Profile of Protos Angelus

Avatar Area

Offline Unknown SteamID unknown
Posts: 1515

General Information


Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?22 May 2021, 10:53 AM Panther without the pintle MG really needs to aim the frontal MGs at infantry to do some damage. The cannon is quite weak vs infantry. It can snipe models at best. But with pintle, and 2 frontal MGs, the infantry go down like butter. So no wipe potential but does bleed infantry. Still, contrary to what Sander has said, I've found Pershing to not be any better in actual combat. Played 3 more games yesterday. Still needs 2 REs to actually repair it in any decent amount of time. The extra speed at vet2 does not actually amount to anything. Sometimes you can escape more easily but that's it. The vet3 +5% to reload I did not really feel... at all. The 11 CP is nice, it did make an entry sooner. And I've tried using the CA in 3v3. Ended up losing infantry around it to. Only time I've actually made any progress with CA was using one infantry + jackson + pershing. And only if when pushing, the enemy had no stuka or werfer. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Commander Update Beta 2021 - USF Feedback20 May 2021, 22:41 PM Jump back to quoted post20 May 2021, 17:35 PMJPA32 I'm not saying they're irrelevant at the role itself, but the fact is I already have 5 Bazookas on 2 squads who can't fight infantry (Rear Echelon (0MP) The Major (Tech Bonus) and have effectively no other purpose in combat, and one squad who needed the Bazooka as an LV deterrent where most of his damage comes from his Thompson anyway. I don't need to be spending 350 Manpower on even more Bazookas on top of that, even if they're superzooks. It's a matter of the role being filled more efficiently and cheaper by squads you just passively already own rather than having to dedicate tons of resources into a role that you already have fulfilled. The manpower is just better spent elsewhere. Until lieutenant Dan gets his legs blown off by a KT. Or Major Tom gets shot up into deep Space by a Brummbar. If the balance team could buff the major to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTAaosUQqPY levels, that would be great. Rangers are quite fine. If it were up to me, I'd either give them some utility or decrease pop to match guards or falls or other elite infantry and reduce price to 340. I'd much rather see the Pershing get an armour buff to 300. Played another couple of games in the current Beta and the repair reduction is not that big. I think on average 15 or so seconds. The speed buff is good. Other changes are really not really that influential. Haven't noticed any difference with the reload buff on vet 3 (if the Pershing even survives the 3v3 masses of raketen, Panthers, paks and elefants). Sander says he plays Pershing "a lot" and "feels" it's performing well. I'd very much like to see that "performing well" part and the "feel" part. I doubt it can perform well against non-braindead players. Mediocre performance at most. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Commander Update Beta 2021 - USF Feedback19 May 2021, 20:40 PM Jump back to quoted post19 May 2021, 18:59 PMVipper Last thing Urban defense needs is buff since it already one of most popular commander about to become even more popular once Dozer Sherman are no longer available to another commander. The commander need nerf not buffs. The only reason Urban is popular is because the USF has an incomplete stock roster. Not because it's got some magical units in it. Judging by the last time we played together, you should be asking for Mega Buffs for USF. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?18 May 2021, 17:43 PM Jump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 17:13 PMPip Wait, you consider the JP4 the "best" TD? It certainly has good survivability and good RoF... but this is kind of counteracted by the severe lack of penetration relative to other TDs, meaning it struggles vs higher-armour vehicles. It's mostly intended to fight other TDs, survivability is generally not a hugely important factor when used in a generic TD role (as a TD is generally not meant to be trading blows), but the JP4's statistics make it very capable of manfighting opposing Tank Destroyers. I've never ever had any problems dealing with anything allies related with JP4. For me the best allied TD is the Firefly while the best overall is the JP4. I just love it. Yeah Jackson is great and all but kinda started hating it when in the key moments of the game it bounces against KTs or super heavies, even with the HVAP. Pure bad RNG perhaps, but I've had much more bad RNG vs axis than I had with OKW vs allies. Can't say how many times my JP4 survived flanks thanks to the low size and armour. And for IS-2 and Comet I just use the Panther. Sometimes double JP4s do the job against IS-2 and Comets. They will bounce here and there but the sheer great ROF and the survivability really lets me snipe anything. Never had any problems penetrating the Pershing. A single JP4 does the job well. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?18 May 2021, 15:27 PM Jump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 14:37 PMthedarkarmadillo You clone the tiger and put the best TD in the game behind it and the best infantry squad in the game in front of it and the axis won't have a chance in hell. I'm interested in balance, not fan boyism. USF has compensations for squishy armour and you can't simply remove that and expect it to be balanced. There is a whole army surrounding the Pershing, one that is designed not to have a tiger. The Pershing cost can absolutely be lowered, but it cannot become a tiger and the tiger itself is completely irrelevant. Different armies allow for different cost effeciency. As I've said if OKW and ost both had a doctrinal Panther with 4 levels of vet they would be different costs because they would be both superior and inferior to the stock options despite being the exact same unit. Such is the USF heavy tank. It has a differently balanced stock army that creates the necessity of heavy Armour being less resilient than other factions. There are rules. These rules ensure balance is a possibility. This is why ost 5 man gren needs to remain less cost efficient than the lmg, this is why soviet should lose their FPR in airborne and why svts need further nerfs. You cannot simply shoehorn in something that has been compensated for them not having. Who is talking about cloning the tiger? Even if Pershing were a clone of the tiger, it would not abuse anything. The pop limit is 100, not 300 that you can put a blob of rifles with double bars in front of it and 3 TDs behind it and paks to support it and AA HT to deal with aircraft and echelons to repair it and 50 cal to suppress... Jackson being the best TD is subjective. I consider JP4 to be the best TD. Jackson is definitely the most mobile one, but JP4 supported by a KT with obers around it is quite strong (low target size + high armour + great ROF). In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?18 May 2021, 14:27 PM Jump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 14:24 PMSupport Sapper 2 jackson HVAP go head on with ele Joke of the year Well they can go... if the elefant is solo... if the ost player has no grens... if the ost player has no paks... if the ost player has no other tanks... if the ost player has no teammates... Basically if the OST player is playing 1v1 and has only built elefant and pios throughout the game. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?18 May 2021, 10:18 AM Sumi... Pershing should lose to a Panther. Panther is stock and is expensive but has only one job to do. Kill tanks. And instead of using range like ally TDs, it uses armour/HP which can also give it the snowball effect through pintle MGs (cannon AI is shit) when enough of Panthers have been amassed (in teamgames mostly). This whole thread has been about Pershing not having a big enough advantage in AI over the Tiger. Not about Pershing losing to Panther or whatnot... The only question that remains if the balance team will actually have the balls to make Pershing 300 armour and buff either MGs or cannon AI a bit to actually justify the hefty price and then through "hotfixes" nerf if needed. I highly doubt it, but still, no need to get angry. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?17 May 2021, 23:17 PM Well I wouldn't get any hopes up. Sturm has said that the patch is going live after the ML5. No new iterations. Another update. Another failure to deliver any substantial changes. Shame. Would be good to see some of the reworks from this thread tested. At least after it was shown that the Pershing does not have a clear cut AI victory over the same priced Tiger in most scenarios. In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Why do Axis Rocket Arty have to 'oneshot' ?17 May 2021, 14:11 PM Depends. Does rocket arty wipe better? Yes. However, one must take note of the lane-y design of 3v3+ maps. There are no brainer lanes where you would want to fire your stuka and pockets of area where you'd want to fire a werfer. Combined with the fact that it comes all in one salvo. If it's not dodged... goodnight. Mobile arty on the other hand is more of an area denial. You see the first two shells and you know where it's targeted so you get out. If you don't react. Goodnight In: COH2 Balance
Thread: Pershing vs Tiger. Shouldn't Pershing be buffed?17 May 2021, 11:33 AM Jump back to quoted post17 May 2021, 11:23 AMSupport Sapper The tests and calculations clearly show otherwise, that Pershing Ai only come out on top at about 5-10% in prolonged fight and the better aoe is also partly off set by larger scatter. Furthermore, tiger can sit still in longer period of time to dish out more dmg, get better scatter and evnt range with vet while Pershing is force to use mobility thus make it loss event more dps from mg (it is intended to use the mobility, isn't it ?) Let just get this straight, dose the Pershing have better AI than the Tiger? Yes. But dose the extra AI justify all the other downsides of the unit as a heavy tank? NO. The natural question is then: By how much is the Pershing AI better than the Tiger to offset the Tiger's other benefits (better survivability, range, ROF). Eg. If Pershing had 1% better AI and Tiger had 20% better survivability then it wouldn't really be "balanced" I mean, you could buff the Pershing's cannon AI a bit too. I won't speak for OST since I don't play OST enough to comment. But as a player that plays OKW and USF the most (USF more) I can say that playing with a KT or a Tiger in teamgames feels much easier and more rewarding than playing Heavy Cav. Even though Heavy Cav is my favorite commander because of the Rangers + offmap smoke. Don't know how many times I've completely wrecked entrenched players with MG42s and whatnot by smoking and pushing with rangers from one side and rifles from another and using the captain On Me to sprint up to the LV like the Luchs or Flak to snare it. Micro as F*** but rewarding and really fun to play. Pershing... meh. Back in the days of double shot skillshot and larger AOE, I did have a blast wiping blobs and I didn't really need a Calliope. Pershing was really really good at damaging blobs and wiping in 2-3 shots. Ever since the AOE nerf I've had more wins with Calliope and a lot more loses with Heavy Cav. Proof: Went to top 20 with Heavy Cav exclusively. Pershing nerf. Went to rank 330 or something like that playing Heavy Cav exclusively. Mostly had problems dealing with blobs. Then I started playing double pak howi in every game. Went to top 60 or something like that. Blobs were no longer an issue. Then the pak howi got nerfed. Went to rank 289 through a series of loses with Pershing + double pak. Again had trouble dealing with blobs. Mines from rifles were to no avail as pretty much always in the blob was a sweeper (or the mines got blown up by stuka/werfer before the Big'Ol blob push). OKW blobs were much harder to deal with because of A-move raketen followed by retreat once they take out AA HT or Sherman or w/e was keeping the blob static. So I decided to swap it out again. Started playing Calliope every game and was winning much more than losing. Got back to top 30 playing double calliope every game, no pak howi. Jackson, Sherman(s) and an AT gun with rangers. Now I oscillate between 60 and 110 playing exclusively heavy cav or recon (80/20) with double paks. Calliope is really really boring to play game in, game out. I do have problems dealing with blobs but unlike before, now I just spam mines so much that the only weapon upgrade I have is the rangers tommies. Now when the blob pushes I try to bait it into the mines that were not hit by the indirects. Usually the double pak howi baits them. They focus it down while I use rangers to nade the minesweeping sturms or pios. In: COH2 Balance