In order to get back to the main topic and also to weigh in to the discussion with more numbers:
While I haven't been able to generate any statistically meaningful in-game data yet (obviously), I've run some theoretical simulations to estimate how the incoming changes to the AOE profiles impact the anti infantry performance of the affected heavy tanks (details on the methodology can be found here).
The comparison is based on the number of shots (S2K) and required time (T2K) to kill a full-health, 6-man squad in either "wide", "stacked" or "clumped" formation (Fig 1) at ranges 5, 20 and 40 m.
Fig 1: Formations used in the simulation, numbers below each image indicate average (AV), minimum (Min) and maximum (Max) distance between entities
The resulting average numbers for S2K (Fig 2) and T2K (Fig 3) over 5,000 iterations for the live and WBP-versions of the Tiger, IS-2 and Pershing, as well as the King Tiger and KV-2 for reference can be seen below.
Fig 2: Shots required to kill a full-health, 6-man squad.
Fig 2: Time required to kill a full-health, 6-man squad.
Expectedly, the S2K or T2K values show significant dependence on the squad spacing and range. However, and more important for the actual discussion, you can clearly see that the effect of the AOE changes on the overall anti-inf performance of the Tiger (as well as IS-2 and M26) is rather limited, and the tanks will be nowhere near as "neutered" by these changes as people suggest.
The actual magnitude (see Table 1) is in the range of only 5-10%, and both Pershing and IS-2 seem to be impacted more by the WBP than the Tiger, in particular for more "clumped-up" formations.
| Clumped | Stacked | Wide |
| Tiger | 5.3 | 6.9 | 5.2 |
| IS-2 | 7.0 | 4.7 | 4.9 |
| Pershing | 11.1 | 10.4 | 8.1 |
Table 1: Percentage of T2K increase for WBP-versions of Tiger, IS-2 and Pershing depending on squad formation
TLDR: Tiger will still be going strong against infantry in the upcoming patch
But, are you using the correct scatter values? |
Don't play 4v4 with randoms if you want to have a solid experience.
I've had 4v4 games where at the 12 minute mark, I still had an army but 2 of my teammates had a combined army count of 5 units. Yet they didn't want to surrender, eventhough it was obvious that we were going to lose. I'd rather not be held hostage by these types of players so I don't agree with your proposition.
I know thats the big problem in 4v4, but it also happens in 2v2 as well. |
|
Imagine this, you feel like its your lucky day and you do a 4v4 or 3v3 or 2v2 automatch pvp with randoms but, it goes horribly wrong when one of you team m8s gets bugspat/network syn error/ threw all his units and he drops just 10mins into the game. While the rest of your team are doing great, now you lose cuz of this bad team m8.
Simple fix for this kinda situations:
The person who drops within ~15mins into a game, gets a 'Defeat' in his leaderboards. While the rest of the players on his team gets nethier a victory nor defeat. But the opposing team (not the dropper's team) will get a 'Victory' however only get a bare minimum rank points in the leaderboards table.
This way the dropper's rank gets lower and the chances are he will be playing with players at his new low rank level. Everyone else dont have to deal with that dropper guy in their next few games. Hence, very little droppers. |
After testing the new Tiger---> I think the AOE and veterancy nerfs are fine, but I don't know why the Tank Commander ability was removed on top of nerfing AOE + veterancy. The change is very very weird and counter-intuitive. It just makes no sense at all that you can upgrade the KT with it but not the Tiger. Meanwhile you can also upgrade the P4 with the tank commander? 90% of the player base will not get why this was done. This change needs to be deleted IMO. Tiger is fine after AOE+veterancy nerfs, no need for this awkward change.
Thats what the mod team have always got wrong about nerfing a current meta unit.
They alway go nerf + more nerf = unit being useless. |
Reminder that mod team = modding team and it's not equal to moderation team on coh2.org.
So i don't know what to tell u 
my whole life has been a lie  |
KT is borderline between a heavy and super heavy. By having more HP and dmg as well.
Same with Pershing been borderline a heavy.
So are we going to test this new idea proposed by @Kurobane in this patch?
Cuz it looks promising way to deal with the heavies solution. |
Personally I feel the best way to balance all of the heavy tanks is to give them ammo switching rounds like the Sherman. AP Rounds for Anti Tank, and High Explosive Rounds for Infantry. This way Heavy Tanks cant solo entire armies and must choose what target they must be good against and promote the usage of combined arms.
Wont work for all heavies like Elephant & J-Tiger B. Unless we want them to be like ISU-152 kinda role? Hmm
Sounds not too bad. This will make esp elephant a bit more useful against infantry.
Maybe add it to the patch preview for testing? @Hannibal  |
IMO the tiger is fine, its the 9CP(which has been fixed) and panzer commander plus Tiger commander that is the problem.
Yea that is the simple problem but they are over-doing the solution. Just move it to CP12 or later and remove vet-2 scatter bonus. Also the panzer command bonus.
Thats it. |
Shouldn't the tiger be good at... Something?
Yea that's my point. It now going to come very late and be bad at the same time.
That's why I suggested to move it to CP 12 or later but don't nerf AOE. |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWHuFBpHskI
^ Thats a detailed demonstration of the patch and the tiger new nerfs is shown at 1min 40s.
Compare that with IS2 and Pershing (in the video), i think it is a bit too much. I would say just remove the Vet2 scatter bonus and move it to CP12 or later. That will fix it. |
Australia
Relic Entertainment
