[...]
Like I actually want to know what scenarios you guys have in mind concerning this tank and this ability.
granted there might not be too many situations where getting a cmnd.p4 + mark target will straight out beat just getting a regular p4 instead, but there are some for sure. those will mostly involve t3 units pitted against heavier armored vehicles, as hannibal already elaborated, though not entirely.
if my simplified back-of-the-envelope calculations (long range pen, frontal armor, assuming 100% acc) are not too far off, a cmnd.p4 + panther + mark target combo deals virtually the same DPS against an IS-2 as a regular p4 + panther during the 30 s the ability is active. granted this isn't long enough for a vet0 panther to score a kill as you'd only get max 5 shots off before mark target expires, but it'll still heavily shift the odds in your favor. and that is neither considering the accuracy buff nor the survivability bonus you get on top of the better penetration, yet.
similarly, two p4s plus a cmnd.p4 with mark target will dish out more damage per second against a kv-1 or bigger (against any tank, in fact, that has at least 33% more armor than the p4 has pen) than three p4s could in the 30 s window the ability is active, again even before the DPS boost from accuracy.
so, yes, a cmnd.p4 just for mark target may not always be worth building over g a regular one, but there are certainly a lot of scenarios where that makes sense.
|
I'd actually love to see the day1 rage of everyone that loses his tank because it survived with 160 and then leaves the CP4 aura, causing instant death. I'd bet money on the code glitching out and that happening.
haha, yeah very well possible! though tanks surviving with 0 HP after taking deflection damage aren't too rare of a sight right now either. i'd give it at least coin flip odds of working as intended |
I hate that this became because it want always like that. It's funny the inconsistency of it though: an team mate can blow up your base with AT guns but you can't do anything back. A sturmtiger can kill a friendly tank, but the AVRE can't kill friendly infantry...
probably one for the much-coveted clean-up patch that, sadly, will likely never come... |
|
yeah, i agree 15% might still be a bit too much and something odd like 13% is kind of questionable. I guess the only way around this would be to give tanks and infantry a flat HP bonus instead of a relative increase (i.e. 160 HP for tanks and 10 HP for infantry). |
ur entire post was about mark target, so i commented on it.
and secondly, I used to use CP4 along with stug so that it could survive 5 shots. NOW even with 10% DR it dies in 4 shots.
Yes, you didnt mention that it has a decent gun vs inf and light tanks BUT normal p4(for only20 more fuel) can upgrade to pintle mg also and do twice the damage. As for light vehicles, it may penetrate the aaht or m20 but the CP4 ive used, fail to penetrate consistanly even stuart. Even if it does penetrate its only 80 Damage.
In conclusion, I think the CP4 might be usefull in a situation where you have no choice but to build it. On merit (for me atleast) the standard p4 is MUCH better at the current costs.
forgot about grenades : id want to move out of grenades rather then stand inside and take 10% less damage.
Yeah i think raising the DR bonus to 15% would have been a good call so it also has an effect on the StuG, but maybe that would have turned out a tad bit too powerful. In any case, I'd argue the aura is still helpful for literally any other unit you and your potential teammates may field. Might not be worth getting it just to buff a single P4 but usually you'll have a sizeable army already once the Cmnd P4 arrives on the field. Also, even if it should be common sense that eating grenades to the face should be avoided at all costs, it does sometimes happen. Not to mention the DR it helps surviving other stuff, like Katyusha or Calliope rockets one-shotting full-health models as well...
Pen and nominal damage of the main gun isn't something worth writing home about for sure, especially if you compare it to a regular P4. It's still has great DPS overall though thanks to the high ROF and low scatter. Maybe not against tanks, but anything lighter than a Stuart will die even quicker to the Cmnd P4 than to the regular version. But, again, you'll not be getting a Cmnd P4 to fight tanks, you'll get it to buff the rest of your army to be more resilient and dish out more damage when fighting tanks. Sometimes you just need a versatile Swiss army knife instead of a brute force machete.
Anyway, the OP wasn't about how useful the unit itself may be in combat, but rather if Mark Target is cutting it or not. And to say the 25% lower armor & target size isn't useful for Ostheer is just as far from true as it gets.
|
that requires 2 p4s to work.. 1 to mark target stuff and another to benefit off of it. Easier to make 2 regular p4s no?
in a vacuum... sure. but you're usually not getting the cmnd p4 just for the mark vehicle cast alone, nor is the tank itself just a giant paperweight that doesn't provide anything beyond that. the 10% DR aura may not seem too powerful, but lets your mediums eat an extra shot and makes infantry a good deal more durable against a variety of threats that could normally OHK models, such as grenades. plus, the newly added smoke shell will surely come in handy in some situations.
oh, and did i mention that it has a pretty decent gun against infantry and light vehicles, too?
|
|
ost may have a couple of high-pen options in their arsenal, but i fail to see how that makes mark target redundant. the -25% armor debuff is actually a 33% better chance to pen and makes a huge difference in many tank vs tank matchups.
for example, the Pz.IV with its 110 far pen has a chance of about 69% to penetrate the armor of a regular sherman at max range. with mark target that goes up to 92%. and if you calculate the probability of killing that sherman with the first 4 consecutive shots (excluding acc for simplicity), your looking at a 23% chance to do so without mark target versus 70% with the debuff. and that's even before factoring in the accuracy increase, which is almost always helpful.
not to mention there are also some high-armor tanks in the allied roster which can bounce even the occasional pak or panther shell... hence, i'd say the ability is far from useless. |
"look, i have no idea what got you banned, nor does it interest me in the slightest." SO YOU SHOULD SHUT UP in the first place instead of uttering "OBVIOUS REASONS". 2ndly, "i can, however, tell you what i would NOT do if i were in your shoes, and that certainly includes going on a rant about how incapable relic's enforcement team is or how admin abuse (whatever this is supposed to mean) is allegedly going rampant here or elsewhere. instead, you could just try to get in contact with either Sturmpanther or directly with JohnT_RE and try to handle the matter privately, without the drama you're apparently after." PEOPLE POST HERE when they see some kind of odd problems like these and it does not INCLUDE THE CONDITION THAT THEY HAVE TO BE IN SOMEONE'S shoe.. YOU ARE NOT A GOD HERE THAT I SHOULD FOLLOW YOU. JohnT RE and STURMPANTHER are not sitting all day to hear my message or anything. Besides we haven't got all day to do this. You are the one here is putting an unnecessary drama by talking like this.. ITS NOT YOUR PROBLEM ALSO.. AND ALSO YOU SAID THAT IT DOES NOT INTEREST YOU. SO WHY ARE YOU SQUABBLING TOO MUCH after you are shown facts and TALKING "IF I WERE IN YOUR SHOE , I would have done that" I DID NOT ASK FOR YOUR SUGGESTION.. THEY LOCKED IT BECAUSE it caused "ODD TRUTH hurting stuff" .. A lot of professional COH2 players started giving bad review to COH2 A VERY BAD REVIEW like " DEVS 1/10" ... AND THAT IS NOT BECAUSE OF FREE WILL BUT BEING FEDUP.. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO EVEN EXPLAIN THAT?. My previous post got locked because they showed me reason: DISRESPECTFUL TO DEVELOPERS... So plz close your mouth for now. RULES ARE MEANT TO be IMPLIED in correct ways but not WHIMSICALLY. OTHERWISE the base number player of this game wouldn't have turned to 5000 presently whereas in 10 years SC2 ( an RTS game) don't have low number of players and still that game is remaining popular because their devs and managers are not such careless.
yeah, well... i certainly do have a hunch now as to why you got banned |
Regardng scaling:
Is the scaling to vet3 still balanced? I ran some (current build) tests of Pershing/Tiger shooting at Volks/Rifles at about range 3. At vet0 the Pershing had a decent advantage where I can see proper use for it. But at vet3 I was not so sure anymore. The Tiger seemed to close in very nicely to the point I would say they are about equal. Especially when the pintle was upgraded. Considering the Pershing is 2 POP cheaper this is still a win for the Pershing, but on the other hand its biggest advantage is not so much an advantage anymore.
Yeah I certainly agree that both tanks are very close in terms of performance at three stars of Vet. Overall I'd say the Pershing has the advantage as it has a much better alpha strike and deals more upfront damage and kills during prolonged engagements. However, the Tiger is usually able to pick up the pace in the later stages of a fight due to the low scatter, high ROF and better MGs (in case they're in range) that makes it more effective in killing singled-out, low-health models.
The 10% less scatter at Vet 2 in the beta also gives the Tiger a small performance boost, but it's overall lower than I would have expected and pretty much of the same magnitude as the 5% higher ROF buff for the Pershing.
So all in all the AI advantage of the Pershing is rather small in most situations, except for the very first shot fired. I can see that this is still a plus overall, but if better AI is the defining trait of the Pershing it could be a bit more pronounced in my opinion. Not HE-Sherman vs. AP-Sherman better, but still a bit more than just 10 - 15% under ideal conditions. |
Of course it was necessary to post this. I don't use slurs or do toxic chat stuff ingame.. I even have the full replay which i can upload here for clearing your doubts. Plus I also heard that there a lot of ADMIN ABUSE stuff goes on here. Before even uttering "obvious reasons", first state the reason instead of 'victim blaming' whimsically. I have absolutely have no clue of doing toxic chats ingame in the last 7 days. Whenever I faced toxicity, I just dropped on spot. This post is repeated because it should. I don't see anything wrong in it while clearly stating the facts.
This post got locked due to the reason: ODD TRUTH hurts... that is not a reason by the way if someone get flinched. THIS IS THE OBVIOUS FACT. I just come to play a fair game to rank up. BUT NOT TO DO TEAMKILLING BUSINESS AND SPOIL THE MATCH of other players by taking their efforts and time casually like players like 'sarcasm15rus'( as for example)
look, i have no idea what got you banned, nor does it interest me in the slightest. i can, however, tell you what i would NOT do if i were in your shoes, and that certainly includes going on a rant about how incapable relic's enforcement team is or how admin abuse (whatever this is supposed to mean) is allegedly going rampant here or elsewhere. instead, you could just try to get in contact with either Sturmpanther or directly with JohnT_RE and try to handle the matter privately, without the drama you're apparently after.
in addition, if i were to guess i'd wager your previous post wasn't locked 'because truth hurts', but rather because calling out players for alleged cheating violates the site rules.
|
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
