Profile of Protos Angelus

Imo, just reduce the cost and remove the limit to one, it is not anymore a heavy tank so it should be considerate as such.

Pershing is too good to not be capped at one and
where would you fit 2 pershings into a standard army composition?

Do players frequently send their expensive hevay tanks around the map where there is no friendly infantry to support it? That may in part be the root of the issue in the "squishy" Pershing issue.
. The prerequisite of "have infantry nearby" has no bearing at all in the quality of enemy...

Yeah, I mostly flank, I don't do head on charges. So yeah, I send my units to parts of map that are undefended and then strike from there. In 3v3s. Try to flank with CA on Port of hamburger with the BS bridges/lanes. You'll lose the pershing momentarily. If the actual holes in the USF roster (and OKW a bit) were plugged, then yeah, Pershing would be ok. But without any serious stock anti blob option that is not just "well spam phosphorous from paks and waste muni while the stuka takes it out every minute or so".

Play USF in teamgames and spam Heavy Cav and come back and say that the Pershing is a viable option in 3v3s. It can be used, but using Tiger is so much easier and more rewarding. I won't comment on OST as I do not play OST but if I had to compare OKW and USF, my 2 most played factions (USF 1st), OKW is miles easier to play and less punishing in 3v3s.

And having infantry nearby in 3v3s has bearing in the enemy. Good players will punish having infantry (plural) with bombardment. Weak, won't. Same as how you easily punish ober blobs with katyusha, which are often seen these days.

As a player that plays heavy cav a lot I can say that CA is a trap on most maps. Example: Angermunde 3v3. Standard custom game as OKW (3x okw vs 3x USF). The noob that I played against on top VP actually used Pershing with 2 rifles and 2 rangers, Jackson and a Sherman, late game. I had one stuka and a KT and a couple of obers and a P4. Top VP is just asking for a stuka line drop. He popped CA hoping to get my KT. Now I don't blame him. Angermunde is dense as f***. Lots of shotblockers and pathfinding blockers. One stuka strike took out both rangers and one rifle squad and I just went in with KT head front. Sent P4 on Jackson. Jackson got stuck on that shit map and KT ate the Pershing (didn't even bother with the Sherman as I like the odds Jackson + Sherman vs vet3 OKW P4). He/She said "GG gardening noob" and left. I had the same thing happen to me on that map and ettelbruck until I learned my lesson and only resorted to using CA on wide open maps like steppes. CA is downright useless on tight maps.

Why are you again counting CA? Shall we count Stuka to count for Tiger AT capabilities?

Because he's playing the extra munitions mod so he can spam CA in every engagement

I mean, the difference there would be that the Panther is much cheaper than the Jagdtiger in every way, and also has the benefit of its' three MGs. Also that the panther fires its' cannon rather faster than the Jagdtiger.

Is comparing the Jagdtiger's main cannon to the Panthers' and calling it "decent enough vs infantry" because it beats the Panther's cannon really all that fair/realistic a comparison? The ISU's AP cannon is also significantly better than the Panther's at fighting infantry, but I'd hardly try and argue that it's a legitimate use of the thing.




I wouldn't be opposed to improving the ISU's stats if it were changed to be a "real" heavy TD rather than what is at the moment... though It's probably worth mentioning that the ISU does have deflection damage, even on the "AP" round, apparently, so not penetrating an enemy tank isnt quite as punishing as one might think.

It's fair to say that the two armies are rather different, though i'd hardly call the Katyusha not a "Wipe Machine". We could probably go back and forth trying to compare the two armies (I'd immediately point to SOV's better stock access to AI vehicles/tools), but I'm not sure that it's necessary.

I only used Panther's AOE profile as an example of a TD profile. You can use Jackson, Firefly, SU85. Doesn't really matter. I used Panther because it's an Axis tank and it's in OKW.
About the "price" argument. I mean, elefant is also pricey but it's not anywhere close to being Jagdtiger level in AI with it's cannon (0.5 AOE).

And if you do want to compare it to the Panthers... jagd can snipe models from a distance. 70 range. Doesn't really have to change any shells or anything, and has the ability to really put the hurt on fleshy peeps. Sure it's not HE ISU152, but still decent enough, considering the 300/500 damage/penetration.

Yeah, ISU has deflection damage but even though it's not as punishing, considering the usual values of HP are somewhat in a hexadecimal system (base 16 --> 160). The 120 damage means --> 120/16 = 7.5 --> 8 "hits".

Still, better than 0, especially if the tank is low and has been snared, I agree.

Well I've broadly classified is a semi-wipe machine. Definitely not as wipe-y as werfer or stuka but has that other bonus then... the duration.
Stuka lands and that's it. If you were unlucky enough or the stuka player "guessed" where you would dodge or something like that... Goodnight. Katyusha doesn't have that, but then again, has the "if you don't retreat from this position, you will suffer". If you're unlucky enough to be in smack center of the area, then you can't really dodge anything. Radial symmetry forbids you, so you retreat.
That's my take on the rocket arty.

Point is. It's stock. Displacing anything from the elefant/jagd is not easy if you don't have katyusha or DOCTRINAL calliope/LM. USF suffers here the most. I mostly play USF in competitive and I know first hand how cancerous it is to play against a good OKW opponent. Early game kubel with double spios can easily lock you out on most 3v3 maps and then late game KT or Jagd or both with obers and a stuka is super cancerous to play against. Similar on how cancerous it is to play vs HE ISU152.

You're minding your own business, capping a point uncontested with a squad. Boom, it's wiped from 100 range by a jagd (supporting fire is, according to seralia, 25-125 although I've never actually seen anyone shoot from 125 range). Lost countless rangers to one jagd shot. Especially as the late game terrain is quite crater-y and the squads tend to bunch up in one crater, allowing easy wipes. And if it's not wiped by the supporting fire, a direct hit will take a hefty amount of HP. Again, not ISU152 levels, but definitely not something to ignore.

EDIT: Now that I think of it. I'm dumb. I should have compared it directly to elefant AOE profile only and avoid any confusion. My bad.

Neither the ISU nor the Jagdtiger should really have HE abilities. Heavy TDs should be very specialised to fighting other armoured vehicles, not having a mulligan to be able to effectively counter any given unit.

At least in the case of the Jagdtiger it's a munitions-costing ability that barrages a single given point, though, so I'd agree that making it a Vet ability again (and giving the ISU the same treatment: Make its HE shell a targeted vet ability too, and bump its range back up to 70) would be a good idea, and would probably make it rather more balanced while retaining this design decision.

Making the JT ability vet 1 would be good and would not affect anything else. The ISU-152 however, would then need a buff in AT penetration, damage, frontal armour. Not to mention you need to balance it around the faction itself. While OKW has premium stock tanks, soviets have none. Neither do they have the all or nothing wipe machine, but rather a semi wipe/semi area denial machine. The current implementation of the HE range 60 is fine. A big nerf sure, but a needed one.