Profile of Toxicfirebal

Jump back to quoted post12 Jun 2020, 09:19 AMPorygon

Walking stuka? check
Katyusha? check
Calliope? check

Just like the COH1 Stuart shotgun but with crazy range, without warning.
You called that fun?

Jump back to quoted post14 May 2020, 22:21 PMStein Grenadier

Methinks it would be better for it to be an M3 call in HT with Guards inside and give it some niche ability like the Ost 250s.

Fits with the theme. Makes it unique. Justifies the price. Doesn't change anything else in the doctrine. Which imo, is iffy for various reasons.

M2HB Browning is functionally a better DshK if you allow soviets to get their mitts on it. All the benefits of DshK sans the sprint, with a more generous arc, similar suppression and damage, and more importantly, a 6-man crew. Thematically works, yes, but removes the tradeoff between the Browning and Dshk, for balance reasons.

Jump back to quoted post15 Mar 2020, 01:30 AMLago

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.