I had a huge fucking post written up and this useless website logged me out before I could post it. I'm tired so this is going to be quick and disorganized.
Man what a boomer, it happened to me many times before, i understand how it felt.
Its quite a walltext but im going to "summarize" some parts for the sake of the rest of the forums. I agree with you on many points now, i am not being dismissive and if i sound like it, i didnt mean to. Remember please english is not my native language also if i mispell words.
This is spot on and i agree with, the fact that the durability and hardness of panthers put other mediums out of the league of mediums is true, but that doesnt really mean it counters mediums, to put it in perspective, its like a bigger fish instead of a fisherman. It will be a definitive answer to mediums 1v1, no doubt about that but panthers dont have that 100% shield that i feel you are describing. Its a high RNG + lot of HP combination, ideal to force allied tanks to desist rather take the risk, because panthers will pen back for sure.
My point is, panther is not a medium counter, but mediums cant deal with him. Its a weakness exploit rather than a strenght.
Again agreed and i didnt ment to be too harsh on the +10 pen +5 range criticism, i understand that the sole idea of saying "give panthers" unleashes a mob of deniers and haters.
Its true that more range would put panthers in an advantage point, like TDs do with it and other heavies,
I considered the whole change as a nerf because currently in team games allied USF players exploit double jacksons. On 1v1 games though the change would be less dramatic. Panthers pen could use a buff and only affect it vs heavies maybe, the range is a lot more complicated, because being able to fire back at TDs has deep consequences, remember OST has hull down or spot scopes. I would rather not take that route, but instead look at the TDs performance.
Here is my main point. I understand that you mentioned many times before both, M36 and panthers and i dont dislike what you said about them, unless i explicitly say it. Thats why im also writing a second walltext of answer, because i like what its being suggested. Hopefully that will put some merit in your effort that i have taken account into, before answering in the first place.
But when you compare panthers to TD when we have discussed it not like a TD of sorts its not really a good point, its ok, yes but not a complete legit point. like saying panthers are immune to handheld AT aswell, you need only to bring it down to 90%-80% to snare it and then the situation turns upside down.
What i want to say its, you get panthers because they are fast+durable+hard hitting. A rushing panther snared is a 2/3rds of a panther worth its costs. Having any TD present means a secured kill, and thats fine, thats how the game goes but you dont see very often allied TDs facing infantry and even less nearby volks/grens. But panthers somehow have to take the risk to be near allied mainlines more often because of their design. In a tight combat youll see more often panther snared than M36 snared, at least from my experience.
I dont consider this as an option/solution in any way, panthers shouldnt be ubermachinenn nor counter TDs, Not only it would be needed to remove everyting made it "original" to be fair and competitive. It would also trash the faction designs.
Im happy that panthers cant counter TDs, dont think otherwise. But somehow as the game is implemented currently the only way to punish bad TD play is with another as fast unit, for the M36 case. For FF and Su85 you also require mobility. Personally i dislike panthers being so mobile.
This solution could only thrive is you limit panthers to 1. But again its a slippery slope from there on. I would however like to see less panthers for better panthers. Maybe a slower, hard hitter and limited to 1. To cut the axis player BS aswell, lategame panther cancer is so dumb.
i loled at the panther HE rounds, man. I think KT and tigers perform that role better. Damn somehow i imagine swapping panthers as doc for tigers as stock if OST really needed premium mediums. But of course game devs you do triple the work to make the game even playable tweaking tigers/panther. Agreed but i dont like it.
Agreed on the description but this will lead to panther vs TDs situations, at least being more micro intensive but not really what panthers should do IMO. I think you could remove panther speed and it should still perform the same way. Because if it should dominate mediums by being tough, you dont need the speed. IMO its in the game to make panther able to secure kills. If i were to make a change i would do it the other way around. Making the panther slower but more accurate, with the same range, sort of like a ATG immune to small artillery and able to survive from stray TD shots.
Man im exausted, but all your points are fair. Panther is hard. I dont think i can fix it but i think we both tried at least.
Disagreed, almost completely.
First the set of rules you lay down are nothing but an idea of yours on how the units should interact.
(Not you but many ppl cant define what panther is, rather a TD or a heavy or a premium medium)
In the case Panther is considered a TD, it SHOULD have better odds vs Jackons simply because...
-Wait for it
It costs more
But because many allied players hate that, but love the price excuse simply cant make a point out of it. The always repeated sentence of the "TD must beat Tanks" is applied both ways if we consider both, panthers and M36 as TDs. So why doesnt Panther have 60 range, well we blame it on its durability. And then we come to the unlogical assumption that harder is better. That ended up making panthers trash. Literally trash vs higly mobile or self spotting TDs.
In theory 1v1 M36 vs panther is a panther win. In practice, and mostly between skilled players there is no clear winner. So i dont take that BS of "Panthers beat M36" unless the USF player is proven to be braindead. Different skill players should not numb the judgement of the units.
If panther were not to be considered TD, rather than a premium tank with good AT, hence no 60 range, then why do you want it to be weaker to its natural counters. 5 Range wouldnt fix anything and 10 more armor penetration would do sh*t difference against TDs, but maybe to heavier tanks. If you weight those down with HP reduction you are simply making the panther a pet kitty cat to those pesky 60 range TDs allied already abuse a lot. If you pay attention not many players rely on panthers in any way because they are so unreliable vs a cheaper and """"More micro intensive"""" unit.
To summarize my statement, panther is a weird bug, i dont classify as you did and i disagreed with your changes because makes it worse for axis rather than better. Its no "buff" at all but a strange nerf against what is keeping it down.
Reduce its HP from 960 to 800, max speed from 6.6 to 6.4, increase far penetration from 220 to 230, range from 50 to 55, and move the 1s wind-down to reload time so it can be decreased with veterancy*.
*((5.2-5.6)+1) to (6.2-6.6), vet 3: ((3.64-3.92)+1) to (4.34-4.62)
This is basically an indirect buff to jacksons... no tnx
I don't know why people are using the Sherman as a counter, even the Scott struggles vs ATGs and one mistake and you're up in flames.
Sherman is not a brumbar or AVRE
You'll realize sooner or later that it's because sherman's and Scott's have good mobility and weapon profiles to kill infantry that makes them viable to kill ATG (no one ever said they counter their counter, that's BS) same as HMGs and assault squads.
I got to 58 Ost in 3s easily and I either go Elephant or double StuGG. I have built like 2 Panthers the last 50 games as Ostheer. StuGG for life.
Completely agreed with SJ. I am not a pro player yet double StuGG perform much better and break the mith of "Axis require less micro"
I even got amazing results with 2 stugs + CPz4. I would really like to have it 20% armor reduction again, only for the player that owns them to see them really shining.
I would say that allied factions have a bigger forgivness trheshold, even when most of their armor has less durability, their infantry + arty harassment is much better. Very, vveryy roughly speaking