Yes, i'm saying the panther cannot counter the churchill even though it is a "heavy tank" and the panther according to many is supposed to "counter heavy tanks".
I think the PV can deal with it, but it will not do so cost effectively. You get a PV for mobility, HP and increased penetration compared to the alternative.
Churchill doesn't have extreme armor (240, +6 against OKW PIV) but it has a high HP pool (1400HP), which puts its in an awkward position between choosing either tank (PV or JPIV/Stug). On the contrary, you probably want the PV against the Crocodile/Avre which are 290 armor 1080HP.
Per comments above, the Stug penetration bonus would last for up to 4 shots, which is plenty.
M10 is doctrinal costs 80FU which is dirt cheap, but it can bounce shots on vet 0 OST P4 and it fights targets that commonly run about 230+ armour. It's more of a cheap unreliable tank destroyer that also takes a commander slot. It's decent for its cost as medium repellent and good for suicidal attacks on enemy rocket arty.
In other words allies can pick a cheap doctrinal TD that can fight axis stock vehicles, while Wehr would like to build stock cheap TD that can fight allied doctrinal heavies.
That's on perfect conditions on which the Stug can keep the target in sight and shoot non stop at vet2, after receiving the reload buff (only if the swap change i propose makes it).
The funny thing is that i had the M10/57mm AT gun in mind when changing the ability. The duration now is 10s, 1 shot, 100% pen buff, 5s disable. Which requires a reload cycle of 5s, for an effective 5s timeframe till vet3.
The M10/Jackson both last 25s. Jacksons give smaller pen/acc and +40dmg and the M10 gains 40% pen / 30% acc. The 57mm AT gun is 50% pen at 30s duration.
At 15s, it would only be able to shoot 2x times till it get RoF buffs. It COULD shoot 4x times with a really short time frame or more realistically 3 times.
+100% penetration for multiple shots might be a bit too much though, compared to similar abilities. +40-50% would be better.
What should be done with Stug E's vet 1 ability you think?
Giving it some thought, yeah 100% it's high, but that's what it currently is but only for 1 shot.
50% sounds reasonable (it should be around AP Jackson minus the damage), it depends on how many times the Stug should be able to fire. My point is, that people tend to overlook the penetration buff, cause it's forces a reload first to do a small impact disable.
Giving it +5s for a total of 15s, you could get around 2 shots with ample margin. At vet2 (if vet is swapped), you would be shooting 4 times.
I think we should make a poll on the vet 1 bonus being AP rounds because TWP is a literal piece of garbage. You'd rather fire normally because it takes forever to load. Relic/bal team nerfed it to shit and left it there.
You can get rid of the blind and main weapon disable and just extend the time it gives 100% penetration. It's already called HEAT shell.
Nope, they are better with lmg, how it's so hard to understand that they only reduced the sniping? DPS is the same , they now might need an extra shoot to kill a model but now with lmg they are better cause they don't overkill anymore
+ They are cheaper and beat volks at long range out of cover at 4 men and at all ranges in cover
You still fail to see why they were used as much prior the latest patch.
The sniping and performance with bolster is all the reason the faction was been used.
As i said before, maybe it's a lack of testing and adaptation to find a new way to play UKF, but not been able to understand why UKF is not as popular now, is not understanding why they were popular before.
Well, it could be another su-76, with a bit better at performance. Su has barrage and would be cheaper and comes earlier.
I don't get the victim card comment. I just feel that buffing the rifles, allied heavies, not nerfing the jackson (5 fuel is laughable), simply means that "wehr weak penetration" could be sth that only sounds crazy but describes well the general balance between the tanks we have now. Allied tanks sort of "pretend" to be weak but whan you look at their battlefield performance it is not the case.
Because complaining about isolated factors in a 1on1 manner, doesn't account for what other factions lack in other departments to account for those strengths.
OH has been weak and strong without needing a 60 TD on their stock repertoire for 6 years. I don't think this is what they need now or in the future.
I can see the Stug performance been buffed by swapping places on the vet 2 and 3. Replacing the armor increase for HP would make it really strong, something i would like to see tested before been implemented but not before seeing if the swapping vet is enough to improve the unit.
Heat shell AKA TWP, could see it's blinded and disabling component removed and allow the 100% pen buff to last longer (something people don't remember the ability do).
As for the other 2 units, pak-PV, they are fine. At most i could see them taking a look at PV vet, but that would break it more than anything else in the bigger picture of the game.
please do explain how now they are bad in attacking , they now cost less and have same dps , if not better with lmg
What made or break UKF was not the double LMG, but the performance with bolster. You now need Bolster + weapon unlock before they are as good as before.
The cost decrease has the same impact as the change with Volks. The reinforce cost hasn't change and the cost acquisition just represents like 50mp top through out the whole game (or less if you don't get IS wiped or you replace them with other infantry). The better DPS applies only at vet3 and is theoretical. You can dress it as much as you want, but the reality is that 5 model with Lee enfields doing 5 x 16 (80) was a stronger unit. Probably not in the raw total DPS output, but how it could reduce the damage received by killing models in the enemy squad.
The suppression buff on the Vickers, doesn't fix the problem with the unit itself. I'm sure you know why if we nerf the damage, it might actually be a better MG.
Mobility buff isn't going to make people use it way more. Same with other changes to Comet/FF.
It could be a problem to adapt or discover a new meta for UKF, but it seems that anything that UKF can do, USF can do it better at the moment (Rifles, MG, light vehicles, shock vehicles, real AI tank).
Well, I'm not. It could be aquired with vet, done through upgrade (similar to doctrine sherman paid with fuel and mp after last tech, for example). I don't understand why factions that have access to snares such as satchels and ability to equip any unit with hand held at don't have to face 60 range tank destroyers form ostheer side. Having buffed allied armour and not allowing ostheer something so basic is more "delusional".
If you want 60 range Stug, it will have to get a cost and performance increase to be a JPIV 2.0 or it would be made to be as obsolete in current meta Su76 with 120dmg and high rof.
Let's be realistic and suggest things that can actually be implemented and are reasonable to be made, instead of playing victim about how X faction doesn't have Y feature. Because that's a game which all factions can play.
The comparisons should never be "Allies vs OH", rather than each specific allied faction vs OH if that's the comparison you want to bring up.
0
Chukonoku
Ballrok
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
