Also considering that the SU-76 is basically the Soviet version of the STUG, I find it funny how the Balance team nerfed the SU-76 because it could penetrate heavy tanks (OMG MY POOR TIGER) meanwhile no such change was made for the STUG which when also spammed like the SU-76 could demolish Allied Heavy Tanks (shocker). Which is basically like saying Soviet made 5 ZIS AT Guns, lets make a Tiger and send it in and expect it to not get destroyed. Then you see the ZIS for being effective at its role it ends up getting nerfed and can no longer penetrate anything.
Like Hannibal said, it's not the same unit. It's a different unit in a different faction. It's sort of similar to the role of the Stug, but that's it. You should never directly compare units in different factions because different units stand behind them.
SU76 can still penetrate heavy tanks. The chance to penetrate is not really high, about 50% for the likes of KT/T. That, however, is more than enough if one gets two SU76s and keeps them alive. Their ROF basically says "Ok, I have lower penetration, but I shoot so often that I sh** on your statistical analysis".
Same as how SMGs are good vs clown cars and the likes. They have lower dmg compared to semi-auto, lower penetration, but much higher ROF.
Point is, SU76 should not have the penetration, nor the survivability (Eg. vetted up stug can bounce quite a few shots, not to mention the low size for the misses) of Stug.
Reduce target size on SU76, improve turn rate and vet3 brings the damage to 160. Reduce ROF by 0.3s.
Compared to Stug, a somewhat comparable unit, it would have less survivability, more agility, less penetration (also on average vs better armour), cost a bit less, have slightly lower ROF but you get a barrage, which is a great tool generally.
You could also improve the AOE of the barrage at the cost of cooldown, scatter or whatnot, I'm not well versed in those stats. But that would be optional.
If you keep it alive, a dual SU76 would eat everything but the heaviest tanks, in one bite. Most useful on open maps. And the downside would be that if you do go for dual SU76, well you get great AT with decent AI but you skimp out on early T34-76 to close the game and/or eat the popcap for a SU85/katyusha
Why is the firefly regarded as shitty compared to the other 2 TDs, when it has a great penning gun and rockets that basically K.O. tanks upon connecting
It's not. Firefly is great. It does have lower penetration so it's not as great vs super heavy tanks with 400 or 350 armour. But personally never had an issue killing anything with it. Once vetted it becomes a monster.
Maybe. I'd sooner say human nature. Nobody is purely objective. I'm not the one for conspiracies but the trend of nerfs to USF indirects speak for themselves. Either complete incompetence or just plain subjective approach to balance. Last commander update, the brits got, on paper, megabuffed. However, 90% of those "buffs" are quasi-buffs at best. Balance team is good with those pseudo-changes that give the feeling of change whilst nothing *really* happens. Don't get me wrong, same thing with some of the axis buffs. The last 2 years were nothing but running in circles when it comes to balance. For all factions
USF indirects got nerfed because most of the balance team had a problem with them, along with some of the more prominent axis players. Sander, a purely OKW player along with Sturmpanther, a mostly axis player, gave in to these "demands" as they were going in their favour as well. There were thread after thread about CalliOP (calliope did deserve a nerf, but not in the health, but agility), or PakHowi OP. Balance team, mostly comprised of axis players, were probably delighted to see it and therefore nerfed pakhowi AOE dmg without giving it anything in return. Well, they did make it a 6 man again but that is meaningless as all the models are clumped up so you get no extra survivability vs indirects, and it's still horribly agile, meaning the run'n'gun unit that is chasing the pakhowi will maybe take 3 seconds longer to kill. So that was just a gimmick to make it seem "balanced". I mean, in most of my games I play double pak howi since one is just useless in 3v3s, and the time it takes them to reach vet3 through barrages/autofire is around 30 minutes. Imagine. A 3v3 game with so many units takes the pak howi so long to vet up. Again, pak howi needed an autofire accuracy nerf so that moving players would not get punished and the static ones would. Right now the static ones are not punished as much due to the lack of any sort of shell-shock from the first shell, due to hard AOE nerf.
Again, why would the balance team, which is mainly comprised of axis teamgame oriented teams, strive to balance the game when they can abuse the position and the will of the forum to ease up their game
IS are very good infantry straight out of the gate, and become /extremely/ good even just with Bolster. You don't need bolster and double brens for them to be "halfway decent"
The 17 pounder (like all Emplacements) is not great, and decent players will be able to deal with them pretty cost effectively.
The firefly is... Ok, though the SU-85 and Jackson especially are leagues ahead of it.
Brenmandos are very strong, though very expensive... Though SOV not having optimal INF DPS really doesn't matter. That isnt really what their infantry are for.
The Comet isnt the same sort of tank as the Panther. What sort of weird strawman is the idea that you need "15 AT guns and 5 TDs", anyway?
Weren't you complaining about the Vickers not being very good earlier on?
The reason not to play UKF is because they are a fundamentally flawed faction, even if they "fit your playstyle".
How can you define something as fundamentally flawed when you don't have fundamentals to begin with?
Are OST/SOV (original factions) the baseline? Are they the fundamentals?
Brits are fine. They are not flawed in any way. They require a different playstyle compared to other factions. Same as how you see people complaining they can't use grens the same way as rifles, this guy stalled for a comet vs falls. His own fault for not adapting. Not the brits fault. In 1v1, brits do not fare well because there are certain commanders like the ostruppen one that are dominant and aggressive, which hits brits hard, who are defensive and slower in nature.
Truth is, most people can't play brits. Between OKW, the easiest faction to play, and Brits, the hardest one, there is nothing but a void in tactics employed.
I mean, my favourite faction, the USF are beyond useless in long teamgames, but the early and mid game are completely mine to dominate. Brits have a better endgame with Comets for teamgames. They do lack rocket arty like the USF, but again, better tank roster plugs it. Not to mention the good base arty for sneaky pyro IS to infiltrate through the margins and take it out. Just as how I go for a min 19 Pershing to close out the 3v3, and if unsuccessful, need to completely shift the playstyle to Scott smokes + Jacksons to stand a chance vs Tigers/KTs/Ele/Jagds + obers, brits need their own changes during the game to be competitive.
I mean, if vet3 obers delete vet3 2xbar rifles yellow to yellow cover, you won't spam rifles to deal with them. You'll go for indirects to abuse the 4 man model
If you're not paying attention to your units and just blobbing away, then you kinda deserve a wipe from a goliath. There are scenarios where you can hide it behind a bush or sight blocker and wipe a squad or two, but Goliath being OP is moronic at best like that thread about Pathfinders being OP.
Falls can be a nasty power creep, especially paired with puma in teamgames. Puma shuts down LV play vs them and they basically melt anything right out of the gate.
However, if you survive the power creep, they are a snareless unit that is expensive to reinforce, despite being 4 man. Not to mention they are doctrinal.
Guards are much more versatile than falls, so are the commandos. Falls are basically hot knife through butter vs infantry but that's it.
They are fine. If anything (big if), I'd increase them to 3CP. Doubt that it's necessary but might fix the falls vs vet1 mainlines engagement where they dominate.
Last game played vs falls spammer. One vet2 fall wiped my vet3 rifle from ambush in about 2 or 3 seconds, with me pressing retreat as soon as I saw the ambush. So I get the toxicity but they are really not OP.
![[PBS] Sigizmund flag](/images/replay/ostheer_flag.jpg)
Relic Entertainment
