Profile of ddd

Actually no, the game doesnt follow retarded logic. FYI.
Next time dont use non causa pro causa and you'll be fine.

Comet isnt showing that much since churchills are both, more reliable and easier to use. Comet has a bad risk/reward ration but that doesnt mean its useless, its riskier and harder to play with but far from useless. In lategame when AT control is critical, comet is not your AT tank but comet+firefly.

You are talking gibberish. Thats the only retarded thing i see so far.

The fact that everyone in this thread agrees on churchill being better at doing excatly the same things as comet illustrates the problem perfectly. Comet should not be fulfilling the same role as churchill. The choice between hammer and anvil should be meaningful and resulting in different units for different tasks. Currently comet is weaker at spearheading attacks and exchanging fire with enemy tanks while at the same time being bad at hunting lone tanks.

Great example of comet + firefly combo being remotely good. Show me one person that prefers that combo over churchill + firefly. You are further proving my point.

The Comet does indeed straight-up murder Axis mediums. No idea why you have this strange idea that a P4 can even remotely handle a fight against a Comet when the P4 has less health and about half the pen chance. The Comet is definitely not a good unit as it currently stands, but bare-faced lying certainly doesn't help your argument.

Im not lying, you are just keeping your head in your butt. I didnt say p4 can handle comet or beat it. P4 can however normaly function on the battlefield while comet is around, still doing work around map and in case comet shows up just reverse with ease.

Compare it to panther presence on the field. Sherman/t34/cromwell will just be chased down by panther if they step out a little. Panther will penetrate them 100% times and requires 3 snares to get engine damaged.

Two problems I have with the Comet are the sidegrade cost and the efficiency of the Churchill. I'd build it if it were available without Hammer tech. But the biggest reason not to get a Comet is that Churchills are simply better at anti-infantry, bullying mediums and spearheading/tanking (haha). I don't want to pay for a weird utility Panther when I can get a 1000+ hp anti-inf heavy tank for significantly less fuel.

Interesting. Thats excatly what im talking about. Comet tries to do the same things churchill does already, but for more fuel and with worse results. Thats why i suggested to turn comet into dedicated tank hunter, with better penetration, rate of fire and maybe healt in exchange for armor (dont need 290 to hunt mediums).

Panther has near zero downsides except it has lower range lol

Jackson is fine or nerf it and add some non doc premium tank because right now jackson is core of usf army if u nerf it u will nerf whole usf late game. And pls dont drag here aguments that triple scott is very strong because stuka is more potent and arives couple of minutes before scott and scott need more micro of course especially when u have more than one so i guess we must live with that so pls adapt already.

You know what will happen if you nerf jackson and put some "premium" tank in its place? USF will be garbage again because panther counters all tanks, even heavies. Tank destroyers are the only way to keep panthers in check, thats why jackson got the changes it got, not sherman.

maybe, just maybe both axis factions have panthers, so you will most likely see them every game.

i need to do some scientific research first before beeing 100% sure tho.

And how is it relevant when compared to comet? If comet was so good we would see it in half or maybe one third of ukf games as opposed to current 1 in 100.

White phosphorus, crew grenade, hammer tracking, no vet blitz and normal smoke are all contributing factors to the units cost, not just it's combat performance.

You cant put them all together as comet features. Blitz and hammer tracking are part of hammer upgrade, not comet itself. When OST unlocks 50 fuel t4 it gets access to panther, brummbar and pwerfer. When UKF unlocks 50 fuel hammer tactics it gets access to comet, gammon bomb, blitz and tracking.

So yes, the panther does its jobs better for the same cost, but the comet can do more. The panther is SUPPOSED to be better than the comet, as seen by the nerfs the comet received so it wouldn't beat the panther 1/2 of the times.

This is all that matters in actual game, panther does its job better, thats why we see panther in almost every game. Comet has bunch of greandes and other useless garbage that is not needed on this tank instead of combat effectivnes. Having greandes makes some sense on churchill, but for whatever reason comet has 2 grenade abillities and 2 smoke shell abilities. Most of it should be removed and comet should be adjusted accordingly. Its not a moba for units to have 5 abilities.

The comet beats p4s and stugs and anything below the panther handily, and for everything above there is the firefly.

Comet has something like 70% chance to penetrate okw p4, for 185 fuel unit behind 50 fuel sidegrade thats very bad.

The comet isn't supposed to replace all your other armour, the old comet could. That's bad design. Does it need some love? Yea. But should it be single handedly smash all of Germany? No.

Now i think you got slightly confused. Im suggesting to turn comet into specialized tank hunter similar to panther, that would require other pieces of armor for anti infantry duty.

Its YOU who is defending current good vs everything comet design. Old comet was just like current comet design wise. Only stats changed.