[UKF, OST][ALL modes] Comet armor

189101113

Comments

  • #362
    2 years ago
    @Kurfürst you gorgeous bastard that is brilliant!
    @AceOfTitanium you know that the p4 can bounce the ass of a panther too right?
  • #363
    2 years ago
    @thedarkarmadillo and that doesnt make any sense but isnt as urgent of an issue as the panzer 4 boucing from the rear of a comet because how many times do you see a p4 going against a panther?
  • #364
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    A tank being fast and having good armor,is OP? You mean the panther? Cause the panther is like that, and no one thinks it's OP.

  • #365
    2 years ago
    AceOfTitaniumAceOfTita… Posts: 195
    edited December 2016

    @MCMartel said:
    A tank being fast and having good armor,is OP? You mean the panther? Cause the panther is like that, and no one thinks it's OP.

    Yes the panther is supposed to have good frontal armor but weaker side and rear armor and thus be vulnerable to allied tanks. Not to mention that the panther has lower RoF.

  • #366
    2 years ago

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    @Kurfürst you gorgeous bastard that is brilliant!
    @AceOfTitanium you know that the p4 can bounce the ass of a panther too right?

    except the Churchill used to have much more armor and if im not mistaken, people complained.

  • #367
    2 years ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,991

    Hm... that would put the Comet at 240 armour. Could work.

  • #368
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,032

    240 armor and for good measure, give it 45 range... also fix its bloody broken vet rate. With the commander it vets up faster than a Panzer IV and will hit vet 3 before the Tiger reaches vet 2 (remember - the critical vet for the extra range on the main gun). This doesn't even take in to account the extra 10% bulletin... As a trade off, buff the damage on the coax MG, leave the hull one alone though. This will give it just a minor bit of extra DPS to help it chew through infantry - which is fine now that it's less durable. It probably would behoove us to consider the penetration too. I've no problem with it penning everything up to and including a Tiger with ease but it should struggle with the Panther because duh - that's the hard counter.

    There. You've got a balanced, functional high DPS "smash your face in" tank with a clear weakness that still provides god tier utility from its vet abilities and will help Brits break through things.

  • #369
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    @AceOfTitanium said:

    @MCMartel said:
    A tank being fast and having good armor,is OP? You mean the panther? Cause the panther is like that, and no one thinks it's OP.

    Yes the panther is supposed to have good frontal armor but weaker side and rear armor and thus be vulnerable to allied tanks. Not to mention that the panther has lower RoF.

    Your claim was that high speed and high armor was OP, I showed it wasn't, simple.

  • #370
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,032

    @MCMartel said:

    @AceOfTitanium said:

    @MCMartel said:
    A tank being fast and having good armor,is OP? You mean the panther? Cause the panther is like that, and no one thinks it's OP.

    Yes the panther is supposed to have good frontal armor but weaker side and rear armor and thus be vulnerable to allied tanks. Not to mention that the panther has lower RoF.

    Your claim was that high speed and high armor was OP, I showed it wasn't, simple.

    Infantry killing utility. Now that's enough of that.

  • #371
    2 years ago
    WiderstreitWiderstre… Posts: 950
    edited December 2016

    There are some good ideas. But I think there are only two working ways: 

    I. Let brit choose between Comet or Firefly. Comet stays at it's current level and Churchill become a standard unit instead of Firefly.

    OR

    II. Nerf Comets range to 40 - 45 (also for its extra abilities) and make Tiger I be a non-doc unit in T4 (maybe with a little damage buff)

    2nd way would be the coolest, because it still looks stupid that there is a limit of 1 on such a poor unit as Tiger. Allii is full of tank hunter, where are the tanks too hunt? King?

    Maybe both

  • #372
    2 years ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951
    edited December 2016

    @Lazarus said:
    Infantry killing utility. Now that's enough of that.

    This, plus its high move accuracy means that it can actually use its high speed and armor together, where the Panther has to stop if it wants to hit what it's aiming for.

  • #373
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    Infantry killing is a seperate issue, and what would fit with the panther's modus operandi is if it had a higher fire on the move score, not better utility or ROF.

  • #374
    2 years ago

    @Beardedragon said:

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    @Kurfürst you gorgeous bastard that is brilliant!
    @AceOfTitanium you know that the p4 can bounce the ass of a panther too right?

    except the Churchill used to have much more armor and if im not mistaken, people complained.

    People complained about the version Churchill with the same armor as the Comet has now (290, reduced to 200, then upped to 240), while having twice the HP than the Comet (1600, reduced to 1400) AND firing a flamethrower a mix of Dragon Fire and Alien acid (massively nerfed in range and DPS), aka the Churchill Crocodile.

    I still think the having more HP then any tank part is outright stupid in the Churchill. It should have high armor and high immunity to many most AT threats, not immunity to flanking because low armor/high HP pool gives you just that. A slow, turtling tank that's gets penned all the time but doesn't care, while dumbly laughs at attempts of using things like flanking tactics. That thing is as frustrating for the player (who has to repair it all the time no matter what AT threat is there) as the opponent (who's frustrated by having the fight 'a tank-means-more HP' clone from Command and Conquer).

  • #375
    2 years ago
    There was a lot wrong with launch Brits that contributed to the churchill being too strong, things like the mentioned flame damage (on everything but especially the croc) and no cost heavy sappers (what was with that?) Or the centaur that wiped on contact, and the bofors that did/does the same. The current environment i think could accept a high armoured churchill again (maybe give it high armour in friendly territory to enforce the defensive nature of it?)
  • #376
    2 years ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,991
    edited December 2016

    I think giving the normal chrichill high armour would be ok. However, the Croc and the Avre should remain as they are, perhaps even get some lower durability still because they are otherwise far too potent.

    Alternatively I could see all Chruchill variants get an armour buff BUT a HP decrease. The regular version could then go and have 290 armour and 1280 hp, while the AVRE and Croc could have 290 armour but only 1040 hp.

  • #377
    2 years ago
    AceOfTitaniumAceOfTita… Posts: 195
    edited December 2016

    The churchill tank should have high armor comparing with the firepower of medium tanks but weaker/alright armor comparing with the firepower of heavy tanks. The AVRE should be the churchill that has less armor from all the other variants.

  • #378
    2 years ago

    @MCMartel said:
    A tank being fast and having good armor,is OP? You mean the panther? Cause the panther is like that, and no one thinks it's OP.

    YES due the fact it can go around AT guns kill them and snipe infantry squads from far away. panthers have good armor and speed but you don see a panthers squad wiping infantry units like the Comet does if panthers had the same AI performance as comets you would see allies players crying for nerf.

  • #379
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,641

    @Generick said:

    @MCMartel said:
    A tank being fast and having good armor,is OP? You mean the panther? Cause the panther is like that, and no one thinks it's OP.

    YES due the fact it can go around AT guns kill them and snipe infantry squads from far away.

    There isn't a singular generalist tank in game which can't do that. In fact, axis and USF tanks have advantage here, because they don't need to rely on scatter alone due to all the MGs.

    panthers have good armor and speed but you don see a panthers squad wiping infantry units like the Comet does if panthers had the same AI performance as comets you would see allies players crying for nerf.

    Panther is anti tank specialist-if it doesn't move on threads, its not a tank, therefore panther will be of limited use against it.

    Panther is mobile anti tank gun which can kill some infantry with MGs.

    Comet is a generalist tank, which is between mediums like P4 and heavies like Tiger in everything, durability, cost and firepower.

    You're comparing apples to potatoes.

  • #380
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited January 2017

    @Katitof said:
    There isn't a singular generalist tank in game which can't do that. In fact, axis and USF tanks have advantage here, because they don't need to rely on scatter alone due to all the MGs.

    panthers have good armor and speed but you don see a panthers squad wiping infantry units like the Comet does if panthers had the same AI performance as comets you would see allies players crying for nerf.

    Panther is anti tank specialist-if it doesn't move on threads, its not a tank, therefore panther will be of limited use against it.

    Panther is mobile anti tank gun which can kill some infantry with MGs.

    Comet is a generalist tank, which is between mediums like P4 and heavies like Tiger in everything, durability, cost and firepower.

    You're comparing apples to potatoes.


    @Katitof said:
    And you need around twice the time to kill panther vs the time you need to kill SU-85.

    As I've said, panther trades DPS for durability and maneuverability.

    SU-85 is designed to use its long range and never be in charms way, panther is designed to slug it out.

    And I will use SU-76 vs panther as an example, because while AT oriented, panther is still a tank and still has limited capabilities of engaging infantry, unlike every single other TD in game, I'm also pointing out cost difference relations vs possible targets.

    If it makes you feel better then sure, go with StuG-G vs IS-2 AND vs Pershing(both equally priced heavy tanks) and with SU-76 vs Tiger(which got the same price as the two allied ones ones).

  • #381
    2 years ago
    KurfürstKurfürst Posts: 289

    @Katitof said:
    Comet is a generalist tank, which is between mediums like P4 and heavies like Tiger in everything, durability, cost and firepower.

    Not everything. It has the practically armor and arguably the firepower of the Tiger I, but with a reduced cost and higher speed, and thanks to that, generally higher survivability.

    Something's gotta give, preferably armor.

  • #382
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,641
    edited January 2017

    @Vipper still on semantics?
    Feel free to create a thread in general discussion, there I'll explain to you how anti tank specialist can still be a tank without exploding anyones mind. I'll explain with details and examples how generalist tanks are tanks and how specialist tanks are still tanks too without derailing this thread(just like anti tank infantry is still infantry).

    @Kurfürst there is considerable difference in penetration, Tiger shoots faster, got larger AoE and better AoE profile.
    Survivability is questionable, Tiger handles alpha strike better, comet has easier time escaping slow firing AT sources, Tiger also can take more punishment due to more hp. They both survive better against different things.

  • #383
    2 years ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496

    I just saw helphans game with comets.

    Three of his went down to a stug an a jadpanther tag team. Slow turning no-turret tanks..kill fast high armor comets...lol

    Eh they are not that OP.
    Brit needs them because they have no heavier armor to deal with Tigers and KT.

  • #384
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,641

    Ahh this game, it was amazing!

  • #385
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647
    edited January 2017

    @mrgame2 said
    Eh they are not that OP.

    Just "kinda" op, having all the strengths of say a tiger (albiet slightly worse dps) without the weaknesses (lack of speed/escape mechanism, utility)

    Brit needs them because they have no heavier armor to deal with Tigers and KT.

    They have fireflies for heavy AT, the Comet is in no way an active counter for a KT.

    I stand by a range nerf, but the idea of swapping the churchill and comets current armour would also be another solution.

  • #386
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,641

    @Farra13 said:

    @mrgame2 said
    Eh they are not that OP.

    Just "kinda" op, having all the strengths of say a tiger (albiet slightly worse dps) without the weaknesses (lack of speed/escape mechanism, utility)

    Horrible argument really.
    On the same basis you could say that T34-76 is OP compared to KV-1.

    Comet is heaviest brit armor that actually have penetration on its gun and its hardly a cheap tank.
    There is nothing wrong with it, its bigger cromwell, just like Tiger is much bigger P4, that's it.

    Brit needs them because they have no heavier armor to deal with Tigers and KT.

    They have fireflies for heavy AT, the Comet is in no way an active counter for a KT.

    Show me how fireflies are dealing with ele or JT.
    Waiting for replay.

    I stand by a range nerf, but the idea of swapping the churchill and comets current armour would also be another solution.

    Range nerf would be completely against what hammer is for and it would leave brits as the only faction without 50 range tank. All 800+hp tanks with decent gun start with or get to 50 range.

  • #387
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    Thing is I've learned not too really argue with you Katitof. Not because I believe you are right in all arguments or you manage to sway my opinion with each of your posts. Its more to do with the fact that I find you too stubborn and I mean this in no offense but very one sided with your views. I don't think I've ever seen you agree with a nerf for an allied unit, or a buff for an axis one even on things like the P4 underperforming for cost, something that is universally agreed upon by both sides.

  • #388
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    @Katitof t34/85 has standard range amd doesnt get a range increase

    Also the brits can use their piats, or cromwels (speed racing flanker) like the soviet had to (minus the hand held AT of course) because even and is2 would be eaten by an elefant.

    And as for the comet/cromwell= tiger/p4 both of the former oyt preform the latter in terms of cost efficiency and utility.
  • #389
    2 years ago
    GrittleGrittle Posts: 993

    @Farra13 said:
    Thing is I've learned not too really argue with you Katitof. Not because I believe you are right in all arguments or you manage to sway my opinion with each of your posts. Its more to do with the fact that I find you too stubborn and I mean this in no offense but very one sided with your views. I don't think I've ever seen you agree with a nerf for an allied unit, or a buff for an axis one even on things like the P4 underperforming for cost, something that is universally agreed upon by both sides.

    But he is right

    Fireflies main niche is sniping heavy tanks like tigers and KT, not tackling long range TDs like elefant

    Also, Katitof has called for multiple Allied nerfs in the past, most notable in recent history was a range decrease for USF mortar.

    If you want, I could pull up his post on COH2.org to confirm it ;)

  • #390
    2 years ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,641
    edited January 2017

    @Farra13 said:
    Thing is I've learned not too really argue with you Katitof. Not because I believe you are right in all arguments or you manage to sway my opinion with each of your posts. Its more to do with the fact that I find you too stubborn and I mean this in no offense but very one sided with your views. I don't think I've ever seen you agree with a nerf for an allied unit, or a buff for an axis one even on things like the P4 underperforming for cost, something that is universally agreed upon by both sides.

    How come you've missed me advocating for 222 buffs for ~10 months, which also included extremely rare by me creating a thread myself?

    I admit that I'm stubborn, but I'm not blind, when presented an argument I can't debunk, I'll admit you right, which I've done in the past to others as well.

    Thing is, I'm trying to look at armies instead of units and I'm not bound by singular faction of choice, I have a prefference, but I am able to play at top 200 level with all factions(brits are my worst as I have aggressive playstyle which they don't really support).

    If I believe a unit is up, I'll advocate its buff, if I believe its fine, I'll try to explain with stats, strats and actual reps/casts when available. I almost never get the same treatment in return, for the last 5 years there were maybe 5 people presenting actual stats, facts and reps to counter my arguments-everything else was people repeating themselves like a broken record.

    In comet case, its a tank in a faction that is supposed to stand up to ALL axis armor non doctrinally, because that's what brits were made for. In addition, change to PIATs made comet role even more important as they are no longer definite UKF heavy tank hard counter due to deflection damage being cut by 75%, which means that comet needs to pull even more weight by itself, especially if opponent uses panthers and actual TDs(to which mentioned before Firefly can't stand up to due to reload and its mobility).

    Look at factions, not at units, the game isn't about unit 1v1 while the rest of the army idles at base.

  • #391
    2 years ago
    HingieHingie Posts: 1,991
    edited January 2017

    @Katitof said:
    I admit that I'm stubborn, but I'm not blind, when presented an argument I can't debunk, I'll admit you right, which I've done in the past to others as well.

    You are something very much different than stubborn. Let it be said that you quite a bit too sure of yourself and refuse to admit mistakes even if they are obvious.

    In comet case, its a tank in a faction that is supposed to stand up to ALL axis armor non doctrinally, because that's what brits were made for. In addition, change to PIATs made comet role even more important as they are no longer definite UKF heavy tank hard counter due to deflection damage being cut by 75%, which means that comet needs to pull even more weight by itself, especially if opponent uses panthers and actual TDs(to which mentioned before Firefly can't stand up to due to reload and its mobility).

    If a multipurpose tank is just slightly more expensive than a dedicated AT unit, yet is outperformed in the AT section only slightly, that makes that unit OP, no matter the faction it is in. The Comet has all the strenghts a tank can have and no relevant weaknesses. It should lose to a Panther reliably, not only 60% of the time, especially since Brits have a dedicated TD in the form of the Firefly. That has nothing to do with faction design, except perhaps that said factions design is very poor.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.