|
The biggest logical mistake many players make is to compare only performance of a unit without looking at its cost. Cost/performance value of t34/85 is so good that makes it slightly OP in my opinion.
Discussions would be so much 'healthier' if everybody added the cost of a given unit every time they refer to it being 'good' or 'bad'. |
|
It is a more general problem with USF. They were supposed to have less raw power but make up for it with cool abilities. Now we have all those 'little' abilities as sprint, repair crews, extra range on Jackson, etc. combined with really potent units. Like vet 3 on officers gives them combat bonuses and sprint. Imo it should be either one or the other. Not all. There are games when it really matters and tips the balance. |
|
Just make it more expensive. They are just too cheap for what they do. The price should reflect the range, turret, speed, health, and self repairs. Idk why they are so much cheaper than a panther.
Option 2 would be to remove some abilities from them and make them cheap. You could simply make them slower or remove crews, etc. It is simple. |
Purely a L2P issue on your side. Virtually all good players agree that the T34-85 is the best (or at the very least top 3) medium. Its cost-effectiveness is through the roof since it is highly capable at fighting infantry as well as bullying other mediums. Its health pool also makes it a great choice for taking on the KT.
You might not realise that it has 800 health, more armour, and a lot more pen than the T34-76, but that really matters in tank vs tank fights. Statistically it has approximately a 90% chance of winning 1vs1 against an Ost p4 (significantly higher % chance to pen + 25% more health), which costs 30mp and 10 fuel less. There's literally no medium as cost-efficient as the T34-85.
Ost has plenty of counters to the T34-85, but that doesn't change the fact that the T34-85, in and of itself, is a top-of-class unit. If Ost had a unit that good, you and CODGUY would have quit the game already. Ost P4s already have a slight edge vs Shermans, T34-76s, and Cromwells, but the P4 still gets blown away by T34-85s.
The OKW p4 has high armour that gives it a very light repair burden and great survivability, so certainly an argument can be made that it's the best medium. But dissing the T34-85 simply means you're a really bad player who doesn't understand how incredibly cost-efficient the T34-85 is.
+1 |
I mean that frag bombs fly in so far is impossible to dodge when deployed at the map edge while cluster bombs are avoidable.
I understand. Yet when you place clusters well, their area of effect is so wide that it can't be avoided. |
Panther with switchable ammo is a completely crazy idea. Panther as it is right now is perfectly fine and should not be touched anymore considering how difficult it was to balance the unit.
Generally either panther anty inf longer range or nerfing allied TD a bit especially Jackson by making it less potent or more expensive. |
|
I would concentrate on panther more rather than on nerfing Jackson. Make panther more of a threat to infantry at range and everything should be fine. Or just make it cheaper. Switchable panther ammo could do the trick. So that it can engage infantry not by running over them. |
|
I'd definitely add crit repairs for pios stock after battlephase 2 or 3, for example. |
CB should be cheaper than frag considering frag can wipe anything on the map edge.
Cluster bombs can also wipe anything on the map edge. |
|
Ostheer:
- stock option for bunkers to upgrade to repair pios (like in coh 1)
- 60 range on stug to match other TDs
UKF:
- AEC and Bofors not mutually exclusive
- More manpower refunded for removing emplacements with pios (50-70%)
USF:
- crews should take damage in proportion to the damage vehicle receives (passive healing like in ostheer halftrack added to make them heal in time)
- Jackson cost increased by 15 fuel |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
