German - All - Brummbär

#1
2 years ago

Problem

Hello,
I think Brummbär is too powerful.
I did some tests, and show this:

In veteran 2, the Brummbä wins:
Sherman, Cromwell, Comet, T-34 / 76mm, T-34/85, 'Easy 8' Sherman, M10 'Wolverine', Sherman Bulldozer.

Obviously the Tank Destroyer (like the Jackson) also wins, but they shoot a distance, for that do not mention them. However, Jackson needs 9 shots to destroy him. While to destroy King Tiger needs 10.

Conclusion

The Brummbär is:
Good vs infantry (It's perfect).
It has almost the same armor as a King tiger (ok, I can live with that)
He won all the tanks of the allies (Here's a problem)

«1

Comments

  • #3
    2 years ago
    VutherVuther Posts: 2,129
    edited March 2017

    The Brummbar does indeed have a pretty good chance against other medium tanks, but I find that it is entirely justified that this is the case.

    1. It turns quite slowly and can't traverse its gun very far from the center. Pretty much all of the vehicles you mentioned are quite capable of constantly moving around the Brummbar's main gun's arc of fire and can keep doing that until the Brummbar inevitably loses if it stays unsupported, because all of those tank's turrets can traverse to any angle around them.

    2. Veterancy takes quite a bit of time for it to earn because it'll tend to be shooting at infantry while it is a fairly expensive tank. While it can indeed attack other tanks, its rather-middling speed will probably prevent it from taking more than one shot against any micromanaged medium tank.

    3. I'm pretty sure the Brummbar's shots may not track targets, so this would mean a moving tank can essentially dodge many of a Brummbar's shots if it constantly moves away from the scatter area of the Brummbar when it fires.

    @Vipper said:
    PLS check your facts the brumbar's armor is not near as that of KT armor.

    javabal probably missed a word - they seem to be considering vet 2 Brummbar entirely, which does have armor that's not too far off from the KT (Brum's 260 X 1.3 = 338 vs. KT's 375) compared to most tanks, though there's still a distinct difference.

  • #4
    2 years ago

    If anything Brummbar needs a buff. The Brum has only 260 armor. Significantly less than KT. And if you allow the Brumbar to duke it out with a Sherman/crom/t34, well that is a L2P issue. If you keep your medium on the move, the Brummbar will never hit the tank. And instead the Brummbar has to fear being flanked by your medium. Few know this but the m8 scott is actually more efficient in killing infantry per shot it takes. The scott has heat seeking shells and suffers little from accuracy penalty on the move. Even if you move your infantry around, it doesn't help dodging shells from the scott, yet this tactic works well vs the Brum.

    Dear OP, your ignorance to compare the strength of a Brum vs allied mediums means that you lack general knowledge of the game. Unless your medium was very low on HP to begin with, the Brum will never kill it. It may take one or two pot shots at it, but that's about it. The mobility of allied mediums is far superior to the Brum. As well, you claim to have checked the armor stats and still made a glaring mistake in claiming the Brum has armor of a KT. Your post certainly demonstrates a general lack of knowledge of this game which is beyond just a careless mistake or bias towards certain units. This forum is tired of such blatant ignorance. Just a few days back another person argued that the T34-85 and pershing needed buffs. Again, a complete lack of knowledge on their behalf. So no offense, but L2P before posting. There are plenty of Youtube videos giving tips and tutorials on how to play and plenty of expert replays to learn from. Its not my job to call out extremely uninformed forum members, but I feel I need to do whatever it takes to improve the quality of discussion. As a poor quality of ideas has led to Relic giving an overpowering performance to all 3 allied factions for the past year.

  • #5
    2 years ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    If anything its removing some of the micro tax involved with the brumbar that should be the priority coupled with an armour buff. To be truly effective you have to manually aim with attack ground, then yes the brum is a beast, but its really awkward to handle in a large scale engagement especially with the auto fire overshooting consistently. Now yes it does get well armoured at vet 2, but for a spearhead unit, the base unit just doesn't cut it in taking fire, most at, even bloody zooks penetrate far too consistently.

    For the tech and purchase cost of units like the panther and brum, players expect them to perform, these arguments of buffing one area means nerfing another to compensate are ridiculous, these are some of the most expensive units in the game that specialize in a single role, currently they underperform, any nerfs made after the much needed buffs will leave them right where they are now. Not worth the investment.

  • #6
    2 years ago

    @Farra13 said:
    If anything its removing some of the micro tax involved with the brumbar that should be the priority coupled with an armour buff. To be truly effective you have to manually aim with attack ground, then yes the brum is a beast, but its really awkward to handle in a large scale engagement especially with the auto fire overshooting consistently. Now yes it does get well armoured at vet 2, but for a spearhead unit, the base unit just doesn't cut it in taking fire, most at, even bloody zooks penetrate far too consistently.

    Totally agree. The Brummbar's shells land where the target was 2 seconds ago therefore, good players always hold fire and attack ground with basically every shot. It's like using a goddamn sniper. Even when the infantry is stationary, the Brum is not that accurate. Truly an embarrassing unit. And at only 260 armor, you shouldn't be surprised that zooks pen roughly 50% of the time. The armor can easily be as good as the panther or even higher since, it's slow and won't be chasing down tanks and the allied player can easily afford TDs if the Ost player can afford a Brum. So either the Brum should get its shells to be heat seeking, or an armor buff.

  • #7
    2 years ago
    Selvy289Selvy289 Posts: 172

    @Vipper said:
    PLS check your facts the brumbar's armor is not near as that of KT armor.

    A brumbar needs 8080 XP to reach vet 2.

    Any of the tank you mentioned can easily circle strafe a brumbar.

    Brummbar

    Developer Comments: Due to its clunky movement, the Brummbar would often get blocked against world objects. We decided to give this vehicle Heavy Crush to improve pathfinding and make it more maneuverable. Reload time standardized to make it more consistent and AOE has been adjusted to improve consistency as the damage quickly drops off by 2 meters. To adjust for these changes. Resource costs have been updated to bring it in line with its current performance.

    Cost decreased from 470 manpower and 160 fuel to 420 manpower and 150 fuel

    Reload standardized from 7.5/9 seconds to 8.25.

    • AOE mid modifer from 0.15 to 0.3
    • Medium crush changed to Heavy Crush.
    • Veterancy requirements from 2740/5480/10960 to 2040/4080/8160
    • Added hold fire

    Sorry, just had to correct you. I remember the Brummbar was changed in the June 21st patch last year.

  • #8
    2 years ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,723
    edited March 2017

    @Selvy289 said:
    Sorry, just had to correct you. I remember the Brummbar was changed in the June 21st patch last year.

    Thanks. (was a typo.)

  • #9
    2 years ago
    capiquacapiqua Posts: 270

    In U.S. faction does not have tanks in good condition and therefore is based on the inf, which in urban maps the Brummbär is a "demigod" and almost times wipe squads. Is a unit too perfect, I mean it has a not very high price for the reward it receives. And in short this tank perfect vs inf, but if we want a balanced game for all factions must be nerf vs inf.

  • #10
    2 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited March 2017

    I don't think the Brumbarr needs any nerfs, if anything it needs a slight decrease in scatter, so it doesn't miss as much but any other changes (nerfs or buffs) are unwarranted IMO. Buffing it's armor seems completely unwarranted to me, it already performs well enough against medium tanks despite being an AI vehicle. It's not too good against them, I think it's right where it should be.

  • #11
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    The brumbar is about ok as is. It's also much more expensive than a medium tank as well, so I think it's fine.

  • #13
    2 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited March 2017

    @Farra13 said:
    Its a spearhead unit, your supposed to open an assualt with it, therefore it should be absorbing alot of fire as it moves to break a line. I expect a td to happily pen it frontally, but when at guns, zooks, medium tanks all consistently score penetrating hitsI begin to wonder, what i am instead supposed to lead an attack with when playing OST? Infantry?

    The bazooka barely has more than a 50% chance of penetrating a brumbarr at close range. T34/76 is even lower, and a Zis gun has a 2/3 chance of frontally penning it at max range. Its armor goes to 338 at Vet 2 also, which is more than a Tiger. Like I said, minor reductions in scatter to make it less random are all that's warranted IMO, I don't think any of those numbers support that it has a hard time shrugging off AT aside from TDs.

    Even if I thought its survivability was a problem, I would recommend a health buff before armor for the brumbarr. It's chances of pinging are good enough IMO.

  • #14
    2 years ago

    The Brummbar needs only one buff, accuracy OR armor. Its getting closer to cost effectiveness, but not quite there yet.

  • #15
    2 years ago

    @Farra13 said:

    Currently Ost lacks the infantry presence to screen assualts and has no breakthrough unit, the Brumbar is the unit one would expect to fill that position, but the armour just isn't high enough to shrug of those hits when it goes in.

    I think the problem will be partly solved with the USF mortar nerfs but yeah, Ost infantry are still very squishy to lead anything.

  • #16
    2 years ago
    So basicly a brumbar should not be able to be forced off when attacking a defensive line with dedicated at?

    I can go with a hp increase but that is it. Its armour is sufficient for the job its gun is good enough for the job. Just support it properly.
  • #17
    2 years ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798
    edited March 2017

    @TheLeveler83 said:
    So basicly a brumbar should not be able to be forced off when attacking a defensive line with dedicated at?

    I can go with a hp increase but that is it. Its armour is sufficient for the job its gun is good enough for the job. Just support it properly.

    What would you call "dedicated AT?" Zooks?At guns? Who said to use a Brummbar in a place that has lots of AT. What do you call a defensive line? One at gun and an mg?Zooks should not have a 50% chance of penning. It's Tier 4 armor. If the allied player can't afford a cheap TD at the point the Ost can get a Brum, they deserve to lose. If you want to counter a brum without armor, you should be required to get 2 at guns and some handheld at. Right now around 3 zooks are able to scare it away. Tier 4 should be fought back with TDs not just a single at gun and a snare or a few zooks.

  • #18
    2 years ago
    I mean su76s su 85s at guns jacksons fireflys
    Zooks are not they are softer at.

    A defensive line in late game when brum hits has dedicated at as mentioned above and should deter a brumbar. A defensive line can be big or smal.

    And being t4 is no reason for zooks should not pen a brum. Not that they should though.

    T0 at gun from okw can easely pen 2 tiers above it if it hits. same with the shreck that works good vs an is2 from what ive seen.
  • #19
    2 years ago

    I could live with a small buff for Brummbar if Sherman Bulldozer AI capability would be roughly at the same level (not speaking about its non existent AT capabilities). Imo its just funny discussing a unit that could be slightly to weak while there is another one which fits exactly the same spot (without AT) and is so far away stat wise. With the exception of a slightly higher ROF and a traversable turret Bulldozer is so far off, its even slower in top speed and accleration. And the funniest thing, inspite of beeing far more specialized because of beeing purely AI and inspite of beeing far weaker in its combat stats it even takes the same population. I will never understand Relics way of balancing regarding population (population of all super heavies is weird too, way too low). Balance at its best.

  • #20
    2 years ago

    @TheLeveler83 said:
    I mean su76s su 85s at guns jacksons fireflys
    Zooks are not they are softer at.

    A defensive line in late game when brum hits has dedicated at as mentioned above and should deter a brumbar. A defensive line can be big or smal.

    And being t4 is no reason for zooks should not pen a brum. Not that they should though.

    T0 at gun from okw can easely pen 2 tiers above it if it hits. same with the shreck that works good vs an is2 from what ive seen.

    The big question is HOW MANY pieces of dedicated at are in the "defensive line." A single at gun should not be able to deter the brummbar but right now it can penetrate the brumbar quite easily - 70% chance to pen at max range. And the lack of accuracy on the brum against even stationary targets like at guns is still lacking. You'd need usually two shots to decrew an at gun when Brummbar is a specialist in killing support weapons (should get a one hit kill on clumped up crews). Its end result damage is no better than HE sherman (better AoE but lower accuracy) yet has a far lower RoF. The Brum shoots every 8 seconds while all at guns have at least double the RoF. So a single at gun can land about 4 shots where 3 of them penetrate before being decrewed. 3*160 = 480 which is a massive chunk of health.

    schrecks vs is 2? They actually have slightly less than 50% to pen the is2 at even close range. Is2 armor 375. Schreck 180/170/160. And as I've mentioned in another thread, shrecks should be better than zooks, but they are barely better (cost wise), and CANNOT be spammed. Therefore, looking at overall performance, and utility zooks are actually better than schrecks.

    Like I said earlier, there is ZERO excuse not to have a TD if the Ost has a Brum. Or else u need at least 2 at guns and snares and probably some handheld at. The difference between Tier 3 and Tier 4 armor for Ostheer still doesn't justify the cost difference.

    I will repeat again, Brum just needs one buff, either armor buff, or accuracy buff (give it the heat seeking m8 scott type of shells)

  • #21
    2 years ago

    @Make_love_not_war said:
    I could live with a small buff for Brummbar if Sherman Bulldozer AI capability would be roughly at the same level (not speaking about its non existent AT capabilities). Imo its just funny discussing a unit that could be slightly to weak while there is another one which fits exactly the same spot (without AT) and is so far away stat wise. With the exception of a slightly higher ROF and a traversable turret Bulldozer is so far off, its even slower in top speed and accleration. And the funniest thing, inspite of beeing far more specialized because of beeing purely AI and inspite of beeing far weaker in its combat stats it even takes the same population. I will never understand Relics way of balancing regarding population (population of all super heavies is weird too, way too low). Balance at its best.

    Except the dozer doesn't need insane teching requirements. I think the dozer should be replaced with the Sherman Crocodile in CoH1.

  • #22
    2 years ago
    LazarusLazarus Posts: 4,032
    @Make_love_not_war you will understand the dozer/brummbar balance significantly better if you bother to acknowledge the dozers advantages (self repair crew, the dozer abilities, no tech costs, is supported by Riflemen) and not just what it doesnt have.
  • #23
    2 years ago
    Rng hates my is2 obviously.

    The brum should win vs weapon teams yes esp vs mgs mortars. But the at gun is also specialised so the brum should take some damge in return but win in the end. not one shot auto win every time. Otherwise the 6 men teams for sovjets loose their edge.

    A breakthough unit should smash the hole and draw fire and its support should capitalize on that. It should not be able to solo 2 at guns every time by deleting 1 in 2 seconds. (6 men should be able to take 1 round mostly)

    It goes up in armour to 338 at vet 2 so imo extra armour is not needed. I was in favor for the hp buff. But can see the accuracy/scattter buff working as well but not homing rounds like the scott that would overdo it.
  • #24
    2 years ago
    MCMartelMCMartel Posts: 1,855

    It definitely doesn't need an armor upgrade, it shouldn't be something that can reflect ATG or medium shells, only heavies should do that. But now that people mentioned it, some more hp to make it more durable in a charge and more forgiving to use considering it's slow speed might not hurt.

  • #25
    2 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    edited March 2017

    @1ncendiary_Rounds said:
    A single at gun should not be able to deter the brummbar but right now it can penetrate the brumbar quite easily - 70% chance to pen at max range. And the lack of accuracy on the brum against even stationary targets like at guns is still lacking. You'd need usually two shots to decrew an at gun when Brummbar is a specialist in killing support weapons (should get a one hit kill on clumped up crews).

    So a brumbarr should be able to roll up an knockout an AT gun in 1 shot reliably? I do agree it needs to be a little more accurate versus infantry, but it doesn't need reliable 1-shotting. And what do you even mean by clumped up crews? The whole idea is that clumping isn't supposed to happen, and this patch is addressing it.

    @1ncendiary_Rounds said:
    What do you call a defensive line? One at gun and an mg? Zooks should not have a 50% chance of penning. It's Tier 4 armor. If the allied player can't afford a cheap TD at the point the Ost can get a Brum, they deserve to lose.

    Why? Tier 4 armor is not a good reason, and how is a little over 50% penetration at close range too much for the bazooka? You'd have to walk straight at the brumbarr to get than penetration, at max range it's just 38%, which is the most likely range for riflemen to be using zooks against a brumbarr. 57mm has a 50% chance of penetrating at Max range. So the 2 primary sources of US AT (prior to TDs) have a 50% and 38% chance of penetrating a brumbarr at the most likely ranges you'll use them. Those numbers show you already need a TD. Buff the Brums armor any more and its pinging AT gun shots far too much.

  • #26
    2 years ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    I dont think an accuracy buff is the way to go, ESPECIALLY because of the spacing changes, all accuracy will do is further punish cover clumps, but more reliably (make it scary sure but not a good direction imo). If its to be buffed (and i think it should be) it should be far AOE distance so its more constant and more effective vs spread infantry/blobs.

    Its already plenty durable but a small health buff would be ok as well
  • #27
    2 years ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    If its to be buffed (and i think it should be) it should be far AOE distance so its more constant and more effective vs spread infantry/blobs.

    Its already plenty durable but a small health buff would be ok as well

    I like that angle better than mine actually. AOE distance is a good route. And yes, if survivability needs looking at, health not armor is the way to go, and it should be slight.

  • #28
    2 years ago
    Make_love_not_warMake_love… Posts: 166
    edited March 2017

    @Lazarus said:
    @Make_love_not_war you will understand the dozer/brummbar balance significantly better if you bother to acknowledge the dozers advantages (self repair crew, the dozer abilities, no tech costs, is supported by Riflemen) and not just what it doesnt have.

    Oh wow, you can discuss about the balance of so many troops of CoH2 but seeing Bulldozer on par with post-buff Brummbar is one thing I never thought anybody would really stat here. But it really happened, so lets see.

    Your points:

    self repair crew - Next to traversable turret and the slightly higher ROF this a third advantage, I forgot to mention this one, but of course with 720 to 800 hp and 200 to 260 frontal armor Bulldozer will really need self repair a lot more than Brummbar, especially if you take into account that it faces Shreks and not Bazookas. Try assaulting a Brummbar frontally with Bazookas, try the same with Shreks versus Bulldozer, you'll see what I'm speaking of. Bulldozer should counter Shreks as Brummbar does with Bazookas. They are assaulting machines versus infantry and structures.

    dozer abilities - The road barrier? Personnally I prefer the stun shot of Brummbar a lot more. Edit: See post #29 and #30: The 60 range bunker buster is more useful than road block.

    no tech costs - Bulldozer comes at a huge cost you forgot to mention, its called commander choice. You are giving up a lot of options (abilities/units) by going for Bulldozer, and the only useful other commander ability is the M10 call-in. The others are medicore or worse. Furthermore 10CP isn't like skipping tech easily for getting a purely AI fighting vehicle. In bigger game modes like 3v3 and 4vs4 this comes really late. And last but not least you could have a Calliope at the same time.

    Rifleman - You can't be serious about that. Thats not the fault of the Bulldozer. You have to nerf them but not the Bulldozer. If Rifles are op and Bulldozer is up to make up for that I wouldn't take Bulldozer at all, just take Calliope it is way stronger and better at killing infantry and stuff. That can't be the way of balancing unit and you do not have to cover Relic here for this bad performance of balancing.

    Bulldozer and Brummbar are never on par, no way. Lets aside for a moment that Brummbar can fight vehicles and tanks up to medium and Bulldozer can't do that. Lets talk about the AI performance. Please have a look at its accuracy. The Bulldozer has double the scatter value, it can't hit the door of a barn. And now back to the AT capabilities: Allrounder should always more expensive in any terms than a specialized unit or it should perform worse on its allround abilities. But this is not the case when you compare Bulldozer to Brummbar. Brummbar even performs better in AI fighting. Taking a Bulldozer means that you will have to afford a second unit for AT capabilities, so its absolutely not okay that both take up 14 population. Never.

  • #29
    2 years ago

    @Make_love_not_war Brummbär doesn't have the stun-shot anymore... since over a year.

  • #30
    2 years ago

    @Widerstreit said:
    @Make_love_not_war Brummbär doesn't have the stun-shot anymore... since over a year.

    Thanks for correction. Forgot a moment about that change with the bunker buster ability instead because of not playing Ostheer and Soviet at the moment. I do think the barrage is a lot more logical for this unit than the old stun shot. And it is still way better than road block, because it gives the option to fire a shell at 60 range instead of 40. Thats a good thing to snipe at defensive positions out of the distance without getting too much counterfire.

  • #31
    2 years ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 798
    edited March 2017

    @SkysTheLimit said:

    Why? Tier 4 armor is not a good reason, and how is a little over 50% penetration at close range too much for the bazooka? You'd have to walk straight at the brumbarr to get than penetration, at max range it's just 38%, which is the most likely range for riflemen to be using zooks against a brumbarr. 57mm has a 50% chance of penetrating at Max range. So the 2 primary sources of US AT (prior to TDs) have a 50% and 38% chance of penetrating a brumbarr at the most likely ranges you'll use them. Those numbers show you already need a TD. Buff the Brums armor any more and its pinging AT gun shots far too much.

    I've already said that if Ost has an expensive T4 Brum, USF should be able to afford a cheaper T3 Jackson. If you're solely relying on AT guns and zooks, you'll need to spam at guns or you should be punished. And you need to use AP rounds. Though the USF 6 pounder has only a 50% pen at max range, the other two have about 70% pen.

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.