I sincerely would like to, but of course it exceeds a real match possibilities and of course it would mean i am playing against ez-bots.
But dont misread me, i never said a stug goes down faster than a su85, that was someone else putting words in my mouth.
My point was and always will be. Since solo 1v1 a stug gets bullied with T70 (sidenote, i never ment to destroy, to bully is to mock and hit without retaliation) like a su85 with a puma, there are no real chances for the foremost to fight back. In a real scenario both units will retreat or hopefully last enough to get help. TTK and Pen/Armor were some of the answers back but both far off the point i was making. If i were asking "what color is this?" the aswer was like "I dont like apple". This kind of logic. And finally i was ready to continue the discussion about a real situation, but some people prefer to disrespect others and attack their persona rather their arguments. Pityful attitude IMO.
My quote back on "good luck retreating" was referring that a T70 having superior speed is able to keep up with the retreating stug. Some might add that screwing the pathfinding can help to steal some time, but again i never stated i was able to do such magic trick.
Again someone else is throwing dirt at my face and puts words i never said.
Added: Thanks doomlord52 for the detailed stats. I still lack of experience to gather those data reliably and fast enough to answer back in time.
The main point of complaint was that your example is unrealistic. Almost every turreted vehicle above the speed of a KT can drive behind a casemate and mostly keep out of the cone of fire. Matter of fact is that your T70 is way to expensive to drive behind a StuG to take shots at it, because you gain extremely little in terms of damage that you do but expose your T70 to high danger from supporting units and a lot of micro you have to invest to dodge those units and avoid a hit during retreat from the StuG. The scenarios in which somebody will rightfully decide to do this are sparse.
The Puma on the other hand has enough potential to use it for a dive and the smoke to get out of there. One of the purposes of this vehicle is flanking other vehicles, which can't be said about the T70.
Everyone got what you meant, but this does not mean that your example can make a point. Your point was "vehicle one can drive behind vehicle two and can't be shot". Yes, but for what purpose?
With this logic I could also say that the USF Flak half/T70/Stuart/AEC track could "bully" a Jagdtiger, ELefant or technically even a King Tiger due to the slow turret "in the same way" a Panther could bully an ISU. Yes, it can drive behind it. Does this comparison make much sense? No, it does not.
Now, back to the Jackson:
Armor nerf (10-30 armor) might be a decent semi-nerf, I think that's what the discussion here and in the previous thread mostly agrees on. What exactly is the reason that Jackson has also such high speed actually? Is it the unreliable ATG that USF has so the Jackson has to cover a larger area? Making it a bit slower could also be a possibility. |
Puma takes out an SU85 77.4% faster than a T70 can take out a STuG.
This assumes perfect flanks and no other support, as it gets WAY more complicated with those factors.
T70 vs. Stug close
Stug armor 140/70, 560hp
target size: 20
T70 reload: 2.43
Pen close: 50
damage: 40
accuracy near: 0.05
moving mult 0.5
50% chance to hit while moving (at close)
71.4% chance to pen vs. rear (at close
35.71% chance to damage vs. rear, at close
560hp/40dmg = 14 hits = 39.2 hits on avg. to destroy (with acc) = 39 reloads = 94.77sec average
Puma vs. Su85 close
su85 armor: 140/70, 640hp
target size: 18
puma reload: 4.11
pen close: 160
damage: 120
accuracy close: 0.05
moving mult: 0.05
45% chance to hit while moving (at close)
100% chance to pen vs. rear (at close)
45% chance to damage vs. rear, at close
640hp/120dmg = 5.33 hits = 6 hits (quantized dmg) = 13.33 hits on avg. to destroy (with acc) = 13 reloads = 53.43sec avg
To be honest the hit chances don't mean too much because of collision hits which (also had to learn this) make the natural hitchance completely useless. But if we assume every shot to hit it's about 25 sec for the Puma vs SU85 against 48 sec for the T70 to kill a StuG. |
Post numbers or GTFO.
Real case scenarios show that both units gets displaced because they are outplayed. The same way for each of both
And next time quote the whole post, i explicitely said, i you want a real case scenario just ask it.
Mr Literall semantics wathever the limit
The T70 'bullying' a StuG from the rear armor is by far no 'real case scenario' mate. You probably won't really pen more than 2-3 shots before your T70 gets snared and killed by supporting units.
By any means, this whole diacussion is absolutely tidious and misleading. Can we go back to Puma vs Jackson kow? |
|
If Distrofio can post a replay in which he destroys a full health StuG with a T70 in a shorter time before a Puma destroys a SU85 against a equally skilled opponent, he will get one friendly digital handshake from me. The challenge is now officially up. |
If the Jackson fires 10 shots (including the starting freebie) in 63 seconds, isnt the reload time 7 seconds, not 9?
Stats on coh2db seem to put the time between shots between 6 and 6.6 seconds.
Hannibal did some testing a few pages ago, and came to the conclusion that the Puma fires once every 4.33 seconds, and the M36 every 9 seconds. This is only 5% off your numbers for the puma, which seems reasonable, but 27% off for the M36, which is a lot.
That said, I did forget to remove the first reload, as you pointed out. However, this just shifts things more in favor of the M36.
/edit
I just realized there's some flawed math in Hannibal's post. 10 shots, or 9 reloads, in 63 seconds means 63/9... which means the reload is 7 seconds. Not really sure where 9 came from.
My own testing showed 11 shots (10 reloads) in ~68 seconds, which gives a reload of 6.8 seconds. This still doesn't line up with your (or CoH2DB's) numbers, but it's closer.
I also tested the Puma, which gave 11 shots (10 reloads) in 42 seconds, which works out to a 4.2 second reload. Again, not exactly your numbers, but very close.
I mean "core concept" changes. The M36 was changed from low RoF/High damage to Medium RoF/Medium damage because it used to do absurdly high 'alpha' damage, which was a real problem when in groups (or against LVs). I can't think of a time when a change was made, justified thoroughly, and then reverted entirely (i.e. full 180) after years of use. There just hasn't been an argument as to why changing the M36 back to low RoF/High damage makes sense.
You both are absolutely right on this, I must have mixed it up somehow. I'll edit the original post.
That mistake's on me!
|
|
To be honest you should probably try the Steel Division/Wargame series. They have exactly this implemented.
Implementing this feature would mean that vision is greatly increased as well, since all units should see further than they detect enemies. This would drastically change the core of CoH though, since much bigger maps were required. |
back to the topic, would a lot change if the Jackson would receive a slight armor nerf? Hannibal so basically p4 bouncing shots < puma to strong vs Jackson?
Not sure what you want to say with that. But keep in mind that we are still talking about reliable penetration. P4 has a 84-96% pen chance against the Jackson, so bouncing a shot is more bad luck once in a while. That still a 50% chance to pen 4/4 shots at max range and a 65% chance to pen 4/4 at mid range. We are talking about the same pen chances which people use to argue that the Panther were shite and needs an armor buff because a dedicated tank destroyer will pen with 85-90% chance (at vet 0).
Just to put this into perspective. Shadow posted the values, but apparently no one thought much about what they actually mean.
and if your fighting pumas sherman pak and bazookas arent valid options? (once heavy meta is fixed once and for all)
Of course they are valid. But as I said, Puma needs 13 secs if it's lucky. That's the only issue I see. That's why my point so far is that the best approach is to probably get ~10 armor off the Jackson. That gives P4 more than enough chance to pen next to every shot while Puma will probably not cause much issues. |
To be fair, Puma hits sh*t on the move and Jackson has more range. What is that scenario? If Puma killes Jackson the OKw pöayer was simply the better player using hotkeys for acc. and timing/tactic for the hunt.
Back to StuG. My version could also be nerfed, the factor is simply the 60 range mark you need to balance everything over 1vs1, because micro-investing is simply way worse for Ostheer than e.g. Alliis. So needed skill for fractions become fair.
Don't know about the moving accuracy of the Jackson. Is it 0,75 like the Sherman?
Apart from that, Puma could miss one shot and even then killing times are equal. If the Jackson misses a hit, it would probably be a dead Jackson since the Puma gets two shots in between.
I also just calculated that the Puma has a decent chance against a Jackson that got hit only once which happens frequently in a battle. Also the range difference is 10, and since during an assault there might be valuable targets than a Puma and given Pumas top speed of 7,2 this should take only 2 seconds to bridge if you assault a standing Jackson.
I'm not saying that a Puma can solo a Jackson, but it could solo a Jackson that got hit only once, especially since it profits more from it's vet in this setup. And I this could lead to an unfair advantage.
Puma already has a role. Rather make JP4 great again. |
Everyone please be aware of the stats you're posting. I've seen multiple people say it takes 2 shots to kill a puma. The puma has 400 HP and the jackson now deals 160 damage per shot making it a 3 shot kill. HVAP, the jackson vet 1 ability can raise the damage to 200 which can make it a 2 shot kill. Hannibal I know you corrected this a previous post, thank you.
As someone previously posted, it takes 6 penetrating hits to kill a jackson, not 4. 4 would've been from the old jackson HP value of 480. The jackson now has 640 HP.
He might've been talking with the Vet3 bonus of Puma in mind. In which case, Puma has 160 damage and can kill Jackson with 4 shots. Considering the difference between Jackson and Puma timings, it's realistic to assume Puma will be Vet3 before Jackson comes.
The scenario I was describing is that the Jackson got hit once during a fight, which happens very frequently, and then OKW dives a Puma to kill it. I see that the second time I wrote "Jackson got one hit", which was meant as "received one hit" and is a bit ambiguously phrased.
|
|
EDIT2:
First version said Jackson had ö sec reload due to miscalculation it's actually ~7
This lower TTK for Puma to 14 and for Tiger to 28/21.
Okay so short test:
First off: Yes, Puma needs 3 shots.
Puma fires 10 shots in about 39 seconds at approximately 2/3 of it's max range (so 30-35 m, forgot to test on the range map). This means it has an effective reload speed of 4,33 seconds.
Jackson fires 10 shots in ~63 seconds at the same range, giving a reload of 9 seconds.
So in the scenario described above (Jackson got 1 hit, Puma dives) Jackson would need 3 shots = 14 seconds to kill the Puma, Puma needs 4 shots = 13 seconds to kill the Jackson assuming all shots hit (which is actually hard to calculate on the move). If the Jackson is still on reload at the beginning of the dive, it obviously takes a bit longer for the Jackson.
[EDIT2 although the argument is not as strong anymore, I still think the core is valid] This is what I was talking about in the beginning. The Puma seems to have a decent chance against a low armor Jackson. Combined with the smoke to break the auto targeting of the Jackson and potentially evade a snare during the dive this could become too common.
Comparing this to the similar setup I mentioned before (Jackson vs Tiger, also about double the fuel price):
Let's say the Tiger was already damaged by 2 shots, so it's down to 70% health which is about the same as if Jackson eats 1 shot. Jackson still needs 5 shots to kill the Tiger (4 if the Tiger got additionally snared), which would take 28(/21) seconds. Tiger would need 4 shots to kill the Jackson (don't know the time here). [EDIT2: argument also less string but the core is still valid] But the 28/21 secs alone give plenty of time to react for the Axis player. There's no smoke or something else to avoid a snare. In this scenario, your Tiger must have overextended heavily.
In the Jackson/Puma scenario? Honestly not that much. 13 seconds can be over quickly if your riflemen are not instantly in the perfect position to snare or your ATG is already on the target. Plus a good smoke could avoid a whole shot worth of damage.
Side note:
Timings obviously change with veterancy, although Jackson has an official reload time of 4,675 seconds while the wind up/down does not get affected by the vet. Puma has 3,85 reload time and thereby the majority of the time between shots will be affected by vet.
EDIT:
Tiger fires 10 shots in 48 seconds; reload = 5,33 seconds; time to kill full health Jackson = 16 seconds. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
