1. 1340 manpower? What do you bought?
2. AT-infantry should only be a soft counter to tanks, TDs and PaKs should be hard counters.
3. AT-infantry is available way sooner, it is somehow redundant to build a Churchill, when its counters are on the field for a long time and vetted already.
1) yes that was not correct it 1020 for 3 PGs sqauds.
2) And even 3 pgs onyl soft counter a churhcill according to you so I fail to see the issue.
3) Yes if one's opponent has invested so much in AT infatry one should not make tanks. Same goes for ATG, your point thou?
PZIV is at a different tech level. Fighting a Panther is more of a realistic case. In addition the PZIV is able to pick the fight or not, the Churchill can't choose.
And the Panther is way more expensive the Churchill so again your point?
Don't understand this comment...
A FF in range on enemy AT is using the unit wrongly.
Claiming that Churchill need buff because Comet is better is not a solid argument since these vehicles do not fight each other. If choice A is better than choice B that design issues and not balance issue. This can fixed with add utility not with buffs.
I talked about population. 19 population is not cost efficient for such a low damage output. It is about 1/5 of your army for the damage output of a medium tank.
That is one way to look at it. Another would be it more than twice the durability for about 1.5 times the pop...
Chuchill is a cost efficient Tank. Should the pop be reduced? probably but then the power level of the unit should be decreased also unless you want to go back in meta where multiple Churchill where used. |
It was actually the exact design of the ability. Old soviets had to choose between SU85 tech or T34/76 tech. If you went the latter, you had to ram tanks and hope for the best to counter axis heavies.
Once more it there in patch notes in black and white.
" The intent isn’t for a full health T34 to ram other vehicles; instead, ram should be used when the T34 is near death to highlight its usage as a last resort type ability." |
2-3 squads are enough to chase it away.
So if a player has invested 1.020 manpower , 24 pop and 300 ammunition in AT infatry it can chase away a singe tank. And that is unbalance because?
A units that just takes damage without inflicting damage by itself makes no sense.
But that is hardly the case Churchill inflict enough damage to take out PzIV 1vs1.
It could have 5000 Hp as long as it isn't a threat it gets ignored when it comes to picking targets. So the Firefly gets destroyed first nevertheless. A damage sponge which isn't a problem for a least one type of unit isn't worth it at all. As I said free vet for german AT. I'm all in for more diverse builds. If it would be a threat to infantry there would be a reaosn to pick it, although the Comet seems to be stronger allround. Isn't it boring to see the Comet always?
If one's FF is in range of AT assets he is probably doing something wrong.
The Comets performance is irrelevant since it does not fight the Comet.
The question one has to ask is "is the unit cost efficient"? and the answer is yes.
A late game tank with the damage output of a Cromwell? Oh wow I'm really impressed. Must have unit.
There is a huge difference between no damage and firepower of medium tank.
An IS-2 has a similar surviability. Less health but more armor and speed. For just two more population it is completely out of the league of a Churchill and a thread to every single unit on the battlefield.
Do I really need to point the differences?, ok will just point out the obvious:
Stock vs Doctrinal
Limited to 1
Around 1.5 the fuel cost
No matter how one want to look at it, Churchill is a cost efficient unit.
edited to correct 3 PG cost. |
then nerf the doctrinal shit and buff the core soviet army...
You do not have to argue with me but with mod team. I am simply pointing out facts. |
always? I think you are deeply mistaken here. Elephant was originally in T4, and I remember that from the Alpha test. And the T-34 with Ram was an obvious countermeasure for the Elephant from the start, so this ability was originally conceived as a countermeasure for heavy tanks, there were changes, but Ram remained, there have been even deeper changes, but Ram is still here, and this ability is a rudiment for current gameplay and must be removed.
It plain and clear it patch-notes read it again:
"The intent isn’t for a full health T34 to ram other vehicles; instead, ram should be used when the T34 is near death to highlight its usage as a last resort type ability." |
Currently, this is the time that tries to justify ridiculous changes, for example I have a T-34 and I fully understand that he is dead, but I have 51% health. There are AT weapons around and I want to ram because the only logical move, but I can't do it, I have to wait for even more damage to him.
Yes there are some hypothetical scenario that it going to be difficult to use. The fact remain that the ability was always meant to be a last resort instead of a "A there is tiger let me built a T-34/76 so I can rem it and finish it of with off map. That was simply not the design of the ability
All that will do this change is the lazy removal of the ability from the game. Mixed in to do some serious work with the T-34-76 and T-34-85 abilities.
T-34/76 was meant to be a flanker tank and that is why it penetration is increased with range more than other units.
Now T-34 might or might need adjustments but that is irrelevant to ram+off map combo. |
No need to come up with excuses where there are none. The ram was originally conceived as a countermeasure for the Tigers and Elephants, and at some points in time it was the only countermeasure against them. Ram + ML-20. Let's make it so that for example smoke from tanks (German smoke grenades, Sherman smoke mine, Cromwell smoke projectile) can only be used with 50% HP, and your excuse will be perfect to justify this - The ability was always meant to be a last resort instead of the first choice.
Nope that is incorrect.
Patch notes:
"Ram
Currently, ram is being used as a crowd control measure to disable other vehicles. The intent isn’t for a full health T34 to ram other vehicles; instead, ram should be used when the T34 is near death to highlight its usage as a last resort type ability. |
Patch note: The Churchill is having its population change reverted. If the unit receives additional changes, it will be to make the unit more potent individually.
Sounds to me there is another small buff incoming maybe. For a tank that late with poorly speed and AT abilities they should give it some more AI power by increasing AOE of main weapon to PZIV/T34 level. Its ROF is still slightly inferior.
It is absoluteley okay that a single Panther will beat it because of range and speed, but it is a problem that AT infantry will do the same.
How many AT infatry are needed to beat a Churchill?
A damage sponge without a real damage infliction potential will just get ignored for better targets unless there are no better targets in which case it gives away free vet for axis side. At the moment the Churchill is only good if the opponent attacks it while your Firefly shoots from behind it without getting targeted manually. But that is not the case versus skilled players.
That is definition of damage sponge, it can take damage but not dish out, it is supposed to be supported by other units that dish out the damage.
As for Churchill its damage potential is not "fake", it has the damage output similar to that of Cromwell.
|
If ram can only be done at 50% hp it wont hit the tank, it will be dead before it hits.
Now if rams always gives you a nearly full refund that would be intetesting lol.
The ability was always meant to be a last resort instead of the first choice.
Even so one can still move the T-34/76 in ram position with full hp and wait for HP to drop to use the ability. That give opponent more time to react to the cheese ram/off map combo. |
I don't see why this would be the case, nobody else misses out of competent doctrine units because they have competent stock units. Airborne aren't weaker because Riflemen are superior infantry, the Tiger isn't bad because the Panzer IV and Panther are good, and Fallschirmjagers are excellent despite being in the same faction as Obersoldaten. There are many examples of competent doctrine units for factions with competent standard units.
Soviet have access to more doctrinal units in more commander than any other faction. The power level of these unit is above average and so is there cost efficiency. The "old design" come with certain perks.
There is little indication that the Soviet faction is actually weaker the Ostheer/OKW. The only trouble it had so far was against osttruppen possibly even vs 5 men grenadiers and those doctrines are being nerf.
It actually remains to be seen if Ostheer can actually survive without these commanders or how viable OKW are. |