OStheer have better tanks than soviets - panther, tiger, elefant, stugs, but soviets can counter them. Su85 can keep tiger at bay, t34s can flank and kill elefant or play on part where elefant presence is lacking and so on.
You can clearly see that ostheer has super lategame advantage against soviets, but soviets can still hold their ground.
Can we stop it with the fucking fantasy time already? The Tiger hasn't been better than the IS-2 for over a year now (on the contrary, and I recently pointed out in perfect numbers why the IS-2s veterancy is only an additional expression of that superiority), and the Panzer IV costs so much more than the T-34 that it simply has to be better at something. Where things get complicated is the SU-76/StuG/SU-85/Panther matchup, because the Panther performs so vastly different to the SU-85 (not necessarily stronger, when both units are used right, but certainly easier).
So Soviets can hold their ground, not despite being so vastly inferior as you claim they are, but because they are much more evenly matched at that stage of the game. The Elefant of course introduces a certain AT superiority that the ISU can't match, but since both units don't exist outside of 4v4s anyway, their hunting area is too small to be of much relevance to the overall topic. |
I know what you mean but try fighting OKW vs OST (OST is ideal balance goal for balance team)
If Ostheer is the goal, then why is everything stronger than Ostheer (even with the WBP)? OpieOP Kappa |
|
Dat escape though... Kreygasm |
|
The problem with the Tiger? Well, it's a worse IS-2, and the IS-2 is basically a unicorn at this point. How do you improve something, that is worse than its already bad counterpart?
The IS-2 is more mobile, better armoured, has better penetration, and is better against infantry. The Tiger has faster reload, less scatter, and slightly higher firing range at vet0. The faster reload is the only noteworthy thing here, because the scatter is gigantic on both units anyway, and the higher firing range (a whooping 5 metres!) is particularly useful when you bounce on most things at that range (if you manage to hit in the first place).
Add to that the veterancy bonuses: They are set up in a way, that the IS-2 gets more of everything, because they are percentages. Since the IS-2 starts off with higher values at nearly anything, the bonuses are much better (there's the exception of firing range increase at vet2 for both units, which is a numeric value, but since the IS-2 gets a bonus of 10 compared to the Tiger's 5, even the range superiority the Tiger initially has is lost, taking away one of the minor upsides of the Tiger). For example: At vet3 both vehicles receive a boost to their weapon reload rate of 0,7, which shrinks the Tiger's superiority to about half a second (when it started at about one second). Also at vet3, both vehicles receive a boost to their rotation speed of 1,2. This results in 38,4 for the IS-2, which is higher than the Cromwell's vet0 rotation rate(!), while the Tiger ends up with 28,8 (which is a bit more than the Centaur has at vet0) - for better comparison, the IS-2 gains almost the same rotation rate as the fucking Gokart Tank (the T-70), which is immensely useful for a slow vehicle with a big hitbox, as navigation is significantly improved.
TL;DR: The IS-2 is considered shit, while compared to the Tiger the IS-2 is superior and gets even better with veterancy while the things the Tiger is good at don't get better at the same rate. How that is supposed to give both units a way to perform uniquely yet properly while justifying both vehicles costing the same can only be understood by Relic. |
I recently used it in a 3v3 on Lazur Factory (or whatever that map is called). It was pretty fun, the Valentine was easily the best part of the doctrine, allowing us to spot the enemy's charges, and present our entire army, wherever the enemy went. It's a good thing we spawned from the North, or otherwise it would have been harder to hold on to two victory points...  |
So we should listen to the person who doesn't play the game vs someone who does, is a Senior Strategist and is good at the game as well? Cool.
How about not tying the argument to the person making it, but instead judging the argument itself?
P.S.: This is meant from a neutral position, I'm not taking a "side" in this particular argument. But the idea that someone's words are intrinsically more relevant because of the person that said those words is illogical. The argument itself should be judged and (if necessary) dismantled, otherwise we come down to what plagues this forum quite a lot: Namecalling... |
Is command panther affected his own aura? I can not find it anywhere.
No, they removed that together with the self-aura effect of the Panzerbefehlswagen IV in a patch a while ago.
Just a waiting game until you get that vet (Very easy to do when fighting churchills or comets), then it breaks the game with the vet bonuses at vet 5
If you consider getting vet5 on the Command Panther to be easy, you could surely post a replay of your "easily" managing that, right? Because I have never seen that happen, as no match lasted long enough for the Allied side to pump out enough tanks for that to happen. |
That feeling when you´re an officer of elite squad and yet Relic box you as crappy conscript. #FEELSBADMAN 
That feeling when you're an officer of a non-elite squad that can't even pick up weapons in the first place.  #JustArtillerieoffizierThings
The only axis unit I can imagine picking up the PTRS now is pios and that is also doubtful as they got the dps buff.
Ah yes, that weird DPS buff to Pioneers that still wasn't really explained as to what it was meant to accomplish. Well, aside from making Assault Grens look even more stupid now than ever before (and they already looked like the retarded child in a family of morons, whose parents are siblings). |
The Brummbar is pretty good against things like SU76's. They make a great meat shield in front of pak40's and wipe weapon teams like crazy.
Like crazy is an overstatement - because (aside from PaKs) any team weapon caught by the Stupa must have done something terribly wrong to be there in the first place. At its cost, the Stupa would have to perform at Centaur levels against infantry to become viable, especially at that point in the game, and even then you would be hard-pressed to find it useful. The lack of a turret and small firing arc combined with the still terrible pathfinding only amplifies this.
Normal tanks deal well enough with infantry, unless you run them straight into AT guns and handheld AT. The Stupa is the answer to a question nobody asked, which is why you never see it. It is such a niche unit in its application, that I have wondered since 2013 why it is a non-doctrinal unit. The Stupa should be replaced with a significantly beefed up Ostwind in Tier IV, while the Ostwind's place in Tier III is taken by the Puma. That would allow the Puma to actually bring some "shock" (as mentioned above) value in, while enhancing strategic diversity: Do I go for the cheaper Puma and shut down the enemy's light vehicles RIGHT NOW, or do I wait a bit longer and get a StuG which will prepare me much better for the inbound armour. |
1. Your starting mp was 440 when I last time played. Which is extra squad after tier1.
2. Even idiots not building tiers 3 and 4 toghether. You can skip t3 without losing in army composition. You would stiill have every unit type your oponent has and more if t4 is chosen. So minus 260/75 to your price tag revealing that t4 is cheap as shit considering heavy units it unlocks.
570/215 !!! That is real price tag of this t4. So whine is about how cheapness is expensive.
Yeah, have fun trying to win against Sherman's, Cromwells and T-34s with only PaKs and Panzerschrecks, I'm sure that's going to work just fine. And send me your replays of pulling that off against a noteworthy opponent… |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
