Panther tank is useless

124»

Comments

  • #92
    8 months ago
    DarjeelingMK7Darjeelin… Posts: 244
    So can we stop this argument yet ?
  • #93
    8 months ago
    szolnok95szolnok95 Posts: 54

    Nope.

  • #94
    7 months ago

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    Making the panther into a comet clone would be a nerf and leave the stug as the best non doc AT wehr can field. Panther has 3 mgs that offer decent AI (comet has 2). Panther has 50 range (comet has 45) panther has 960hp (comet has 800) comet has more armour! But the panther armour is already trivialized by allied TDs. Panther gets reload buffs with vet comet gets none.

    Well...I am not sure if it could be called "decent AI" . The truth is most medium tanks' damage on infantry is by the main gun, not the MG right? I'm not supporting the idea that Panzer is useless, but at least let's admit the truth that it may hardly anti-infantry ok?

    When Comet Tank has the stats:

    AOE Radius
    2.5
    Distance near
    0.25
    Distance mid
    1
    Distance far
    1.5
    Damage near
    160
    Damage mid
    64
    Damage far
    32

    and Panzer has:

    AOE Radius
    0.5
    Distance near
    0.15
    Distance mid
    0.2
    Distance far
    0.25
    Damage near
    160
    Damage mid
    24
    Damage far
    8

    How could you ignore that and talking about Panzer has 3 MG and Comet has 2??? Isn't that a little bit bias of your claim sir....

  • #95
    7 months ago
    C3ToothC3Tooth Posts: 642

    I think comparing T34 & Panther is not fair.

  • #96
    7 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    @Yanggesaisi most BURST damage comes from the cannon that is true, but mgs offer far more reliable AI DPS.
  • #97
    7 months ago

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    @Yanggesaisi most BURST damage comes from the cannon that is true, but mgs offer far more reliable AI DPS.

    It depends on how do you definite the word "reliable". To me, it's the capable ability to fear, to suppress and to kill enemies' effective strength. Also, it is such a common scene that Allies infantries ignore the damage from Panzer, keep doing what they planed to do, even driving Panzer back. And this is what I was talking about the cannon AOE damage, so as to your BURST theory.

  • #98
    7 months ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,822
    > @Yanggesaisi said:
    > @thedarkarmadillo said:
    > @Yanggesaisi most BURST damage comes from the cannon that is true, but mgs offer far more reliable AI DPS.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > It depends on how do you definite the word "reliable". To me, it's the capable ability to fear, to suppress and to kill enemies' effective strength. Also, it is such a common scene that Allies infantries ignore the damage from Panzer, keep doing what they planed to do, even driving Panzer back. And this is what I was talking about the cannon AOE damage, so as to your BURST theory.

    It could also miss entirely 18 shots in a row and do nothing. That's the trade off. You get a panther and you pay alot for a counter for something that might not come. It's not like allied TDs with great accuracy and respectable ROF that makes it great against all armour making it valid that they have no AI to speak of. You pay for reliability with the panther and that's what you get. If you want a shock AI unit there is the brumbar for Ost or going for the uparmoured p4 as Ost (not really shock but eh) that's not the panthers job. For a unit specialized against armour it does a reliable job against infantry as well.
  • #99
    7 months ago

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    > @Yanggesaisi said:
    > @thedarkarmadillo said:
    > @Yanggesaisi most BURST damage comes from the cannon that is true, but mgs offer far more reliable AI DPS.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > It depends on how do you definite the word "reliable". To me, it's the capable ability to fear, to suppress and to kill enemies' effective strength. Also, it is such a common scene that Allies infantries ignore the damage from Panzer, keep doing what they planed to do, even driving Panzer back. And this is what I was talking about the cannon AOE damage, so as to your BURST theory.

    It could also miss entirely 18 shots in a row and do nothing. That's the trade off. You get a panther and you pay alot for a counter for something that might not come. It's not like allied TDs with great accuracy and respectable ROF that makes it great against all armour making it valid that they have no AI to speak of. You pay for reliability with the panther and that's what you get. If you want a shock AI unit there is the brumbar for Ost or going for the uparmoured p4 as Ost (not really shock but eh) that's not the panthers job. For a unit specialized against armour it does a reliable job against infantry as well.

    Indeed, I agree with you on most parts above sir.

    But it also brings a new question....... Why OKW need two armored Anti-Vehicle units to finish its job? Was the R43 AT too weak, or the J4(70) was not that effective? Or, the role-definition of Panzer , which is only effective to anti-vehicle, is totally wrong at the very beginning, especially under the circumstance that OKW has no effective anti-infanty vehicles (please don't remind me of Luchs for the moment.....) like other factions, or something like "Brummbär" ? I am a little confused by this as well.

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.