I don't think that decreased cost of barrage make it popular. Problem as always in overall effectivness of unit. If you make barrage more user friendly (more accurate or more AOE) it could screw german infantry due to wipes and i don't think that this will be good in terms of balance and gameplay. SU-76 became a prey of soviet design - it trying to become good in any role, but fail, due to bad stats and more better units (Zis). It also don't have any chances in lategame - it means that it place in early-midgame, but as i previous said, these timeframes of games too short and SU-76 can't fit to it.
I recently saw Skippy game, where his team try to did heavy SU-76 spam - against 1 p4, 2-3 su-76 works, but when p4 2 or 3 or panther (or any another heavy) came to field, they light is off. While barrage quite effective vs blobs, SU-76 leaded to very later T4. And as result game was lost, because map pressure was lost and loses of su-76 leaded to huge fuel drain.
It's squishy enough, if we make it more fragile, how you supposed to play and what compensated this? In game only rocket artillery very fragile, but it's compensated very strong abilities to wipe enemy infantry and team weapons [...]
While rework would be an option, I think it's too late for COH2 to basically get a complete new non doc unit. Su76 will stay a light TD for the life cycle of the game.
The SU76 was quite OP as it performed well in AT and AI due to the barrage. Looking at thr stats, AT is still fine vs Ostheer, while its insufficient vs OKW. Can't do nuch about that unfortunately. But since the Su76 does not scale well into the late game anymore, ZiS is the better option. 75 FU for something scaling that badly isjust not worth it. So I assume it's best to make its AI and utility worth using it again. |
Su-76 barrage gets a 25% damage (iirc) increase is vet 2 and almost double the range buff of the zis at vet 3.
If you are asking about the TWP:
Pak: +900% penetration for 10 seconds. Hits disable weapons and movement for 5 seconds
Stug G: +100% penetration, will lock enemy vehicles turret temporarily and disable its main gun.
Su-76 is a very viable option against T3 unit but since T3 in many cases is not a viable option for Ostheer there is little reason to built SU-76.
The unit if performing fine for cost and is effective against it T3 units.
Well, then I think the barrages are still comparable since the functionality is not changed (barrage vs conditionally better barrage, while TWPs are timed snare vs negate offensive capabilities).
But these are very minor points, let's refocus.
However, the OST P4 was always a good tank in the last versions, Ostwind now has been patched back into the meta and it seems that also StuG has finally found a place, at least I've seen people building them every now and then quite effectively. I still see basically no one go SU76s when I play Axis. The problem is that it is only good vs OST in general and complete shite against OKW, since the OKW P4 leans heavily towards the premium tanks armorwise, so the SU76 ist unreliable. And against OST you're probably better off using a ZiS, since a freaking Ostwind can inflict sufficient damage (25% combined hit and pen chance at range 40) to your SU76 if caught even slightly offguard.
I think the AT capability of the SU76 is just not worth getting it due to better options. Buffing accuracy or pen on the other hand might screw Ostheer. If we want SU76 back in the meta (which it is not currently, as no one builds it), we should give back some utility. 20 mun barrage, as I said multiple times, is my suggestion. |
Su-76 barrage becomes superior to that of Zis with veterancy.
In addition comparing the Zis with Su-76 barrage is rather misleading. Its like claiming that pak has better TWP and that makes Stug redundant and thus Stug should be buffed.
Su-76 is a cost efficient unit that is better option if one choose not built T2.
Could you lease elaborateon your second point? Visually, they do pretty much the same, so I never thought about it if there were any drastic stat differences, since in game they behaved similar.
What are the differences between the two abilities?
The thing is that the SU67 is not a very viable option at the moment. It's not horrible, but there is little reason to build it due to other options. And since the other options are not deemed OP, SU67 could be overprized/underperforming.
The stuG was also not a horrible unit stat wise. The problem was that Allied TDs countered it heavily, so Ostheer usually relied on its PaK as it is more cost efficient.
The Su76 is by no means the most glaring problem of the game, but if there is interest to discuss it, why not. So we need to fiddle with small adjustments |
|
Whoops, then I had the wrong numbers on that one. My mistake. |
well centaur has 50 more armor and have 0 accuracy problem on the move for LV
they have about the same combat stats, with the Cromwell scarifying armor for speed and being better at mid and near range
ff is just as effective without muni sink, it has 200 damage not 160, for medium tanks is not that much unless us use any snare as at that point it becomes a 3 shoot unit (isntaed of 4) but from panther and bigger is around 1-2 less shoot needed to kill a tank
panther has lower armor for more hp, that's it, the pen is - 50 at all ranges but it still hit infantry, tho it comes with 45 range instead of 50 (but is fair cause it's only for at), btw the better ai is a meme it will beat panther AI in all but open road where infantry models are 4 meters from each other (an unlikely scenario these days)
well u are right, that's why u play 230 fu for tiger and is doctrinal, did u expect to be worse or the same as comet ?? 
FF has 160 up to vet 3, then it has 200 damage. So a medium tank will still be 4 shots, but at vet 3 you gain the possibility to kill the enemy with a snare. "3 shotting" is only possible if you upgrade with Tulips, then you need two shots and both tulips to hit.
EDIT: Wrong numbers, FF does 200 standard damage; thanks Shadowlink
I think the "Comet has bad AI" stems from its unreliability. When it hits, it can hit quite big and wipe 2 models with ease. But from my game experiences it misses very often and hits nothing at all, which is very frustrating for a not very cheap tank. To be honest, these are ingame observations, I don't have the scatter and AOE values at hand at the moment. |
Comes out fast, I personally use it vs mg to makes infantry come in suppressed or to run away as it comes out very fast and last long
Someone ballsy even use it on reverse to avoid at gun fire
Honestly on retreat is the only way I ever used it. Mainly because I forget that it exists when I attack. I just use it as a panic button when I've already given up on my Churchill |
There might be a few niches where it's useful (camo HMGs for example) but usually units ambushing from camo don't want to fire at max range. That means they're on Hold Fire anyway.
I get your point. But there also are situations where I leave my camouflaged unit on the front and need to manage something in the base. Because I'm not a top level player, I often can't immediately react if an enemy squad runs into them. Although they would win the fight easily, they don't fire back and lose.
Of course that's a micro issue, but if you apply the same logic consistently, there should be no "vehicle prio" function as well.
Apart from that, I don't want my regular infantry to fire their salvo at the 222 that pushes up with the Panzergrenadiers until I manually reassign the targets, just as I don't want my AT gun to fire at the Grenadiers. |
You probably could, but I doubt it'd be very useful.
Snipers wouldn't use it: if you're hiding your sniper you're on Hold Fire, and if you're A-moving it you actually want it to stop and shoot vehicles.
If it didn't, it'd walk straight towards them.
So what about all the camo squads that I also mentioned in the first post? And AI speacialist vehicles?
I mean in the case of the Brit-SNiper it kinda makes sense to engage vehicles since he sports an AT-rifle but I didn't even know that the Wehrmacht and Soviet snipers are actively engaging vehicles like wtf 
Even then I don't want my Brit sniper to fire on vehicles all the time. He often does not even pen and I don't want him to reveal himself if a P4 attacks, because he could get killed easily.
|
|
Well, as the title says:
Is it possible at all and if so, how difficult would it be for the mod team to implement a prioritize infantry ability?
I hate that snipers and camouflaged infantry open up on medium tanks like total retards.
The argument that there is "hold fire" does not count, since I don't see anyone raging about the "prioritize vehicles" ability, which is the same thing. |
Removing the Churchill's smoke is a must . There is really no excuse for a unit with so much HP to have a smoke ability and to actually be destroyed at all must solely rely on attack ground .
Honest question:
How often is the ability used and how quickly does it cover a retreating Churchill?
At least at my rank, I never saw a Brit player use this smoke, so I don't know. I used it sometimes, but I'm not sure if this was really what made my Churchill survive.
The ability was actually meant as a offensive ability to cover assaulting infantry, it also makes the tank even slower and enables more shots for the enemy, even if these are only ground shots. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
