Profile of Doomlord52

I don't think the problem with the Panther is the Panther.

I think it's the IS-2 and Tiger.

Consider the following:

• The IS-2 beats the Panther in a 1v1 battle.
  
• The Tiger is a better heavy tank counter than the Panther.

Therefore, if you're playing Soviet and you pick an IS-2 doctrine, your opponent's overwhelming best answer in 1v1 is a Tiger doctrine. Going Tiger gives you 160 more HP, a load of anti-infantry firepower, and going Panther doesn't work.

What if we changed that?

What if we cut the IS-2 and Tiger to 960 HP, same as the Panther and Pershing? The Panther can then take on the IS-2 in a one-on-one battle, and the Tiger stops being a better pick than it.

Now that the IS-2 can be countered nondoctrinally, there's less incentive to go IS-2 every game.
Now that the Tiger isn't a better heavy counter than the Panther, there's less incentive to go Tiger every game.

This is a pretty accurate description of the problem, imo; but the solution only works in an OST/Sov vacuum. Reducing the IS2/Tiger HP is a good idea, but it means they'll be even more vulnerable to TDs, which makes '60 range TDs' an even more optimal choice.

As you pointed out, the reason the panther is 'bad', is because the Tiger is simply a better choice in every situation. I'd like to expand this idea to the other factions; the reason medium tanks/light TDs are bad is because 60 TDs are a better choice.

For USF and UKF, and to a lesser extent Sov and OKW, the best choice in essentially every situation is "60 range TD".

Enemy going for a medium tank? Get a 60 range TD and hard-counter it.
Enemy going for an AI focused tank? 60 range TD.
Enemy going for a heavy? 60 range TD.
Enemy going for a 'premium' medium? 60 range TD.
Enemy going for literally anything on wheels/tracks? 60 range TD.

Additionally, since those four factions have very strong infantry, they usually don't need the AI power offered by mediums, or already have some AI focused LVs built(Flak HT, etc.). As a result, there's really no reason not to go for a 60-range TD, as it shuts down any vehicle-based AI your opponent might go for.

To come back to your suggestion, as a result of all this, reducing the HP on heavy tanks in hopes of making the Panther a better choice will essentially do nothing, as other TDs will only be made even better choices in essentially every situation.

Or the can simply follow my suggestion move PH to Major and Scott to doctrine.

That doesn't really address the problem, it just delays/hides it. Double PH and double scotts will still be available, and will still impose an absurd micro-tax on OST players for relatively little micro on the USF player's side.

Few people been talking about the panther and it’s accuracy issues even with veterancy. Just realized that the medium buff of target size will nerf this against the panther which the panther doesn’t currently need. Please give the panther veterancy some kind of accuracy buff so it isn’t missing shots at 5 range. It’s absurd.

When stationary, the Panther should have 100% chance to hit at min range, and 70% chance to hit at max range, against the new 20-size mediums. This also doesn't take into account scatter "misses that hit".

In general, I really don't want to see the Panther be better against mediums; it's supposed to be OST's non-doc heavy counter. STUGs, Paks, and Schrecks exist to counter mediums, and do a really good job.

Hopefully the next patch can finally address this, and make the Panther and M36 the heavy counters they're supposed to be (and I guess to a lesser extent, the FF and SU85).

The answer is fairly simple. There is nothing wrong with OST perse it's just OKW is so much easier and more powerful why bother taking a chance on OST when you've got way more in your favor as OKW?

If OST is fine, and it's OKW that's OP; what's the explanation for OST's 37% win rate in WCS?

It would be nice to see toning down of "Mechanized Support" (guards + ISU) and "Jaeger Armor" (elephant with a scope) doctrines

Mechanized support have 'mark targer' on top of the bombing strike. So it can nuke both armor and arty.
Jaeger armor have recon on top of having spotting scopes and bombing strike, which it can use against allied arty and emplacements. You have a lot of armor? No problem I have elephant with a scope.
You have arty? No problem i have recon with bombing strike. It is kind of excessive.

Particularly these 2 doctrines are extremely toxic in team games and should not have a lot of A+ abilities in their arsenal.

TLDR: I think arty should counter long range heavies, but currently such doctrines have bombing strikes to deal with it and some of them even have recon on top of that.

+1

The two biggest "issues" (IMO) are the TDs in both docs, though. Mark-target and bombing strikes aren't too strong when combined (although, with ram, they are), nor is recon + stuka (that's in a lot of docs). However, a self-spotting Ele is just far too powerful, and the ISU could use some tweaks as well (stop deleting squads at range).