense in their current form. At 2 CP, they arrive too late. Since they can't upgrade to Pyrotechnics, they never get the vision that they need to help with tanks. A Tank Hunter squad that has about the same vision as a Brummbar is worthless. I've tried them a couple of times but I've found that both regular Sections with piats and pyro or Heavy Sappers with piats work much better.
Having them be 0 CP would nearly be a hard counter to a Kubel so I don't think that would be a good idea. Having them be after a Platoon post would probably be best, but 1 cp would also probably work.
|
|
To the balance team - thank you for these changes. They feel like they put UKF infantry into a more competitive position. Please consider lowering the Commandoes CP requirements to two like every other faction's elite infantry. |
I'd be happy with a manpower cost reduction.
The complaints about the barrage itself are far less relevant if two of them don't cost you 700 manpower.
They've been reworked so that they are an area-denial tool. They can blunt attacks but don't wipe units, unlike every other faction's rocket arty. To get them to hit anything, they have to be so close that even average players will dive it and kill it. With a PanzerWerfer, you can drive up to just outside of the enemy's visual range, launch an attack that will wipe even full health squads, and usually retreat before being at risk. Same for Katy or Calliope, and the Walking Stuka is in a class of its own. It is one of the bigger factors in the Soviet's poor win rates in 4v4. A land mattress is only dangerous if it is shooting relatively close and you decide to ignore it. |
![Orange Zombie [ROK] flag](/images/replay/ostheer_flag.jpg)
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
