|
At 65 fuel, I think it would start to overlap with the t-34 too much. They're both AI tanks, and at that point 20 fuel wouldn't be to much to wait for.
I think the fuel should stay the same, but the potential moving-while-shooting nerf might put it at a good place. I'd like to see that implemented (if it indeed will be) before further balancing of it.
Basically what Tuvok posted as I was typing lol |
|
@wooof
Maybe it's just me, but yeah, Panthers are one of the biggest headaches I run across. Unless I have 3 SU-85's ready for a Panther rush, they pretty much just stroll in and I can't do shit to them. As a matter of fact, a couple days ago I had 6 t-34's (yes, 6, I was popcapped and spammed the shit out of them. Seemed like a good idea at the time). VP's were ticking down and we needed to push. Germans had a few bunkers, so my AT guns were otherwise occupied with them at the main entrance point as my t-34's flanked in from the side, catching the 3 Panthers off guard. They reverse as my t-34 shots bounce off of the Panthers, and in the end I killed one Panther and lost 6 t-34's.
I just about punched my monitor at that point. Lesson was learned that day- anything but SU-85 spam or heavy tanks in team games is bound for loss, simply because of Panthers. At least it's that way for me in 90% of games I have. Almost every time, Panther spam. And no amount of AT guns/Guards with button can stop the shit.
Granted, this problem seems to be much less of a problem in 1v1 and 2v2, but I really don't want to just exclude 3v3+ in my playing. I like some variety, ya know? |
the panthers gun in worse in every way against infantry. more distance scatter, more angle scatter and less AOE. all of these combine to make the panther hit infantry far less often than the su85 does.
the only advantages it has are its turret and mgs. i wouldnt exactly say pathers kill infantry well though.
It might snipe infantry a little less effectively, but it's still too good against infantry/AT guns. Seriously, what infantry counters a Panther? At least Germans have PGrens against SU-85's (not that they're THAT reliable against them and it's muni heavy, but at least they damage and force off SU-85's). If the Soviet player went t3 or doesn't otherwise happen to have a couple SU-85's sitting around, a Panther can more or less just waltz in and laugh at the AT guns and Guard troops bouncing their shots off of it. It may not kill infantry that fast, but it still trumps whatever "counter" should exist for it.
Mines are a nice option, but what if you need to push into the Panthers? Not gonna help you there, that's for sure. |
|
This isn't just a problem with SU-85, it's the same with Panthers. I agree, dedicated AT should not do much against infantry; they should be forced to carry AI support with them, as in theory, infantry should be their counter. However, look at (especially in team games) Panther spam. If Germans save up for 3-4 Panthers between even 1 or 2 players, it's pretty much GG, because of how little their "infantry" counters do to them, and how well the Panthers kill infantry. Guards can't counter Panthers to any extend like PGrens can counter SU-85's, and it seriously takes like 3 AT guns to take on one Panther. Yeah, they're expensive, but they shouldn't be as effective against infantry as they are.
In a nutshell, yeah I think AT shouldn't snipe infantry like it does. But this isn't limited to SU-85's, it's a problem on both factions. |
As per the title - they need to be as survivable at least as the guards infantry or their recrew needs to go down to 30 per man. Currently they die as fast as engineers, its absolute bullshit to have a squad that expensive be the weakest infantry in game. The near unkillable shock troops re crew is no where near the 45 mp asking price.
It's not like they have armor or mow down anything short of shock troopers while advancing, or anything. They'll only go down like engineers if you throw them against a KV-8 or something that would naturally hard counter infantry anyways. Weakest infantry in the game? Right.... |
|
I kind of agree with this. I've had many 3v3 or 4v4 games that would have been awesome games, if it wasn't for one person in a lane who sat there for a minute trying to figure out what to do, then building like 4 combat engineers to rush into enemy MG's, not retreating as they do so.
It's understandable that new players want to play with others, but it's kinda courtesy to have at least a basic understanding of the game before jumping into automatch with players. I played at least 15-20 games with the computer (sometimes even through Automatch with AI) before I tried playing against live people.
Not having the best micro/complete understanding of all the units, doctrines etc. is acceptable and takes time to master. Not knowing that your starting unit can build something isn't, and should be learned away from other players to avoid ruining their matches. |
|
I don't think t34's should be changed or swapped out. They are a great early game shock unit, and can deal with tanks pretty decently if the soviet player takes advantage of the many, many combined armed tools they have. Between having better mines, the snare of guards, and mergeable field guns, the t34 should have enough support to handle p4's. The only problem is when heavy tanks hit the field, and the soviet player has gone t3. Against a heavy tank though, a t34 is (understandably) almost worthless, which is why in the thread about cheaper backteching for soviets, I said that su85's should eventually become viable late game, even after t3 was chosen early game. |
|
I rather like this idea. I can't tell you how many times I wished that I hadn't made the "mistake" of going to t1 when german tanks hit the field, or going t3 when a heavy tank shows it's face. Early game, the whole choosing 2 buildings works well I believe, but late game sometimes you need a bit more versatility, and as people have said, the soviet is punished pretty hard for going for say t3 and t4.
I think that over the course of the game, it should be viable to have both t34's/halftracks and su85's, and so far the OP's suggestion is the best one i've seen yet. |
Need to be careful with the nerf, or oorah +/- molotov will take the cake.
Hopefully an HMG nerf will promote the first few units being grenadiers, to encourage the establishment of a base army before "support" teams come onto the field. In this case, oorah/molotovs won't be so bad as grenadiers can cut down conscripts as they rush in/dodge molotov easier. Also, it has already been a bit harder to use the combo early game because it now costs 25 munitions every time you use it (not a big deal later, but in the first engagement or two that's pricy). Wish they would increase the cost of all MG's so they come onto the field a little later, but we'll see what the devs can do. |
|
|
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
