Its extremely difficult to fabricate less realistic scenario, given all of these tanks are much faster then churchill and all of them(except P4) have more then enough penetration to never close below 40 range against it.
In Panthers case, its a 100% win ratio with zero damage taken, because it got all, speed, range and penetration advantage.
That leaves P4, which is supposed to not be able to stand a chance, but always able to escape due to superior speed.
He attack moves with "U" hotkey instead of "A".
actaully all the tanks gain more for being close then the churchil as they can reach 100% pen at close range and gain much more pen (and is 2 has 40 range), pather just needs mid range |
At what range and how many times?
3 times each close range like p4 lrnght from each other, tested tiger panther and is 2
|
A Churchill can deal with vetted a PzIV,a OKW P4, a Brumbar without any support.
Churchill has a good chance to deal with 2 PAks/Raks without any support, it even has a decent chance vs 2 Ostheer PzIV with little support.
If it faces Panther or JP it simply need some ATG support and it is fine.
Pls elaborate how you (and not We) have established that "Churchill does need plenty of support". End pls try to learn the difference between stating fact or expressing you opinion.
to add to this i just tested the Churchill with most heavy tank and panther, it manages to at least bring them to half HP before dying, so I can safely say that the gun on the Churchill is not impotent |
The cost not say much, it is the timing of the unit that really matter. My point was we should stop compares them thought.
i actaully tried to compare to brumbar before as it's role is pretty similar, but kat is kat |
Churchill have additional tech cost and lock out other unit/abilities. Let move on.
same for panther it's tier 4 after all |
You have to look at all factors for both vehicles. The Panther has a much better gun and speed than the churchill so that offsets its rear armour values vs the churchill to most players.
then again chitchuil alredy has much more hp and better AI and it cost less |
I'm not sure you understand what 'too' means in this context.
It's comparative. It can't exist in isolation. You have to be too something to something.
If a theme park ride only allows people under 180 cm tall to ride it, and a man is 185 cm, then he is too tall to ride it.
You're saying the rear armour (or rotation speed or acceleration) is too high to be balanced, yes?
If that is true, then there is a maximum rear armour that is not too high to be balanced.
For that to be objectively true, that maximum balanced rear armour value has to be defined objectively.
well, at least lower than the frontal armor of a medium tank |
P4s are meant to have a very hard time in general against them, Pumas rarely bounce their rear armor point blank, StuG/JP4 obviously won't be flanking anything and P5 and above doesn't have to.
So the only unit that would benefit from it is a P4, which both churchill and KV-1 are meant to hardcounter as hard as it gets without penning it 100% of the time in return.
Would you be up for lowering rear armor and increasing pen in return?
If you soften damage sponge, its no longer a damage sponge.
Unless you want to slap that missing rear armor on the front, which also is an option.
by that logic shouldn't the panther have superb rear armor ? as it's meant to counter them ? |
If the ratio is what matters, would you support taking that 40 armour from the back and putting it on the front?
it's not the ratio, it was an example explaing that they have too much rear armor, by logic u can do it with every tank
would like to add 60 armor from rear to front for x tank ?
we are talking about unit overperforming, no a change in role, for the price kv1 and churchil have too much rear armor, there was a reason that they nerfed the armor of all heavy tank without buffing them back
btw would u like to remove 100 armor form the JT frontal armor to add it to the rear ? |
The advantage of hitting the rear is you have a much better chance to penetrate because the armour is lower
The churchill has more front armour than rear armour and hitting its rear gives you a much better chance to penetrate
Ergo, the advantage is not negated
yes but compare it to other tanks, the reaer is around half the front armor, giving u a much better odds of penetrating, for the churchil and kv1 they have too much rear armour reducing this advantage by a lot while still having having good frontal armor all for a good price, remember that when u try to flank something u have to expose ur rear too most of the times |
Katitof-2018 
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
