Profile of Lago

Avatar Area

Offline unknown
Posts: 3260

General Information
Steam: 76561198031945233


Thread: Another Take On The Heavy Tank Meta16 Mar 2020, 10:33 AM Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 03:24 AMShadowLinkX37 I think it’s difficult to make the panther a designated “heavy counter” without reducing its reload heavily. Because as it stands, it’s stats not only let it contest well when supported vs heavies but also solo mediums and tds in range. Except it does function as a heavy counter at the moment. It beats the Comet and has a slight edge over the Pershing. It's the IS-2 specifically that beats the Panther, and that's why the IS-2's been a problem child since GCS 2. What I'm suggesting is bumping down its health to make it equal to the new Pershing. Same with the Tiger. Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 04:11 AMSuperHansFan IS-2 just got hefty nerfs, I don't believe drastic changes are needed otherwise you're just overnerfing heavies into old comet uselessness. By all means buff the IS-2 and Tiger elsewhere, revert one of their existing nerfs or reduce their cost. This isn't about reducing the strength of the IS-2 in a vacuum. It's about making the Panther function against SOV as it does against USF and UKF, and about stopping the Tiger being OST and OKW's heavy best tank destroyer. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another Take On The Heavy Tank Meta16 Mar 2020, 02:30 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Mar 2020, 22:01 PMShadowLinkX37 Think we’d be better off raising heavy tank price than lowering their durability vs giga-TDs. Let’s see how the patch nerfs the heavy tank meta before we go for a 4th nerf though eh? It's not about nerfing heavies in a vacuum: it's about making them interact properly with the nondoctrinal roster. You could balance the IS-2 perfectly for its cost and it'd still create a heavy tank meta by itself because it beats the Panther. By all means, buff the Tiger and Pershing in some other way if need be. The two things that matter here are making the Panther work as a heavy counter (which it does against USF and UKF) and making the Tiger not be a better heavy counter than the Panther. Jump back to quoted post15 Mar 2020, 21:51 PMDoomlord52 No. As I said in the other thread, this just makes the current high-pen 60-range TDs even more dominant; i.e the M36/SU85/FFs (JP4 doesn't have all that high pen). I want to make the current heavy-tank meta less powerful as much as anyone else, but it's still massively preferable to TD spam. How so? A reduction in heavy tank durability applies across the board. I don't see how it further incentivises building tank destroyers. If anything, a drop in heavy tank usage disincentivises TD spam. I'm all for slashing the DPS of tank destroyers, but nerfing heavies won't encourage TDs. TDs do better against a heavy than they do against double mediums. Jump back to quoted post16 Mar 2020, 01:57 AMblancat think about cost Don't just look at performance Performance is critical here. Take the T-34/76 vs Panzer IV matchup. To beat a Panzer IV with T-34s, you need two. 600 MP 180 FU to counter a 120 FU tank, and therefore the Panzer IV usually holds the advantage in that matchup. The IS-2 vs Panther matchup is the same situation. The IS-2's only about 17% better than the Panther, but you can't build 1.17 Panthers. There needs to be a unit or combination of units that cost-effectively counters the IS-2, or you've got a balance problem. Jump back to quoted post15 Mar 2020, 23:06 PMWAAAGH2000 I though ,just balance them by cost,based on Tiger,Pershing reduce fuel to about 210,IS2 increase to about 245 As above, the matchups are very important. You can't balance units just by cost because they're quantised: you can't build 1.33 T-34/76s to counter a Panzer IV. No unit is an island. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Another Take On The Heavy Tank Meta15 Mar 2020, 21:36 PM All the heavy tanks are good, but the Tiger and IS-2 are the two that really entrench the heavy tank meta. The Pershing is just as powerful (if not more so) on paper, but it's had nowhere near the same impact on the meta. I think that's because of the matchup with the Panther. The Panther beats the Comet (800 HP), can take on the Pershing (960 HP), and generally loses to the IS-2 (1040 HP). This makes the IS-2 the most impactful heavy tank on the meta despite not being that much stronger than the Pershing on paper. If the opponent wants to counter it without going heavy tanks themselves they need a Panther and something else. They need to expend more resources on AT units than the generalist IS-2 costs. Viewed that way, it's easy to see why the IS-2 is such a popular pick in 1v1: it doesn't have a nondoctrinal counter. Then we have the Tiger. The Tiger has 1040 HP, making it better in a heavy tank slugging match than the Panther. This makes it a better pick than the Panther even against the Pershing: anything the Panther can do, the Tiger can do better. In summary, we have these two problems: The Panther cannot deal with the IS-2. The Tiger is a better anti-heavy unit than the Panther. What if we changed that? Reduce the Tiger's HP to 960. Adjust cost or buff as necessary. Reduce the IS-2's HP to 960, or rework it into a more expensive tank in the vein of the King Tiger. What if we cut the IS-2 and Tiger to 960 HP, same as the Panther and Pershing? The Panther can then take on the IS-2 in a one-on-one battle, and the Tiger stops being a better pick than it. Now that the IS-2 can be countered nondoctrinally, there's less incentive to go IS-2 every game. Now that the Tiger isn't a better heavy counter than the Panther, there's less incentive to go Tiger every game. Thoughts? In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panther Accuracy15 Mar 2020, 16:09 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Mar 2020, 13:23 PMVipper Generally their annoy to play with and against. They would either completely "shock" the enemy or be decimated in seconds. That is why I suggest testing less firepower more durability. They're already having their firepower cut, and they do not need more durability. If they're too weak at 960 HP, slash the price. Don't make them tougher. Them being better than the Panther at AT is the cause of so many of the problems with them. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panther Accuracy15 Mar 2020, 12:47 PM Jump back to quoted post15 Mar 2020, 12:06 PMVipper And tank are almost mandatory for Ostheer since they will lose if they try to play without vehicles. In addition not using you fuel is also a waste of resources. I'm not saying don't. I'm saying it's better to build a medium tank if its AT firepower is sufficient to counter the enemy composition. Going massed TDs when you don't need TDs is trading better manpower bleed for overkill. Tank destroyer spam happens when that much AT firepower is necessary. Your suggestion of making heavies even tougher is just going to make that worse. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panther Accuracy15 Mar 2020, 11:55 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Mar 2020, 07:34 AMDoomlord52 For USF and UKF, and to a lesser extent Sov and OKW, the best choice in essentially every situation is "60 range TD". Enemy going for a medium tank? Get a 60 range TD and hard-counter it. Enemy going for an AI focused tank? 60 range TD. Enemy going for a heavy? 60 range TD. Enemy going for a 'premium' medium? 60 range TD. Enemy going for literally anything on wheels/tracks? 60 range TD. Additionally, since those four factions have very strong infantry, they usually don't need the AI power offered by mediums, or already have some AI focused LVs built(Flak HT, etc.). As a result, there's really no reason not to go for a 60-range TD, as it shuts down any vehicle-based AI your opponent might go for. I think you're heavily undervaluing manpower bleed. In isolation, the Sherman is a better pick against the Ostwind than the Jackson. The Sherman will deal with the Ostwind and then contribute its hefty anti-infantry firepower to the battle. The Jackson will deal with the Ostwind, then do nothing until another tank shows up. This applies more broadly: you want enough AT to deal with the enemy tanks, then stack the rest of your army with as much manpower bleed as you can. Investing in a load of AT you don't need is suboptimal play. Tank destroyers are a reaction to the enemy composition. We see it so much because the dominance of the heavy tank meta since the Mobidef nerfs made it necessary: if you need two Tank Destroyers to kill a heavy, you're going to build two tank destroyers. And there goes 38% of your popcap. Cutting the Tiger down to 960 makes one tank destroyer that much more able to deal with it, freeing up that popcap and those resources for other vehicles. It might, ironically enough, reduce the number of 60 range TDs fieled. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panther Accuracy15 Mar 2020, 04:10 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Mar 2020, 03:39 AMToxicfirebal That will just make heavies less unique. It'll make them take six hits to kill instead of seven. That's hardly a design feature. Jump back to quoted post15 Mar 2020, 03:56 AMmrgame2 Sounds almost perfect, except reduce is2 and tiger sight to 45. Reduce panther health to 800 like comet. This will make heavy unique as always. I'm not sure how it's possible to read my suggestion and miss the point this hard. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panther Accuracy15 Mar 2020, 01:30 AM I don't think the problem with the Panther is the Panther. I think it's the IS-2 and Tiger. Consider the following: The IS-2 beats the Panther in a 1v1 battle. The Tiger is a better heavy tank counter than the Panther. Therefore, if you're playing Soviet and you pick an IS-2 doctrine, your opponent's overwhelming best answer in 1v1 is a Tiger doctrine. Going Tiger gives you 160 more HP, a load of anti-infantry firepower, and going Panther doesn't work. What if we changed that? What if we cut the IS-2 and Tiger to 960 HP, same as the Panther and Pershing? The Panther can then take on the IS-2 in a one-on-one battle, and the Tiger stops being a better pick than it. Now that the IS-2 can be countered nondoctrinally, there's less incentive to go IS-2 every game. Now that the Tiger isn't a better heavy counter than the Panther, there's less incentive to go Tiger every game. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panther Accuracy15 Mar 2020, 00:32 AM Jump back to quoted post15 Mar 2020, 00:04 AMSvalbard If an accuracy buff is unnecessary, then the Panther should get a penetration buff at Vet 2 instead. No. Vet zero. It's not much of a counter if it needs to gain two vet levels to do its job in the first place. Veterancy should make a unit better but it shouldn't be a gate for it doing its job. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Panther Accuracy14 Mar 2020, 20:54 PM Jump back to quoted post14 Mar 2020, 19:01 PMKatitof And jackson loses to panther frequently, eh? Range and mobility matters. If the Panther's meant to take on the IS-2 and Pershing with range then the IS-2 and Tiger need their veterancy range bonuses removed. In: COH2 Balance