M2HB .50 cal buffs  FINALLY |
'The LeFH may not do as much damage as some soviet artillery pieces, but it makes up for it with decent range and a faster rate of fire.'
Might need to change that unit description.
sure if you are still playing with an outdated version then sure your right,BUT the ml-20 got nerfed and is inferior to the LeFH for NO REASON |
So what's the actual time to kill for Stug G vs IS2 and Churchill?
160 damage, 170 pen, 0.125+(3.5+4.5)/2=4.125 seconds per shot
vs 1040hp 375 armor & 1600 hp 280 armor
55.15 seconds vs IS2
63.94 seconds vs Churchill
And then firing at the rear...
28.33 seconds vs IS2
39.67 seconds vs Churchill
No tank in this game should have this much HP, it just leads to tanks that are unkillable without getting engine destroyed on them. And the survivability of the Churchill at its current price point is also pretty messed up in general. It would make far more sense with 1040hp and 300 something armor.
then reduced the damage the elefant and the pak43 do to tanks to 200-240,BUT they should never do so much damage ALONG with so HIGH penetration |
You remove the whole point of these options, while still having a highly increased TTK with basic AT weaponary - how is this a good approach again?
Sadly, it does not.
Even if you gain more fast firing lighter AT for flanking, the TTK is highly (!) increased. You don't have any logical option to actually counter it. High armor units are usually prone to high pen or rear flanking. Health due plain ROF. This unit ignores both.
I'm completely missing an argument here
"Asymmetry". Maybe we should bring back the old ISU & Ele, you know... for asymmetry.
The "old way" could also mean a more reasonable 1040 hp & 300 armor, and gain 1280hp with veterancy - as an example. And / or you adjust cost, or give it certain specials to fulfill it's role (oh wait, it already has those).
Missing an argument, again
With 280 front armor ingame, it pretty much has the Tigers armor already. It should outclass the KV series, no doubt about it, but doubling it's HP pool is beyond reasonable... and let's not even talk about the specials.
If you read Relics patchnotes you will often see this: "to bring it in line"
No ask yourself why.
just my 2 cents.
"Asymmetry"
yea so fun to play a faction that has a heavy tank that is slow as a turtle,awful at AT as a t34-76 and the only redeeming thing it has is its HP and you want to nerf it WHY?
cause flanks dont do shit?really???
why dont reduce the rear armor of the IS-2 and the ISU-152 then,their rear armor values ARE TOO STRONG and can bounce quite often shots from a panzer 4! but oh no we must nerf the churchill |
|
ALL AT GUNS should have ATLEAST a 70% CHANCE to PENETRATE |
i didnt expect to see a AVRE nerf thread(i didnt liked it at all in the alpha and it always arrived too late)
i expected to see a comet nerf,a 17 pounder nerf thread OR BETTER a firefly sherman nerf thread  |
It can't kill Ost vehicles at max range, at least not that quickly. Its bursts scatter far too much. You want a fix to that problem? Buff the 222's health so it doesn't die to an engineer squad.
USF AA HT wins every 1v1 against the Flak Halftrack as well, can kill a Luchs if well microed, and simply rips through buildings and emplacements. Why aren't you calling for its nerf?
T70 is better at running down squads.
Flak HT and AA HT both suppress at max range.
Fine, raise the fuel cost to 45. I'd be ok with that.
IT DIES IN TWO HITS OR LESS TO ALL AXIS AT AND GETS ONE SHOTTED BY TELLER MINES. L2P.
oooohhhh, such logic, much rationality, wow!
It's safe to say we can ignore the opinion of people who call for the M5's nerf and fail to provide any sort of logical argument as whining Axis weeaboos who can't be bothered to prepare for something they know is coming.
i agree the M5 is weak to AT,BUT lets be real here.
the M5 alone needs a bit of a fuel increace(a 20-30 fuel increace)i mean the thing reinforces on the move and even on enemy ground AND with 120 munition it can be a mobiles Suppresion and light vechile counter,for that alone it should atleast be more expencive to field(delay it a bit) ,right now the M5 should atleast get delayed for werhmacht so they can counter it properly(OKW hard counter it from the start) |
1. So it'll have 200/190/180 Pen and get a buff to a whopping 210/200/190?
2. It's a Mortar not a Howitzer, and a Mortar is important for smoke barrages to help block out MG 42's.
1.correct and will also cost 300mp
2.both are artillery units |
1. By the time the Pershing arrived, Germany's fate was already sealed. The US Army was advancing so quickly they had to stop and wait for the supply lines to catch up. The Pershing did nothing to change the outcomne of the war. It just rolled in at the very end and claimed Victory when it hardly deserved a participation award.
thats why it didnt made an impact in real life correct,still you didnt mention why it was developed i wonder
2. The M36 and M26 had the same gun, and in real-life M36's had HE rounds that they fired at infantry or emplacements.
it also had a machine gun to fire at infantry so what? why mention it?
3. Sure, but I'd imagine it'd easily run up to 200 fuel cost. I would rather a Xylophone for 85 fuel
i doubt the calliope will cost 200 fuel if it was added
|
If your overall units are performing better, you'll get less issues to deal with late game. Pershing won't help you if the rest of your army get blasted before it hits the field. Calliope is another debate.
the M2HB .50cal is the perfect example of why not having durability hurts,the unit is very good but dies too fast so it doesnt shine and really doesnt help at all.when facing something that has BOTH durability and a damage you see why the faction wont be fixed,pershing would take damage and allow the other "glass cannon" units to survive indirectly,something the rest of the arsenal cant provide(unless you buff shermans by ALOT) |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
