Spring Update Balance Discussion

1235716

Comments

  • #122
    1 year ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… Posts: 2,268
    @Lazarus Well they have the fewest stock vehicles to choose from anyway. What else are you supposed to build late game if your openent has a heavy or multiple tanks? The US is strong in some cheesy ways, and i think they are very doctrine specific atm.

    On the panther. I think the health buff should be swapped out for a received damage modifier (see current KV-1). Imo the modifier should be .74, which would equate to 1080 health if I'm doing that right.

    If we're nerfing the armor and making it more of a soaker, let's go all the way. And let's not give ost more time wasted on repairs
  • #123
    1 year ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    edited April 2018

    Wow you know Lelic is trolling with bolded statement on Panther. I hope Mr Smith never gets a job at a real game developer. His balancing = throw out all unique flavors of the original game and take easy way of mirror units. And his biased trolling...

    Now possibly in its best spot yet.

    Nice way to further nerf the panther so that people will cry to revert this SBP and forgotten that DBP nerfed Panther to hell against allies AT tanks.

    SBP Panther vet2
    960 HP
    286 Front Armor
    99 Rear Armor
    185 FU
    14% better far accuracy against Allies AT which outranges and always pen our Panther..? :trollface:
    OKW 15% reduced reload
    1 less Wehr Grens unit

    DBP Panther vet2
    960 HP
    320 Front Armor
    110 Read Armor
    175 FU

    With the Stug nerf + mortar boost against stationary AT gun, Wehr is more crap against late game Allies tanks.

  • #124
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,778
    @SkysTheLimit brawl might not be the best term, but knowing you can get in, deal damage and get out is a farcry from the old jacksons high risk/reward system. They are fast, hit like hammers and can escape ambush now more often than not. The jackson went from something unique to an overgrown M10
  • #125
    1 year ago
    The command panzer 4 nerf is uncalled for. If it's going to go through, at least give it's current stats back at vet 2 or vet 3.
  • #126
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,587

    @SquishyMuffin said:
    The command panzer 4 nerf is uncalled for. If it's going to go through, at least give it's current stats back at vet 2 or vet 3.

    Raw damage modifiers are extremely potent and CP4 ventured into the OP territory ever since bonus was made an aura for all units around instead of sector only buff.

    That dmg modifier makes units that should lose engagements win them and that's the overpowered thing about it.
    25% durability buff for everything around is MASSIVE.

  • #127
    1 year ago

    @Katitof said:

    @SquishyMuffin said:
    The command panzer 4 nerf is uncalled for. If it's going to go through, at least give it's current stats back at vet 2 or vet 3.

    Raw damage modifiers are extremely potent and CP4 ventured into the OP territory ever since bonus was made an aura for all units around instead of sector only buff.

    That dmg modifier makes units that should lose engagements win them and that's the overpowered thing about it.
    25% durability buff for everything around is MASSIVE.

    I thought it was 20%? Regardless it would make the tank worth investing in perhaps. You don't want it to get back to 20% at vet 3 then? It would still be nerf to a unit that I didn't hear many people complaining about tbh.

  • #128
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,587
    edited April 2018

    @SquishyMuffin said:

    @Katitof said:

    @SquishyMuffin said:
    The command panzer 4 nerf is uncalled for. If it's going to go through, at least give it's current stats back at vet 2 or vet 3.

    Raw damage modifiers are extremely potent and CP4 ventured into the OP territory ever since bonus was made an aura for all units around instead of sector only buff.

    That dmg modifier makes units that should lose engagements win them and that's the overpowered thing about it.
    25% durability buff for everything around is MASSIVE.

    I thought it was 20%? Regardless it would make the tank worth investing in perhaps. You don't want it to get back to 20% at vet 3 then? It would still be nerf to a unit that I didn't hear many people complaining about tbh.

    20% rec dmg modifier translates to 25% health increase. Basically extra model for all squads and 800hp for med armor.

    edit: lulz at poor butthurt individual who dislikes my post for stating actual stats. I do feel sorry for you.

  • #129
    1 year ago

    @SquishyMuffin said:
    The command panzer 4 nerf is uncalled for. If it's going to go through, at least give it's current stats back at vet 2 or vet 3.

    I disagree. I would rather give the Command P4 like other command units more utility through abilities. It could gain mark target, maybe smoke or other artillary call-ins, temprary boosts like The Ost officer or maybe a recon sweep/flare artillary
    or other recon and intel ability.

  • #130
    1 year ago

    @pioneerspam said:

    @SquishyMuffin said:
    The command panzer 4 nerf is uncalled for. If it's going to go through, at least give it's current stats back at vet 2 or vet 3.

    I disagree. I would rather give the Command P4 like other command units more utility through abilities. It could gain mark target, maybe smoke or other artillary call-ins, temprary boosts like The Ost officer or maybe a recon sweep/flare artillary
    or other recon and intel ability.

    Yeah something like that could also work.

  • #131
    1 year ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    > @Lazarus said:
    > @SkysTheLimit said:
    >
    > @ImperialDane said:
    >
    > I'm with Dane, a 5 range change is a joke and it gets under my skin that the team is "pretending" that this is a nerf. I do agree with you that the self spotting nerf is a great change - however in terms of the Jacksons overall power the nerf does little as you can entirely circumvent the sight nerf by having literally anything else screening your Jackson. Keeping in mind we for some unknown reason thought the Jackson needed a HP buff to discourage TD spam (????) 10 range is the absolute minimum that is getting taken off its range before I'll even consider it nerfed.
    >
    > Otherwise it's just tokenism - like the P47 nerf. Yup. Good job guys, you really beat the hell out of a dead horse on that one. Barely nerfing useful things, and nerfing useless things to pad out USFs place in the list is glaringly obvious and gets under my skin quite a bit.
    >


    Basically so true. 5 point range decrease when it already outrange axis tanks? When the DBP boost Jackson at same time nerf panther for double whammy?

    Trying to hide DBP Wehr nerf by reverting some changes to IL2 and Luch?

    The numbers don't lie. SBP panther has worse specs than DBP and DBP has worse specs before that. How is panther role as tank hunter work with the paper armor nerf? I like someone explain this to me, while my panther is staying in base getting repaired..
  • #132
    1 year ago
    LorenLoren Posts: 22
    edited April 2018

    When you buff or nerf a unit, you have to consider its countermeasures. For example, the past combination of Soviet sniper on an m3. The two combinations had no counter. So it was so worth giving nerfs. The debate here is puzzling: do Phanter make a kiting unit like the TD of other factions, or have a slight disadvantage(range) in extreme long distance, but are capable of close-combat (like the TD version of a riflemen ; multi-purpose unit) I think it is a decision to keep. If you have to do kiting using Phanter to counter Allies TD, Armor nerf is a natural procedure when compared to other TDs. Because, after adjusting TD range, Phanter's range is 55, which is the same as other TDs. The option to choose both might makes the Panther a Super OP unit.
    In fact, most Axis users seem to have not admitted that the tier of Phanter (especially OKW) is the same tier unit as SU - 85, M36 Jackson, Sherman Firefly.
    Is the concept of Phanter the Allies' TD counter unit? or not? I think we should talk about it definitely. Also, if Phanter is a TD counter, then thinks how to Allies counter Phanter. Obviously, every unit must have strengths and weaknesses.

  • #133
    1 year ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496

    You counter panther with snares, ATG, T34/85, Comet. And yes supported either by range with SU85, Firefly, Jackson.
    Right now Panther armor will get rekt before it reaches Allies tank.

    Wehr armor used to be a late game push. Where their early-mid game is to hold out against Allies strength in numbers which is still in place. Panther is so late, and now more expensive, yet its performance is no advantage.

    At the same time, what can wehr do to counter Allies fast or highly armored T34/85, Comet, Pershing, Churchill, IS2, KV8, KV2?

    Pak gun get de-crewed easily with Allies Arty. Something like SU76 free arty is so cheap and easy. Or USF super accurate mortars or just simple infantry flank with their mg/brens.

    Allies non-doctrine TD has easy counter to Axis doctrine heavy tanks and nerf Panther. While Stug has too much armor it need nerf! (sarcastic!)

    Panther is supposed to be tank hunter, to be strong unit to fight 1 v 2 battles of cheaper allies tanks.
    But with double armor nerf + TD boost, its paper armor is a joke.

  • #134
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,587

    @mrgame2 said:
    You counter panther with snares, ATG, T34/85, Comet. And yes supported either by range with SU85, Firefly, Jackson.
    Right now Panther armor will get rekt before it reaches Allies tank.

    You don't counter panther with comet.
    Its the other way around.
    Same for 34/85, which can only with with numerical advantage, in which case it should.

    Now, think for a second, how is it possible that allied tanks with half of the armor and now 50% less health are managing to do their job, when you have your own ATGs, StuGs and shrecks? And that is before even panther comes into consideration.
    It might be worth for you to do the same-micro instead of a-move expecting to win against your counters.

    Wehr armor used to be a late game push. Where their early-mid game is to hold out against Allies strength in numbers which is still in place. Panther is so late, and now more expensive, yet its performance is no advantage.

    And now axis late game armor was nerfed, just like allied early game was nerfed. Playing field got leveled for you, if you struggle at the moment, its because you were outplayed as there is no longer factions supremacy tied to specific game phase anymore.

    At the same time, what can wehr do to counter Allies fast or highly armored T34/85, Comet, Pershing, Churchill, IS2, KV8, KV2?

    34/85 is being steamrolled by StuGs for the cost.
    So is comet, but panther will stomp it as well, equal support or slugfest.
    Pershing can win only if its vetted.
    Churchill? You for real?
    IS-2 will lose if you'll kite or circle it as its not mobile enough.
    KV-8? KV-2? If you struggle against these with panther, it might be way too late for L2P for you.

    Pak gun get de-crewed easily with Allies Arty. Something like SU76 free arty is so cheap and easy. Or USF super accurate mortars or just simple infantry flank with their mg/brens.

    SU76 is being nerfed and its not a threat to panther unless massed and when its massed, you are not going to see any of the other tanks, StuG spam hardcounters them easily.

    You complain about USF mortar, but ignore Ost mortar, which is the same, but got 30% longer range? That's dictionary example of bias.

    Everyone can dispose of ATGs equally easy if you apply correct counters and axis factions do not lack any of these counters.

    Allies non-doctrine TD has easy counter to Axis doctrine heavy tanks and nerf Panther. While Stug has too much armor it need nerf! (sarcastic!)

    And panther easily beats allied doctrinal armor.
    Your point?

    You pretending StuG isn't OP only speaks for how bad of a player you are.

    Panther is supposed to be tank hunter, to be strong unit to fight 1 v 2 battles of cheaper allies tanks.
    But with double armor nerf + TD boost, its paper armor is a joke.

    No, it is not supposed to be strong in 1v2. It never was and it never will.
    It was supposed to stomp allied premium armor in 1v1 situations and its exactly what it does, except now it'll do it even better.

    Don't complain about TDs, because they all got nerfed as well this patch.

  • #135
    1 year ago
    thekingsownthekingso… Posts: 446
    edited April 2018

    I would like to point out that the soviet T70 needs toning down.

    It kills infantry better than an Ostwind for cheaper and comes earlier. Add the increased damage to the sniper and you have an already extremely overpowered unit even stronger.

  • #136
    1 year ago

    @Reichsgarde said:
    Greetings everyone (it is great to return to this community since the DBP discussions),

    I agree with @ImperialDane on the matter concerning StuG III G. Its only saving grace was its rate of fire. Removing this core strength from the vehicle will make the assault gun a dubious proposition at best. If you also consider that its pop cost will rise to 10, this makes even less sense as the vehicle is getting nerfed. To the devs (@Mr_Smith et al.) I would like to ask, what are you doing about the SU-76M? Are you nerfing it equally by increasing its pop cost and reducing its rate of fire? In my opinion, there is no need for any changes to the StuG. It is already in a decent place as it is.

    As aforementioned several times, the OKW/WM Panther is not in "its best spot". Nerfing its frontal armour (rear armour nerfs are fine I guess) is not a good idea as the vehicle needs as much protection as it can get to compensate for its slow rate of fire. What the current Panther requires is either a damage boost (160 to 180 to reflect its historically fast muzzle velocity) or a more significant boost to its rate of fire (something between 4 sec and 5 sec range at Vet 0). Furthermore, the Panther should get a pop cost reduction so that it costs 16 points instead of 18.

    OKW Jagdpanzer IV costing 15 pop points seems quite excessive in my view. It is a good tank destroyer but not so good to the point that it costs that many pop points. Producing a single Jagdpanzer IV will limit an OKW player's ability to synthesize his/her army with other units as the max pop limit is 100. I believe that the JgPz IV should cost 12 pop instead given the fact that it is a turretless vehicle with limited capabilities. If I understand correctly, the JgPz IV is supposed to be the "poor man's" Panzer IV.

    Kubelwagen needs to be revised in order to remain relevant till the late-game. As of now, the Kubelwagen is so weak and fragile that it gets vaporized in an instant. What this vehicle needs is a form of camouflage ability and possible upgrade paths that will allow OKW to use the Kubelwagen as a utility vehicle. For instance, an ambulance vehicle, a command aura vehicle, or a reinforcement vehicle. As always, I am always in favour of making EVERY unit in the game useful no matter what stage of the game the player is in.

    I have a few more points to make but I will make them as this patch process unfolds. I concur with @Troyd that it is heartening to see the community and devs still patching this game. However, what would be even better would be is that if the patchers pay close attention to what is being mentioned here in this thread. Some people here are actually spending a good chunk of their busy lives to make constructive criticisms and insightful comments.

    The Stug is the only crutch the Wehr have , there is literally no other stock armoured vehicle or tank (panther) worth building.

  • #137
    1 year ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496
    edited April 2018

    @Katitof said:

    You don't counter panther with comet.
    Its the other way around.
    Same for 34/85, which can only with with numerical advantage, in which case it should.

    Why not? Comet has always fight on equal grounds against Panther. It is 50-50% either one will win, or managed to survive.
    Panther at current state and after SBP will be easier to counter.

    Now, think for a second, how is it possible that allied tanks with half of the armor and now 50% less health are managing to do their job, when you have your own ATGs, StuGs and shrecks? And that is before even panther comes into consideration.
    It might be worth for you to do the same-micro instead of a-move expecting to win against your counters.

    Which 50% less health? Allies tanks come out faster and more units. By time Panther hits, Allies have imba TD

    And now axis late game armor was nerfed, just like allied early game was nerfed. Playing field got leveled for you, if you struggle at the moment, its because you were outplayed as there is no longer factions supremacy tied to specific game phase anymore.

    Allies infantry still dominate the field, control the resources, churn out shock units, and make faster tanks.

    34/85 is being steamrolled by StuGs for the cost.
    So is comet, but panther will stomp it as well, equal support or slugfest.
    Pershing can win only if its vetted.
    Churchill? You for real?
    IS-2 will lose if you'll kite or circle it as its not mobile enough.
    KV-8? KV-2? If you struggle against these with panther, it might be way too late for L2P for you.

    I am not struggling with Panther. Its Panther struggling to dispatch these high armor tanks, which hit the field earlier. Push back wehr front line, Supported by immba TD later on. You see the problem? It is not about 1 tank vs 1 tank. It is the field of play, the timings, the need to consider all units, the waterfall effect.

    SU76 is being nerfed and its not a threat to panther unless massed and when its massed, you are not going to see any of the other tanks, StuG spam hardcounters them easily.

    Yes i approve the nerf because SU76 was way too cheap and too early. Stug do not hard counter them, both are of equal potency, but SU76 was too early, has free arty and vet faster. Making it even more potent

    You complain about USF mortar, but ignore Ost mortar, which is the same, but got 30% longer range? That's dictionary example of bias.

    Because Wehr mortar need to take on 6 man support weapons, emplacements, thin out infantry blobs. While USF accurate mortar squad wipe wehr support teams. You are missing the point again.

    Everyone can dispose of ATGs equally easy if you apply correct counters and axis factions do not lack any of these counters.

    Allies have more arty, earlier and more deadly. At the same time Allies have better TD late game. Allies have cheaper T70 Stuart AEC easily kite ATGs. You see the point?

    And panther easily beats allied doctrinal armor.
    Your point?

    No it does not. IS2, ISU, AVRE, Churchill, Pershing are tanks that can soak up a Panther, while ATG back them up.
    With SBP armor nerf, Panther is going to spend too much time outside instead of harassing.
    Again, when is a coh2 game of 1 tank v 1 tank?

    You pretending StuG isn't OP only speaks for how bad of a player you are.

    How is it OP when a AEC can kite and kill it?
    It is as OP as allies SU76 wall or ATG wall with maxim spam.

    No, it is not supposed to be strong in 1v2. It never was and it never will.
    It was supposed to stomp allied premium armor in 1v1 situations and its exactly what it does, except now it'll do it even better.

    In Coh, in Coh2 the unique flavor was to have panther up against multiple faster cheaper TD. Hence it is later, more expensive, and strong veterancy. Relic new balance team is getting lazy and dropping the uniqueness of this series.
    Allies TD got boost while Panther armor weakens yet remain expensive. What a joke

    Don't complain about TDs, because they all got nerfed as well this patch.

    What nerf? A slight sight nerf to prevent sniping Axis tanks unfairly when said Axis armor was nerfed the same time as Allies TD got boost last December?
    Meanwhile Panther armor keeps dropping and keeps getting more expensive to field.

  • #138
    1 year ago
    Sander93Sander93 Posts: 49
    edited April 2018

    To me it feels like Panthers barely ever bounce shots from AT / late game tanks anyway so I honestly welcome an HP buff. I'd rather count on a set HP value for survival than RNG pen mechanic.

    The only thing that it really lacked IMO was DPM. That's being buffed now so I'll be keen to see how it all works out.

  • #139
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,587
    edited April 2018

    @mrgame2 said:

    @Katitof said:

    You don't counter panther with comet.
    Its the other way around.
    Same for 34/85, which can only with with numerical advantage, in which case it should.

    Why not? Comet has always fight on equal grounds against Panther. It is 50-50% either one will win, or managed to survive.
    Panther at current state and after SBP will be easier to counter.

    Umm, no.
    Not even close.
    Math was done and tests were made.
    Comet has at the very best 40% to beat panther and only on very lucky RNG streak, which panther does not need.
    Penetration and armor values are not rocket science. Comet is visibly inferior to Panther in 1v1 brawl and you trying to present a baseless opinion as a fact won't change it.

    Now, think for a second, how is it possible that allied tanks with half of the armor and now 50% less health are managing to do their job, when you have your own ATGs, StuGs and shrecks? And that is before even panther comes into consideration.
    It might be worth for you to do the same-micro instead of a-move expecting to win against your counters.

    Which 50% less health? Allies tanks come out faster and more units. By time Panther hits, Allies have imba TD

    New panther has 960 health.
    Medium tanks have 640.
    50% of 640 is 320.
    Want to know what will happen if you add 320 to 640?

    And if allied fielded a TD, why have you not got any ATGs again? Panther needs to be parked only slightly behind PaKs to ensure safety of PaKs from tank flanks and destruction of anything in front of them, that "imba TD" included.

    And now axis late game armor was nerfed, just like allied early game was nerfed. Playing field got leveled for you, if you struggle at the moment, its because you were outplayed as there is no longer factions supremacy tied to specific game phase anymore.

    Allies infantry still dominate the field, control the resources, churn out shock units, and make faster tanks.

    No, they do not.
    Infantry was rebalanced, allied weapon teams were nerfed and axis were buffed, so was mainline infantry, including this very SBP.
    Tanks arrive within 30 seconds of each other when you do not suck at the game and keep your half of the map, like good players do.

    34/85 is being steamrolled by StuGs for the cost.
    So is comet, but panther will stomp it as well, equal support or slugfest.
    Pershing can win only if its vetted.
    Churchill? You for real?
    IS-2 will lose if you'll kite or circle it as its not mobile enough.
    KV-8? KV-2? If you struggle against these with panther, it might be way too late for L2P for you.

    I am not struggling with Panther. Its Panther struggling to dispatch these high armor tanks, which hit the field earlier. Push back wehr front line, Supported by immba TD later on. You see the problem? It is not about 1 tank vs 1 tank. It is the field of play, the timings, the need to consider all units, the waterfall effect.

    Out of everything you mentioned, exclusively 34/85 and KV-8 arrive faster. Panther penetrates both of them 100% of the time, at all distances. Everything else arrives just as fast or later. And you can field ATGs to completely shut down TDs.

    Yes, I do see the problem very clearly.
    You lack the ability to correctly asset the situation, fail to anticipate, very likely have bad micro and don't understand how units should be used to utilize them to their fullest.
    That's the main problem I see.

    You know, its not about 1v1 tank vs tank. Its the entire scope of the match. All the counters can be fielded BEFORE they are needed in anticipation. You need to anticipate and field them earlier, not minutes after you need them, you need to consider all units.

    SU76 is being nerfed and its not a threat to panther unless massed and when its massed, you are not going to see any of the other tanks, StuG spam hardcounters them easily.

    Yes i approve the nerf because SU76 was way too cheap and too early. Stug do not hard counter them, both are of equal potency, but SU76 was too early, has free arty and vet faster. Making it even more potent

    And its getting its nerf.
    So is the StuG, which is equally OP.

    You complain about USF mortar, but ignore Ost mortar, which is the same, but got 30% longer range? That's dictionary example of bias.

    Because Wehr mortar need to take on 6 man support weapons, emplacements, thin out infantry blobs. While USF accurate mortar squad wipe wehr support teams. You are missing the point again.

    6 man support weapons of USF? Brits?
    You do realize that USF mortar got exactly the same accuracy as ost mortar? It literally is the exact same weapon, but with shorter range and now, with the patch, its literally exactly same weapon, but more expensive, because reasons.
    I'm not missing any point here.
    YOU however are completely missing the basic knowledge of stats to make an accurate argument on mortars.

    Everyone can dispose of ATGs equally easy if you apply correct counters and axis factions do not lack any of these counters.

    Allies have more arty, earlier and more deadly. At the same time Allies have better TD late game. Allies have cheaper T70 Stuart AEC easily kite ATGs. You see the point?

    Like what?
    First indirect fire piece that arrives on field belongs to USF, ost can field own mortar whooping 10 seconds later.
    Walking stuka is first rocket arty to hit the field.
    Howitzers arrive at the same time for everyone.

    Luchs is cheaper then T70, stuart and AEC and it rips apart ATGs better then any of allied ones. Flame 251 is fastest arriving vehicle that murders all weapon teams effortlessly due to how it works. What is your point again?

    And panther easily beats allied doctrinal armor.
    Your point?

    No it does not. IS2, ISU, AVRE, Churchill, Pershing are tanks that can soak up a Panther, while ATG back them up.
    With SBP armor nerf, Panther is going to spend too much time outside instead of harassing.
    Again, when is a coh2 game of 1 tank v 1 tank?

    IS-2 has terrible firepower, its MEANT to soak damage, just like Tiger is meant to deal damage, which IS-2 can't compare to at all.
    ISU is much less durable then elephant and jagd tiger, so you are wrong here as well.
    If you are using panther to counter churchills, you are further proving to me what I have said above about you not understanding units and not being able to field proper counters. StuGs counter churchills, not panther. Panther is for high ARMOR targets, StuGs are for meds and high HEALTH targets with modertate armor, which churchills are.

    And what prevents YOU from using your own ATGs to back your armor?
    Sorry, but you can't use the "iz not 1v1 tank game" exclusively when it suits you and ignore it when it doesn't.
    Where are your pshrecks? Where are your PaKs? Where is your other armor?

    You pretending StuG isn't OP only speaks for how bad of a player you are.

    How is it OP when a AEC can kite and kill it?
    It is as OP as allies SU76 wall or ATG wall with maxim spam.

    How exactly AEC can kite it when it has 10 less range?
    Yes, it is as op as SU76 and PaK wall with HMG42 spam, you are right, and guess what again? Both are being nerfed!
    Can you stop repeating yourself like a broken record now?

    No, it is not supposed to be strong in 1v2. It never was and it never will.
    It was supposed to stomp allied premium armor in 1v1 situations and its exactly what it does, except now it'll do it even better.

    In Coh, in Coh2 the unique flavor was to have panther up against multiple faster cheaper TD. Hence it is later, more expensive, and strong veterancy. Relic new balance team is getting lazy and dropping the uniqueness of this series.
    Allies TD got boost while Panther armor weakens yet remain expensive. What a joke

    You are literally pulling that out of your rear.
    Not a singular Relic employee ever once even hinted that panther is supposed to kill tank destroyers.
    It was always supposed to counter high armor targets, which allied TDs are not.
    And again, allied TDs are nerfed this patch while panther is being buffed.
    Your wet dreams of krupp steel are no more, because axis is NOT MEANT TO be stronger in late game, just like allies are no longer stronger in early game. Get the memo already.

    Don't complain about TDs, because they all got nerfed as well this patch.

    What nerf? A slight sight nerf to prevent sniping Axis tanks unfairly when said Axis armor was nerfed the same time as Allies TD got boost last December?
    Meanwhile Panther armor keeps dropping and keeps getting more expensive to field.

    Population changes.
    If you had most basic grasp at understanding how it works, you'd see that new population changes effectively soft cap all TDs to 1 per faction. If you want to have 2, you will never be able to field regular tank. If you want to have 3, you will have no army. There is a massive difference between 30 and 45 pop.

    Panther was buffed with faster firing rate and has more hp from get go, allowing it to easier survive retreats.
    Stop pretending its not a buff.

    You remember when churchills had a lot of HP, but low armor and it was changed to more armor and less HP?
    That was a nerf to their survivability.
    The exact opposite is just happening to Panther.
    You really need to lack knowledge on the game to believe otherwise don't let that viper poison you and apply yourself a cure of getting to know stats and how they work in game.

  • #140
    1 year ago
    mrgame2mrgame2 Posts: 496

    Wow which version of game you playing? In the old-old version, yes a vet2 panther can win 60% against comet.
    No one goes for an early flame HT now, besides flame damage nerf, you are open to fast T70/Stuart/AEC without ammo and mp back-up. And T70/Stuart/AEC is earlier as Luch and shreds both inf(ACE against support team) AND all Wehr doctrine armor except P4, Panther and Brumbar. Relic had to nerf Luch in DBP? lolic. Come again?

    And SBP has weaker Panther armor and more FU, what faster firing rate? Only slightly better retreating accuracy shots. It is overall nerf. Jackson may lose pop, but Panther already lost 2 in DBP. Jackson got all round boost in DBP, it make sense that it should have more pop and Relic only putting in 4 months later. Same story, change some stats for wehr armor, only to compensate on others. While Allies TD is now shredding heavy non-doctrine armor.

    Wehr inf is not boosted at all.
    Ok the PG got a nice AT boost in SBP. But Allies infantry still shred Wehr.

  • #141
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,778
    Tbe match up for panther and comet was 60/40 in the panthers favor before the big comet nerf. The panther can reliably beat the comet now due to shortened range, reduced pen and being a bit slower. The panther is king of tanks. Even the mighty brits now know that.
  • #142
    1 year ago

    @thekingsown said:
    I would like to point out that the soviet T70 needs toning down.

    It kills infantry better than an Ostwind for cheaper and comes earlier. Add the increased damage to the sniper and you have an already extremely overpowered unit even stronger.

    T70 is fine. The Ostwind needs a buff (which the balance team fucked up). I just hope this patch fixes the ostwind buff PROPERLY.

  • #143
    1 year ago
    TheLeveler83TheLevele… Posts: 684
    edited April 2018

    my thoughts on sov and ost changes:
    soviets.
    -The ppsh upgrade just needs to be made more expensive instead of reducing them to 2 smg,s. make it 70 muni for example. 2smgs will make it a pretty usseles upgrade.
    -The su76 pen nerf looks good to me. i still do want a group of them to at least threaten a single heavy though. they could also just make the su76 more expensive instead.
    -the su85 changes seem unnecesary to me personaly.
    -katty changes dont seem neccesary to me personaly as well.
    -The guards were fine imo. 3 cp is a big change. we will see how that works out.
    -the sniper change i dont like. it does not have a good vet ability for it to be one man imo. it will be a worse sniper for the same price.
    - mortar changes seem good to me. esp the rediculous rof for the ost and usf mortars finaly. but both the soviet mortar flares should be made cheaper or replaced with something usefull. a semi precision strike perhaps. with a (larger) radius were it can hit. this will make it usefull and not as powerfull as in the past.
    -b4 in tank hunter instead of m20 makes sense to me.

    Ost.
    -pgrens smoke grenade i agree with. shrecks i dont know i about that. i never found them to be lacking. the price being dropped a bit should have done it already.
    -stug change is not neccesary to me. i think they are good for the most part.
    -the 222 price decrease is over the top. esp with the armour buffs.
    -brumbar changes are not needed imo.
    -panther changes are interesting. the price increase for the ost one is a not neccesary imo. also i dont know why only the okw one is getting a rof increase. the ost one is lacking dps the most.
    -the cmd p4 changes i think are ok. it did have a very big impact. a tad to big imo.

    feel free to agree or disagree.

  • #144
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,778
    **changing the B4 into the ml20 is a bad change imo. The reasom the ml20 was put into tankhunter was to give the enemy a reason to dive into ambush, the b4 isnt that threat because the b4 id an absolute joke that might hit a cache if when you target the base sector.
  • #145
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,587

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    **changing the B4 into the ml20 is a bad change imo. The reasom the ml20 was put into tankhunter was to give the enemy a reason to dive into ambush, the b4 isnt that threat because the b4 id an absolute joke that might hit a cache if when you target the base sector.

    Agreed.
    They wanted to make the doctrine more attractive, but how exchanging somewhat "reliable" howi into RNG cannon that can't hit the sector it was targeted at is questionable.

    Also, one other thing-mortar damage modifier on yellow cover was implemented to reduce squad wipes of clumped full health infantry. I'd like to discuss if it maybe could be a good idea to implement similar modifier for yellow cover(where most squads tend to hump each other) for grenades.
    Would it make sense? It certainly would benefit smaller squads the most.

  • #146
    1 year ago
    Farra13Farra13 Posts: 647

    @Katitof said:

    Also, one other thing-mortar damage modifier on yellow cover was implemented to reduce squad wipes of clumped full health infantry. I'd like to discuss if it maybe could be a good idea to implement similar modifier for yellow cover(where most squads tend to hump each other) for grenades.

    That could be a very good idea, question is, do you apply a flat modifier like the mortar rounds or apply the same system that green cover has? (damage reduction only occurs when the projectile crosses the cover piece)

  • #147
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,587

    Green cover is always directional and object.

    Yellow cover is also ground area based.

  • #148
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,778
    Can they just add a general damage modifier to yellow and reduce the RA slightly? I know it would make late game craterfests a bit more forgiving but certain units could be buffed to compensate
  • #149
    1 year ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,587

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Can they just add a general damage modifier to yellow and reduce the RA slightly? I know it would make late game craterfests a bit more forgiving but certain units could be buffed to compensate

    Yellow cover accuracy reduction is already 50%. I doubt we need to go down with it even more, between squads native RA and vet bonuses.

  • #150
    1 year ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,778
    Oops i meant reduce the bonus my bad. Good catch
  • #151
    1 year ago
    _Aqua__Aqua_ Posts: 1,951
    edited April 2018

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    **changing the B4 into the ml20 is a bad change imo. The reasom the ml20 was put into tankhunter was to give the enemy a reason to dive into ambush, the b4 isnt that threat because the b4 id an absolute joke that might hit a cache if when you target the base sector.

    In its current form, yes, but I imagine the intention is to give the B4 a buff in a future iteration. If not though, then yeah, its going to suck to play Tank Hunters.

This discussion has been closed.

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.