Profile of achpawel

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1351

General Information


Thread: Jackson Nerf vs Making Panther Doctrinal8 Nov 2019, 18:52 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Nov 2019, 18:46 PMWingZero To be honest AT guns are great vs USF since they have no Kat and yes Gal but that is doctrinal. You just have to micro and defend you AT guns and Shrek squads. Agreed. The problem is not with defending, which you can do successfully. Offensive capabilities are inferior. You just have to close in more and it is difficult to chase a kiting 60 range TD with a Pak or panzergrens. You have pack howie as USF instead of werfer. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Zis Barrage8 Nov 2019, 17:25 PM Jump back to quoted post1 Nov 2019, 22:25 PMHannibal The ZiS has the lowest rate of fire, that's why it is the worst at AT duty. It's not a bad AT gun either, but what it lacks in the AT department when compared to e.g. the PaK40, it needs to make up for in versatility, like most of the SOV units. It has a larger crew and wider arc. It is enough to offset a really slightly lower rof. To me the rate of for is similar btw. In my opinion the practical difference between a Pak and zis is negligible. The fact that zis can engage infantry can often be and is a gamechanger. In: COH2 Gameplay
Thread: reworking TD and giving them a role 8 Nov 2019, 16:37 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Nov 2019, 16:23 PMSelvy289 I have never been a fan of the pen increase at vet 2. I remember strictly stating when they were testing these changes that there pen was ridiculous and posted there new stats as well (even through they needed fixing back then). Cutting down the pen bonus for the su85 and jackson to 10% or 15% would do. Maybe adjust the accuracy a bit on the jackson (Not sure what to do about the jackson). On the panther, personally even through its accuracy has been buffed, I would like to see it not to really ever be able to miss a shot on heavy armour. Most frustrating when that happens, perhaps slightly reduce the cost but that's it. Just a tank Hunter that you can be sure you can dive against a heavy that won't miss (don't know what the current chances are atm). I absolutely loathe the idea of increasing the Panthers pen (even if it's at vet) because 1. It's already high at 220/240/260 and 2. This is against one single vehical (is2) so if the pen was increase, all you bloody would be doing is creating the exact same problem with the allies heavies (kv1,kv2 is,Churchill and the comet). At a higher expense but the same problem. Many of us believe that it is not too good that too many units have been buffed. I agree completely that it should be TDs that should be nerfed rather than panther buffed, but on this stage it will probably be easier to just tiny buff a panther In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson Nerf vs Making Panther Doctrinal8 Nov 2019, 14:51 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Nov 2019, 14:31 PMWingZero Why do people find it so hard to fight Jacksons when Paks and Shreks get the job done? Jackson has 0 anti infantry capability. True. The problem is that USF has many tools to make paks useless. They are too slow to react to flanks and of course terrible attacking kiting units. Their range is 60 (just like TDs) and tank destroyers shooting at advancing tanks will almost always be out of their range and screened by infantry. Shrecks are very expensive upgrade on a fragile and expensive squad. Screening infantry has a relatively easy job of damaging them forcing a retreat or simply wiping them when they want to have that one more volley. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson Nerf vs Making Panther Doctrinal8 Nov 2019, 14:41 PM Jump back to quoted post8 Nov 2019, 11:31 AMKatitof Panther can't really be kited by anything due to its speed and vet1. It can be zoned by ATGs and infantry, but it can't be kited by any allied vehicle. IMO it can be kited easily, especially by Jacksons (but even by fireflies and su85s) and lured into at guns/mines/zooks. Jump back to quoted post8 Nov 2019, 11:31 AMKatitof And its not supposed to outrange, its supposed to outlast. In plain firefight, it beats all allied TDs without contest. but in real game scenario when you and your opponent are on similar level, it won't outlast concentrated fire of cheaper units with longer range. This idea is the crux of the problem. Range is far superior to extra armour as it gives you more tactical possibilities. It wouldn't be such a great problem if the cost was simlar (jackson priced similarly to panther; range/repairs/speed on one side and extra armour and a bit of anty infantry potency on another) but panther is so much more expensive. Jump back to quoted post8 Nov 2019, 11:31 AMKatitof Also, you seem to be under the impression that churchill is actually good against vehicles - its not, its worse then cromwell as despite it has durability and same gun, it doesn't have speed to flank or finish of anything. Its a damage sponge, not damage dealer. Churchill will sponge damage, kill infantry, often at weapons and penetrate mediums. It is usually enough for the rest of UKF units to finish what is left. There are other tanks such as KV and other heavies which panther can't reliably penetrate in contrast to other cheaper TDs. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Jackson Nerf vs Making Panther Doctrinal8 Nov 2019, 11:20 AM Jump back to quoted post7 Nov 2019, 20:58 PMKiwiBirb Churchill is balanced in therms of its tank Vs tank power. 1 Churchill can stand up to 2 stuGs or 1 panther which is fair as they cost about the same amount. Problem is it has the same ai as a medium but can sit there for twice as long dealing the damage, effectively doubling its ai power. And then it can just smoke + reverse out. That is exactly the problem. Tanks costing that much are good at both roles. Panther is expensive and is only useful as a 'closer' range tank destroyer that can be kited. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: About Grenade Inconsistencies8 Nov 2019, 06:35 AM Isn't rifle grenade just different because it explodes on impact. I mean, aren't those timed grenades calculated differently (from the place they explode perspective rather than from the perspective of the squad throwing them)? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: reworking TD and giving them a role 7 Nov 2019, 20:50 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Nov 2019, 18:51 PMBlueKnight ... fight than Panther. Range and health are more connected than you think. Panther needs to close in more to deal damage than other tank destroyers. That means it will be in range of more at weapons and will absorb more shots. Usually it means that it will have to retreat for repairs relatively quickly. This is where the real problem begins - panthers spent too much time repairing compared to other tank destroyers. When they charge they deal too little damage against heavies and absorb too much. They survive but their impact is just too small for how much tech and cost is involved to build them. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: reworking TD and giving them a role 7 Nov 2019, 20:27 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Nov 2019, 16:55 PMHon3ynuts Does anybody else have thoughts on the panther vs heavy Matchup? Simple: despite its high price and tech requirements it is a lesser threat to heavies than cheaper Jackson. It is especially sad against KV tanks etc. Solution: Option 1: make it cheaper Option 2: increase range to 60 Option 3: make it more potent against infantry (remove pintle and add switchable ammo, for example) Option 4: increase penetration so that heavies are more afraid of it In: COH2 Balance
Thread: reworking TD and giving them a role 7 Nov 2019, 19:42 PM Jump back to quoted post7 Nov 2019, 16:46 PMSerrith The panther's poor dps per supply is offset by its positive attributes like durability and ability to damage infantry(with its mgs). It has great penetration and is reliable at damaging mid cost heavies like the kv8 and churchill. It does not trade very well 1v1 with the IS2 as the IS2 is substantially more expensive in mp fuel and supply, but it can at least hold its ground for a time. Panther penetration and dps are fine. The problem is that being considered a TD it has less range and it's gun bounces quite a lot. It is a bit too expensive to have a gun that bounce agains heavy armour that much. If it was 60 range then ok. In: COH2 Balance