OP M36

[Panzerblitz1]

While we're here on this discussion, I want to ask if the 90mm gun is supposed to be better or worse than the 17 pounder. Because it seems that the 17 pounder is much cheaper but is a lot better at destroying axis tanks. This is just a comparison I want to make because the M36 and M36B1 are almost perfect counterparts to the Achilles and the Firefly. Both are modified M10 Wolverines or modified Shermans.

Well normaly the 90mm is matching the 17 pdr, and the Achilles is the cousin of the M36 Jackson, both Guns should be equal in damage in BK.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Actually according to realism.. the US 76mm guns are supposed to be too close in performance or almost matching the CW 17Pdr guns, yet weaker than the 17Pdrs for sure. While the 90mm guns are to be probably considered as the best... But not the most accurate ones.

in BK however; the 90mm guns aren't really great, that's simply because the SP exists in the game. Which is obviously intended as far as I can see... Specifically since that all the US tanks which are equipped with the 90mm cannon (such as Pershing and Jacksons) are too early available and also pretty cheap compared to their Axis counterparts. Although that based on reality they should be later available, but again; all these unrealistic confusions currently represented on the game.. is ONLY due to the SP existence!

[Warhawks97]

While we're here on this discussion, I want to ask if the 90mm gun is supposed to be better or worse than the 17 pounder. Because it seems that the 17 pounder is much cheaper but is a lot better at destroying axis tanks. This is just a comparison I want to make because the M36 and M36B1 are almost perfect counterparts to the Achilles and the Firefly. Both are modified M10 Wolverines or modified Shermans.

check first post.

With basic AP the 17 pdr pens generally better axis tanks than the 90 mm (except vs KT where 90 mm is better). Panther or tiger.... go 17 pdr.

VS Tank IV´s the 90 mm has way higher chance with basic AP to oneshot as the 17 pdr. Just the silly thing in BK is: Axis and CW AP rounds do increase the damage by 25%. The US HVAP for their 76 mm gun does only buff pen (iirc the 17 pdr APDS boost pen by 57%, the US by 54%. But i can check it in corsix if you want). The US AP for the 90 mm do decrease the damage by approx 15% and increase pen by 74%.


conclusion:

17 pdr achilles/Firefly:

1. better basic pen vs almost every axis tank
2. AP increases damage matching up with 90 mm having AP active
3. AP activation cost 50 ammo (?)
4. Reloads faster
5. Cheaper
6. Achilles has better camo boost for pen, damage and range making it clearly better.
7. Armor upgrade on firefly boosts its armor more than second sandbag upgrade on sherman.
8. Achilles has flank speed at default after ambush.

90 mm:

1. lower basic pen values
2. damage decrease with AP rounds
3. normal AP round activation cost
4. long reload time
5. Costly
6. weaker camo bonuses
7. Good basic armor. Can stand 50 mm and 75 mm L/48 shots very well
8. No flank speed at default after ambush. Also needs engine upgrade first
9. Can call Tank commander arty when Tank commander is inside and ability unlocked.


As for axis: AP rounds do make sense when facing superior numbers of shermans, especially e8 (with sandbags). A Panther with basic AP doesnt oneshot a e8 (unless making lucky shot). With AP active that chance is greatly increased, turning the Panther into a deadly oneshot tank thus enabling it to take on a larger group of (engaging) easy eights.

Actually according to realism.. the US 76mm guns are supposed to be too close in performance or almost matching the CW 17Pdr guns, yet weaker than the 17Pdrs for sure. While the 90mm guns are to be probably considered as the best... But not the most accurate ones.

in BK however; the 90mm guns aren't really great, that's simply because the SP exists in the game. Which is obviously intended as far as I can see... Specifically since that all the US tanks which are equipped with the 90mm cannon (such as Pershing and Jacksons) are too early available and also pretty cheap compared to their Axis counterparts. Although that based on reality they should be later available, but again; all these unrealistic confusions currently represented on the game.. is ONLY due to the SP existence!

nah, they had been bad even before SP came. US stuff was simply shit, just like that. Doesnt matter their vcoh MG tent with pure vcoh stats but insane build cost, 76 guns that barely penetrated Tank IV´s while Tank IV´s had super basic pen chance, pea shooter jeep with almost vcoh weapon stats, M1 Garand that couldnt beat MPi´s at longer distances being only effective at MPi range, 57 mm AT gun that took fucking 7 seconds to reload (!!), super expensive M10´s and many many more silly things, M15A1 with peashooter stats but more expensive than a Tank IV, quad cal 50 that couldnt penetrate and hit german airplanes..... that list was very long.....

So there was no "intention". It was just not important.

[Krieger Blitzer]

nah, they had been bad even before SP came. US stuff was simply shit, just like that. Doesnt matter their vcoh MG tent with pure vcoh stats but insane build cost, 76 guns that barely penetrated Tank IV´s while Tank IV´s had super basic pen chance, pea shooter jeep with almost vcoh weapon stats, M1 Garand that couldnt beat MPi´s at longer distances being only effective at MPi range, 57 mm AT gun that took fucking 7 seconds to reload (!!), super expensive M10´s and many many more silly things, M15A1 with peashooter stats but more expensive than a Tank IV, quad cal 50 that couldnt penetrate and hit german airplanes..... that list was very long.....

So there was no "intention". It was just not important.

Why do u make me feel like that US or Allies in general have been always persecuted or something? "Oh, poor US! People treat u so bad" That is such a ridiculous sense of sympathy from ur side to be honest and is not good for ur credibility as it could reveal us how much biased u r, plz don't repeat that kind of argument again.
However that just to clarify.. back then; things used to be much worse for Axis too... And not only for the US at all. The game was simply full of bugs and apparently incomplete. It's not like that they always intentionally tried to make US the weakest anyhow.
V1 used to be crap as well, Def doc 200mm off-map rockets barrage dealt zero damage, this was fixed just since the last patch!
Just another example, Tiger tank used to cost more, yet being much weaker than now! The Tiger's armor later was buffed though.
The HE rounds of the Def doc stubby 75mm gun HT weren't working, as it was still shooting AP even after HE shells activation... See??!! This was fixed just recently as well.. this clearly shows how totally wrong u r. The game was simply incomplete.. as that the development of the mod was at early stage, and work was still in progress back then at that time in the past, that's why several things were full of bugs or seemed unbalanced enough.
What proves what I say, is that all those things u mentioned were later fixed anyway... And we all welcomed it. The US Armor doc had HUGE buff too...

So ya, back to the subject... I guess I have to say it for the last time now just to rest my case.. 90mm guns can't be buffed as long as SP exists. According to balance wise of the game, it would be fine to do so only after removing SP as well as delaying both the Pershing and Jacksons!

[Warhawks97]

dude, i talk about times before you came. I mean how else do you explain an MG nest from vcoh being taken out by three bursts of a lmg?

I didnt speak about current state. I do talk about past(!!). You got that?

When there is an MG nest for US that has vcoh values, a 76 that has almost no chance to pen Tank IV even when using HVAP while those pen with 99% chance with basic AP and both tanks on similiar price tag, when a quad cal 50 has a 7% chance to pen a plane and with a hit chance of 10% or less, with 37 mm that cant hit anything (M15A1), when a elephant or JP reloads two sec faster as a silly 57 mm gun. Dude, how would you call that?

It got changed by wolf (!!). I just gave counter to the belief that the 90 mm is crap just because of the SP because it was crap before the SP came (!) along with all the things i mentioned above. So yeah, i do blame (and think its obvious when you get the fucking facts) the old devs to be greatly biased towards axis (and that mod was originally made for some axis players who want expert alli compstomp and that it became famous and used for pvp rather by accident than by purpose. And when i started with BK i exactly did that: 2-3 axis players vs 3 US exp bots on blazing lowland lasting hours and with axis tanks up to 500 tank kills).

So i dont get your problem now when i blame the past for good reasons.

and yeah, axis had some bugs as you mentioned.... but those were bugs as you correctly stated. The tiger was more costly, yes, but 76 worse and e8 cost more than 400 MP even after mass prod in very old times. Also in pvp the bugs on axis appeared on units being barely used anyway (stubby tank IV, off map rocket from def doc and the like) or not core units or important for balance. The US were no bugs, they were simply horrible in stats, never looked at etc. And a not working (overpriced) stubby tank IV (which still has barely use) is less balance concerning than rifles not better than MPi´s at any distance, not working AT guns or core units that cant kill shit (AA, MBT´s etc).

So just side units had bugs, core units performed always extremly well. US side units had bugs and core units had simply shitty stats.

anyway, off topic....

on topic:
The whole point is that the 90 mm is not worth getting really just because the SP is in game and to balance it out. It was not getting it even before the SP came. With not worth getting i do mainly refer to team games when you got a brit that can provide better 17 pdrs.

[Krieger Blitzer]

I didnt speak about current state. I do talk about past(!!). You got that?

I am definitely aware of that for no doubt, that's why I was also using past sentence;

However that just to clarify.. back then; things used to be much worse for Axis too... And not only for the US at all. The game was simply full of bugs and apparently incomplete. It's not like that they always intentionally tried to make US the weakest anyhow.

I also said;

What proves what I say, is that all those things u mentioned were later fixed anyway... And we all welcomed it. The US Armor doc had HUGE buff too...

So, I am surely not talking about the current state either.

It got changed by wolf (!!)

And most of the Axis problems I mentioned were also fixed by Wolf. It wasn't by old developers...

I just gave counter to the belief that the 90 mm is crap just because of the SP because it was crap before the SP came (!) along with all the things i mentioned above.

Yes, 90mm guns might have been weak even before the SP came, but probably they never manged to change it.. maybe because they knew they were planning or that they were going to add the SP in the future.
And not due to that it was simply not important anyhow... Why haven't u ever thought to consider this fact as a possibility, rather than calling them biased? While in fact, u r the one who seem to be biased this way.

the old devs to be greatly biased towards axis

I don't think so.. adding a prototype tank for US that almost never existed during ww2, is enough to prove that they weren't any biased for Axis. It's just that they were still working on the mod.. that's why several things seemed crap and yet incomplete at that time. As that those bugs or these unbalanced incorrect things were actually imported from vCoH directly without any change.. but this doesn't mean they weren't planning to change it later. It's not that they had tendency to one side over another... I dare u call the old devs like that again.
Without the old devs, there would have been no BK mod nowadays. Keep that in mind.

Also, u have to consider that in vCoH... Allies used to be much better than Axis.. so; when they started working on BK mod, they began their work with adjusting Axis first since that Allies were much better already. But I bet they were surely planning to re-adjust Allies later after that... And that's what has happened now. The current devs also include ones from the old team, don't forget that

[Warhawks97]

Oh, yeah.... a prototype tank added to allied. That clearly shows their passion to really address the endless problems (HMG vcoh tent, insane reload times for medium pak, horrible cost ratio for M15A1 and M20 etc. Their 57 mm AT HT cost 270 MP while brits payed 220, wtf..... MPi rifles, usless jeep with vcoh stats etc etc etc. Yeah, they made all that so shitty because they added the SP years later. Dude, do you even know what i am talking about? So many errors on very core units? The fact that they simply put that SP with horrible broken stats and without any real sense shows clearly how much "attention" allied have got by old devs..... Maybe i gonna make a full list of all the shit for allied (mainly US) i can remember from old days and compare those to the few axis bugs on non axis core units. Sure they had some units with no use and bugs like the old 50 mm Puma with bugged HE or some overpriced vehicles.

I mean wake up. Dont get it? Another sample was the old wespe.... cheaper than a howitzer and 1 CP cheaper.... no bias at all, nooo.


So yeah, the weak 90 mm is not a "wise" decision by old devs with the forethought of adding the SP in future that solves all the problems.... Sounds really reasonable to me. Anyway, i am out for now. good night.


and allied better in vcoh? Nah, the factions couldnt be compared at all. Yeah, it was easier with allied there than in old BK. But all factions were simply so extremly different. But well working PE players and WH can rush decently even there. And PE is more funny there as well in their design.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Well, in order not to get this topic derailed off any further. My opinion stands clear though; whether u think the old devs were wise or not, but anyway at the moment the 90mm guns now according to the balance wise at the current state.. can't be buffed without removing the SP as well as delaying both the Pershing and Jacksons... Or it would be obviously a total balance breaking for reasons I already mentioned above.

[Cyberzombie]

Problem is that the SP will most likely never get removed.
People are getting the SP because it is in most cases the only reliable tank against all those heavies coming from axis. Improving the 90mm could lead to less use of the SP... But I guess we shouldn't even try it since allies would become super OP instantly

[MarKr]

Since I might finally have time to continue working on the patch I have to ask: what is the reason for people saying that 90mm guns cannot be buffed as long as SP is in the game? I read the posts in this topic and I just don't see the logic behind it...US have a single tank capable of destroying axis heavies and therefore 90mm guns (which are only mounted on 2 vehicles) cannot be buffed to effectively take down PIVs, Tigers and Panthers? It is not like it would suddenly penetrate KTs at max range 95% of times.

[Leonida [525]]

I think there's the risk that Armor doc could become just overperforming. When i play US I almost always prefer this doc, I think it is very good. For me Armor doc like it is now, talking about "tank power" is right (he shermans with sandbags are amazing Vs infantry, TDs are very good, not to forget fast Hellcat and m10 with his super-Heat shell , pershings are quite good especially with apcr). the fact is that the SP is a "strange" unit, put there to counter super-heavy german tanks, but if we buff 90mm then the existence of SP it's just too much i think. armor doc has already some nice things that german faction does not have (White health bar and very fast repair with armor engineers, command vehicle, auto-repairing tanks, the possibility to replace lost tanks, more fuel) combined with more manpower thx to supply yard and cheap pershings (at least for now ). But if there will be also a change of prices of tanks it could be honest. That's my worry .. Dunno, this changes must be well evaluated

[Krieger Blitzer]

Since I might finally have time to continue working on the patch I have to ask: what is the reason for people saying that 90mm guns cannot be buffed as long as SP is in the game? I read the posts in this topic and I just don't see the logic behind it...US have a single tank capable of destroying axis heavies and therefore 90mm guns (which are only mounted on 2 vehicles) cannot be buffed to effectively take down PIVs, Tigers and Panthers? It is not like it would suddenly penetrate KTs at max range 95% of times.

Leonida probably said it all. I can still clarifiy it further though...
But first.. i am really glad to hear you have finally started working on the next patch!
Secondly, how could someone like you ever fail to recognize the logic behind what has been said??!! I think the reasons that 90mm guns can never be buffed as long as SP is in the game, are quite VERY obvious like the sun, i would say.

Actually the 90mm guns (at least from what i have seen) currently perform well enough btw, and they CAN penetrate even King and Jagd Tigers quite reliably. Specifically when using APCR!
Keep in mind also that both the Pershing and the Jackson are in fact available too early... While in reality the SP wouldn't be even there, while the Pershing and the Jackson would be much later available as well.
As for now, and only because of the SP existence, the Pershing is somehow available as soon as a Tiger as a result!!! 1945 tank is available as soon as a 1942 tank. Panthers which were deployed in 1943, are available later than the Pershing too! Unless you pick the Jackson first. Why this mess?? Only because of the SP existence.
But even though, i mean, even if you pick jacksons and not Pershing... Then as we have seen on this topic.. the M36 (not the B1) is actually over-performing for its cost, at least it should have less HP than the B1.

I am not discussing realism or history here, but I am just trying to point out the fact that even according to game balance; 90mm guns buff = SP removal = Pershing and Jackson delay.
Quite as simple as that, cuz the Pershing is not only available as soon as a Tiger, but actually the Pershing's armor is apparently not too weak unlike some people are claiming! If you have watched my videos, u will observe how the Pershing and the M36 were able to bounce off the Tiger's 88mm and the Panther's 75mm shells several times. Keeping in mind that Pershings and Jacksons already cost less than the Panther G and Tigers. And are also available as early as those, while they should be later available as i mentioned, at least according to realism.

And btw, Pershings together with Churchills are the ONLY Allied tanks I have seen that are capable of bouncing the 100 ammo rocket ability from 50mm paks. Not to mention the SP of course! But Jumbos can't do that as far as I am concerned.

So, why giving extra firepower to such tanks like Pershing and Jackson? Don't they have the SP already? While it shouldn't be there even? isn't the Pershing early available as much? While it even shouldn't?
I understand that the 90mm guns can bounce off a Tiger, which is little bit unrealistic to be honest.. true.
But isn't the SP already unrealistic as well? Who cares then? Yet, Axis 88s and long barreled 75s of Tigers and Panthers can also bounce off the Pershing... SO again, where is the problem here??? Why buffing the 90mm guns??

SO, let me say it again, hopefully for the last time.. if you would like to massively buff the 90mm guns, then go ahead and remove the SP... Also delay Pershings and Jacksons as well. DON"T tell me that you would only like to buff them just 'slightly' because currently they ARE NOT WEAK anyhow. At least consider the fact that those tanks which are equipped with 90mm guns, are easier to obtain than their counter parts. While it shouldn't be the case!

Wish if I have settled it out clearly enough.

[MarKr]

Actually the 90mm guns (at least from what i have seen) currently perform well enough btw, and they CAN penetrate even King and Jagd Tigers quite reliably. Specifically when using APCR!

I'd say it depends on what you consider "reliable". It seems to me that in the game "Axis reliable" is more than "Allies reliable". Yes, APCR boost penetration a lot but also reduce damage, while Axis AP ammo boosts penetration less (but they have better basic pen. stats) + boost damage too.

Keep in mind also that both the Pershing and the Jackson are in fact available too early... While in reality the SP wouldn't be even there, while the Pershing and the Jackson would be much later available as well.
As for now, and only because of the SP existence, the Pershing is somehow available as soon as a Tiger as a result!!! 1945 tank is available as soon as a 1942 tank. Panthers which were deployed in 1943, are available later than the Pershing too! Unless you pick the Jackson first.

In this case realism is not the most important factor, gameplay is. Pershings and Jacksons are meant to be counters to Tigers and Panthers so what would be the sense of having them available only when Axis start bringing out KTs and other superheavies?
Also without APCR Pershing has a chance of 36.54% to penetrate Panther at max range...given the fact that Pershings are suppoesed to be counters to these units, it still seems pretty weak. With APCR it is about 62%, which still doesn't shine very much.

One thing that is still on my mind - you say that people go for SP because it is the only reliable counter to Axis superheavies...ok. That means that players in general consider 90mm guns to be too weak and unreliable against the super heavies and so the preffery SP over PAce. Doesn't that mean that if 90mm guns become more reliable (when I say "more reliable" I don't mean SP reliable level...just better against Tigers and Panthers, but not on the level to be a certain win against KT and alike), players will use them more often and possibly start considering using PAce, rather than SP which would lead to less often SP occurence in general because Pershings are cheaper than SP and PAce is too and you can use it repeatedly.

[Krieger Blitzer]

I'd say it depends on what you consider "reliable". It seems to me that in the game "Axis reliable" is more than "Allies reliable". Yes, APCR boost penetration a lot but also reduce damage, while Axis AP ammo boosts penetration less (but they have better basic pen. stats) + boost damage too.

Armor doc is usually suffering no ammo issues, just like RE doc.
So, APCR is often obtained easily in those docs...

I would say that the Armor doc currently with the existence of the SP is one of the most important doctrines in pvp games, with the existence of the SP of course... Nevertheless.. it won't be ever a good idea going double Armor docs unless the map is rich on fuel. Going double Armor doc on Autry for example is probably unstoppable even!

In this case realism is not the most important factor, gameplay is.

And also that's what I already said here;

I am not discussing realism or history here, but I am just trying to point out the fact that even according to game balance; 90mm guns buff = SP removal = Pershing and Jackson delay.

I can see you have said there that the penetration chances of the Pershing's 90mm gun against Panthers are not that high, right?

Also without APCR Pershing has a chance of 36.54% to penetrate Panther at max range...given the fact that Pershings are suppoesed to be counters to these units, it still seems pretty weak. With APCR it is about 62%, which still doesn't shine very much.

But I wonder... How much penetration chances the Panther has got against the Pershing??!!
By watching this following short video which i uploaded last month;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AaTraipX7k

I can safely say the Panther's 75mm gun doesn't have any high chances of penetrating the Pershing either!!! So, where is the problem there??? WHY would the 90mm gun ever need higher penetration chances against the Panther then???!!!

Pershings and Jacksons are meant to be counters to Tigers and Panthers so what would be the sense of having them available only when Axis start bringing out KTs and other superheavies?

It would make sense only if you massively buff 90mm guns, delaying those tanks a little bit.. while also removing the SP. ONLY then it would make sense. As i never meant that they should be later available on the current state of balance with the existence of SP anyhow! They are definitely fine as for the current state of balance I mean...

One thing that is still on my mind - you say that people go for SP because it is the only reliable counter to Axis superheavies...ok. That means that players in general consider 90mm guns to be too weak and unreliable against the super heavies and so the preffery SP over PAce. Doesn't that mean that if 90mm guns become more reliable (when I say "more reliable" I don't mean SP reliable level...just better against Tigers and Panthers, but not on the level to be a certain win against KT and alike), players will use them more often and possibly start considering using PAce, rather than SP which would lead to less often SP occurence in general because Pershings are cheaper than SP and PAce is too and you can use it repeatedly.

But I also never said that we often go for the SP because it's the only reliable counter to the Axis heavy tanks. As I also believe they go for the SP not because the 90mm guns suck, but i am personally going straight for the SP sometimes because the 90mm guns are weak IN COMPARISON TO the SP of course! So, we go for the SP.. not because the Pershing is THAT bad, but because the SP is indeed something to be probably considered as somewhat OP, at least in some certain occasions.. and is available after only 9 direct command points.

But do u really like to make the PAce used more often?? Then remove SP, buff 90mm guns massively.. slightly delay both Pershings and Jacksons perhaps by just 1 command point in total at the end... And increase the range bonus given by the command car to 20.
I am afraid this is the ONLY way to make PAce more useful. That's only if you would REALLY like to... I can propose a small list of changes that would change Armor doc into that aspect. I can't say if the Armor doc would be much better or even worse with those changes, but it will definitely give us a new look for the Armor doc without the SP. However that this is AGAIN; only if u want to see the suggestions... It is nothing that I really ask for.

This whole topic was mainly created just to reduce the M36 (not the B1) Hit Points by just 100 btw. From 700 to 600 I mean!
And not to discuss about 90mm guns

[Devilfish]

Even though you're saying that reasons are "VERY obvious like the sun", all you listed is just "pershing should come later, cause realism", "so cheap", "in this video pershing bounced panther". Build and tech order and time isn't suppose to reflect years of ww2. Pershing is just slightly cheaper than Panther G, only you forget to mention that pershing can't do shit except AT. Panther is a killing machine. You see, comparison is not really that simple.

I don't think SP and persh/M36 strength/power is cumulative in a way it needs to be balanced together, aka we can't improve 90mm because there is an SP. SP is one timer super tank, similar to KT. As axis you can get more panthers instead of KT, or rush for KT or get both, both have cons and pros.
Thing is, as US all people are getting SP because persh/M36 are NOT reliable. Yes, they can do the job and are very dangerous especially with 3+ vet, but not reliable. Basically no chance against well microed KT. In the end, most armor games end up in a minigame "WIll the SP survive?"......

I'd vote for slightly buffing 90mm, to be more, let's say, consistent....

[Krieger Blitzer]

Even though you're saying that reasons are "VERY obvious like the sun", all you listed is just "pershing should come later, cause realism", "so cheap", "in this video pershing bounced panther".

And are these reasons not enough? Why should the Pershing be capable of penetrating the Panther more reliably than the Panther would penetrate the Pershing??!! While keeping in mind that the Pershing is already earlier available, requiring less command points and actually cheaper as well??!! What you only forgot to mention on the other hand is the Panther D and how totally crap it is. Yet, somehow requiring one more command point than the Pershing! Also the Jacksons are earlier by 2 command points than the Panther D, they cost the same... But the M36 is way better because the turret rotates much faster than this Panther's turret, and the M36 also has flank speed and ambush capabilities. Panther D is not a killing machine anyhow, u know!

So, what kind of logic is that?
Well then, we would also buff the Panther's gun against the Pershing.. just why not? Same logic

Build and tech order and time isn't suppose to reflect years of ww2.

Actually i never said Pershings should be later available, although it's a fact that is pretty much based on reality. But again; in the game... i never said they should be later available, unless they are massively buffed of course.
I mean that I wouldn't mind 90mm guns buff, as long as SP would be no longer in the game...
Yet, I believe the 90mm guns are performing very well as for the current state and there is even no need to buff them.. at least considering the fact that Tigers and Panthers also suffer to penetrate Jacksons and Pershings sometimes! SO, it's currently quite equally balanced. And I can see absolutely no problems here! Not to mention the Allied counterparts are in fact cheaper.
And any such reckless change on this field, would obviously ruin the balance to Allied favor...

However that if u take a look into the Axis tech tree, u will actually find out that it's realistically organized.
For example, the Tiger actually comes earlier than the Panther, just like how it was in reality, since that the Tiger was a 1942 tank, while the Panther was a 1943 tank...

Almost every Axis doc is tuned that way, also all Allied docs actually.
Except the Armor doc... ONLY because of the SP existence!

Bottom line is, there is noway you could buff 90mm guns without removing the SP first.

[MarKr]

Armor doc is usually suffering no ammo issues, just like RE doc.
So, APCR is often obtained easily in those docs...

Perhaps but take a look at the video you linked (Pershing vs Panther) - Pershing bounced off even with APCR, in most cases Axis players don't even bother upgrading Wolfram ammo for their heavies because they know their weapons are reliable enough even without it.

But I wonder... How much penetration chances the Panther has got against the Pershing??!!

OK so I list Pershing again for clear comparison - the stats ae actually lower because I forgot the Panther has skirts:
Pershing at max range shooting at Panther G:
No APCR: 31.32%
With APCR: 54,4968% AND damage lowered by 15% (572,5 - 701.25)

Panther G at max range shooting at Pershing:
No Wolfram: 57.6%
With Wolfram: 76.6% AND damage boosted by 25% (625 - 812,5)

(Just for information I list Tiger I too)
Pershing at max range shooting at Tiger I:
No APCR: 46.4%
With APCR: 80.73% AND damage reduction of 15% (572,5 - 701.25)

Tiger I at max range shooting at Pershing:
No Wolfram: 60.8%
With Wolfram: 80.86% + damage boost of 25% (687,5 - 875)

So if you say:

I can safely say the Panther's 75mm gun doesn't have any high chances of penetrating the Pershing either!!! So, where is the problem there???

Then I'd say it depends on what you call "high chance of penetration" but if Pershing WITH APCR has lower chance than Panther WITHOUT Wolfram, I'd say that Panther has quite high chance against Pershing.

It would make sense only if you massively buff 90mm guns, delaying those tanks a little bit.. while also removing the SP. ONLY then it would make sense.

Only then it would make sense...because? Where is the reason?
Also why do you think the 90mm guns need EITHER a massive boost OR none at all? The whole time I'm talking about a boost but nowhere close to massive...

But I also never said that we often go for the SP because it's the only reliable counter to the Axis heavy tanks. As I also believe they go for the SP not because the 90mm guns suck, but i am personally going straight for the SP sometimes because the 90mm guns are weak IN COMPARISON TO the SP of course!

But that is what I say...stronger 90mm guns = not so huge difference between 90mm and SP = SP less needed in games

This whole topic was mainly created just to reduce the M36 (not the B1) Hit Points by just 100 btw. From 700 to 600 I mean!
And not to discuss about 90mm guns

This reduction would not help much because the main problem of M36 is waaay too strong armor. Closer inspection of this unit brought us also to the strenght of its gun, since M36(B1) and Pershing use the same gun, any change of stats of M36 should be applied to Pershings too.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Perhaps but take a look at the video you linked (Pershing vs Panther) - Pershing bounced off even with APCR, in most cases Axis players don't even bother upgrading Wolfram ammo for their heavies because they know their weapons are reliable enough even without it.

I believe these are nothing but some misconceptions about playing Axis, in fact.. i personally often need to upgrade APCR rounds for my Tigers and Panthers in order to be able to destroy Jumbos and heavy Allied tanks more reliably. My Tiger has also definitely suffered penetrating Churchills and Pershings sometimes before... But it's often easier to obtain APCR shells as Allies than as Axis actually!
The Blitz doc for example has to save up so much ammunition, so that you could invest your ammo storage in upgrading your Storm troops as well as using trades and Maultiers etc.

OK so I list Pershing again for clear comparison - the stats ae actually lower because I forgot the Panther has skirts:
Pershing at max range shooting at Panther G:
No APCR: 31.32%
With APCR: 54,4968% AND damage lowered by 15% (572,5 - 701.25)

Panther G at max range shooting at Pershing:
No Wolfram: 57.6%
With Wolfram: 76.6% AND damage boosted by 25% (625 - 812,5)

(Just for information I list Tiger I too)
Pershing at max range shooting at Tiger I:
No APCR: 46.4%
With APCR: 80.73% AND damage reduction of 15% (572,5 - 701.25)

Tiger I at max range shooting at Pershing:
No Wolfram: 60.8%
With Wolfram: 80.86% + damage boost of 25% (687,5 - 875)

The Panther has skirts, but Pershing has more HP, and the possibility to get over repaired... Also gains 1 veterancy level after the unlock. So, it's not about calculations here.. these values are pure mathematics. Of which are not really a true representative of the actual situation in the game! I guess you already know that.

From what I have seen on the video, and also from what I can see on pvp games according to my own experience... The Panther does have no real advantage over the Pershing by any means. Except the top turret mounted MG gunner! And that's why the G Panther actually costs more.

Also, keep in mind that Pershing require only 5 direct command points. Panther G requires 7 ones! D and A require 6 command points on the other hand...

Then I'd say it depends on what you call "high chance of penetration" but if Pershing WITH APCR has lower chance than Panther WITHOUT Wolfram, I'd say that Panther has quite high chance against Pershing.

So, again; based on what I have mentioned above. Where is the balancing problem here?? Panthers are already harder to obtain.

Only then it would make sense...because? Where is the reason?
Also why do you think the 90mm guns need EITHER a massive boost OR none at all? The whole time I'm talking about a boost but nowhere close to massive...

Well, I was basically saying that we might need to delay both the Pershing and Jackson by at least 1 command point due to massively buffing their 90mm guns, being at the same level of the SP's gun.. while totally removing the SP in return. BECAUSE, I believe that 'slightly' buffing 90mm guns is absolutely nothing that we should even argue about!
I mean that you should either remove the SP entirely while sharing the exact same stats of the Super Pershing's cannon with the normal 90mm guns, as a result of removing the SP.. and that is considered a massive buff for sure! And which is the only thing that would make sense... OR not to buff them at all. While definitely keeping the SP as it is, nothing change then.
This is my opinion!

[MarKr]

I believe these are nothing but some misconceptions about playing Axis, in fact.. i personally often need to upgrade APCR rounds for my Tigers and Panthers in order to be able to destroy Jumbos and heavy Allied tanks more reliably. My Tiger has also definitely suffered penetrating Churchills and Pershings sometimes before...

"Misconceptions"? Just look at facts - as Axis you need Wolfram shells to get reliable penetration against Allied heavy tanks (just as you said) and those are which? Pershing, SP, Jumbo, Churchills and maybe Comet... Those are 5 tanks out of which Pershing, SP and Jumbo are in one doctrine while Churchills and Comet in another. So as Axis you need Wolfram shells when you play against one of these two doctrines. As Axis, Def doc has Elephant, BK doc Panthers and Tigers, Terror doc Tigers, Panthers and KTs, Luft has Panthers, TH doc has JPs, JT... so 5 out of 6 Axis doctrines have something heavy, against which you need AP shots as Allies to get at least some chance to penetrate it. So as Axis in case your opponent doesn't choose Armor or RE doc, you don't need Wolfram ammo upgrade for your heavy tanks at all, because the strongest tank your opponent has is Sherman.
Yeah, yeah...Allied teams usually have one of these two but still, technically speaking there are more situations when as Axis you don't need the AP ammo because your basic shots are enough.

The Panther has skirts, but Pershing has more HP, and the possibility to get over repaired... Also gains 1 veterancy level after the unlock. So, it's not about calculations here.. these values are pure mathematics. Of which are not really a true representative of the actual situation in the game! I guess you already know that.

What? First you you say that:

Panther's 75mm gun doesn't have any high chances of penetrating the Pershing either!!!

Then you ask for penetration chances (that is numbers/mathematics!) and then, when the numbers don't support what you say, you claim that numbers don't matter?

From what I have seen on the video, and also from what I can see on pvp games according to my own experience... The Panther does have no real advantage over the Pershing by any means.

Video is one case out of many and "own experience" is always tricky because people tend to remember what they like/dislike but forget about occasions that don't stand out in any way, statistic chance is what mathematically happens most often and math doesn't lie (unless you make an error in your calculations ). Accordig to me basic penetration chance of 57.6% simply IS advantage over 31.32%

Also, keep in mind that Pershing require only 5 direct command points. Panther G requires 7 ones! D and A require 6 command points on the other hand...

So far this is the only thing I can agree on - if Pershings/M36 were to be made somewhat more threatening to Tigers/Panthers then they should come at about the same time.

Well, I was basically saying that we might need to delay both the Pershing and Jackson by at least 1 command point due to massively buffing their 90mm guns, being at the same level of the SP's gun.. while totally removing the SP in return.

I totally disagree with this. Do you realize what kind of buff it would be for Armor doc? Right now Armor doc has ONE tank that has gun strong enough to take out most Axis tanks without any bigger problem (SP). If it were done as you say, suddenly Pershing, PAce, and M36(B1) would all be just as deadly. Such a buff can in no way be considered as ballanced out by simple +1 or +2 CP to unlock.
That is why I think that 90mm guns on Pershings and M36 should be stronger than they are now, but real difference would be felt against Panthers and Tigers, super heavies would still be harder to defeat. But buffing them to the line of SP is nonsense from my point of view.

[Krieger Blitzer]

"Misconceptions"? Just look at facts - as Axis you need Wolfram shells to get reliable penetration against Allied heavy tanks (just as you said) and those are which? Pershing, SP, Jumbo, Churchills and maybe Comet... Those are 5 tanks out of which Pershing, SP and Jumbo are in one doctrine while Churchills and Comet in another. So as Axis you need Wolfram shells when you play against one of these two doctrines. As Axis, Def doc has Elephant, BK doc Panthers and Tigers, Terror doc Tigers, Panthers and KTs, Luft has Panthers, TH doc has JPs, JT... so 5 out of 6 Axis doctrines have something heavy, against which you need AP shots as Allies to get at least some chance to penetrate it. So as Axis in case your opponent doesn't choose Armor or RE doc, you don't need Wolfram ammo upgrade for your heavy tanks at all, because the strongest tank your opponent has is Sherman.
Yeah, yeah...Allied teams usually have one of these two but still, technically speaking there are more situations when as Axis you don't need the AP ammo because your basic shots are enough.

Thing is, it is a fact that Armor doc is currently a nightmare in most pvp games. And it is the doc of which i play the most.. choosing TH doc is now a must in team fights... Because armor doc is already capable of fielding as much tanks as both Blitz and Terror docs together, thanks to supply yard upgrades. Armor doc is currently the proper counter to ALL the Axis doc tanks. Except the TH doc ONLY!
Elephant is not a threat. This slow ass turret-less tank can die with a Hellcat, believe me. Elephant is one of the worst tanks in the game actually. I even believe it should have more range... To become at least any useful.
KT is good, but expensive as FK. The most expensive tank in the game... COMES TOO LATE as well.
Panthers and Tigers are ALREADY countered by earlier available and cheaper Jacksons and Perhsings!!

You want to buff 90mm guns, so that SP become less used... While I honestly can't get this logic! Because, Tigers and Panthers are already suffering against those earlier available and cheaper Pershings and Jacksons. And you want to buff them even further, so Axis would have no chance at all against the Pershing and Jackson? What are they going to do then against the SP later???!!! IF you buff their guns, then buff it while delaying them or increasing their cost.
Pershing vets up too fast, unlimited in numbers.. i often see 3 Pershings which is actually much. M36 has a shitload of armor to be honest, ambush ability.. and also great mobility! Yet, they are not ANY expensive and are early available somehow.

Then you ask for penetration chances (that is numbers/mathematics!) and then, when the numbers don't support what you say, you claim that numbers don't matter?

Why should the Jackson or the Pershing penetrate the Panther even more reliably then??? You just say "oh, look at these numbers here, panther is better!" Hell, NO! Panther CAN never win the Pershing always. Even usually, Panther dies with 1 shot whenever penetrated. Even by 76mm guns btw! Because of such a low HP. Just 800 HP is too LOW for its cost if you ask me! Pershing CAN never die with 1 shot by a Panther on the other hand.

Video is one case out of many and "own experience" is always tricky because people tend to remember what they like/dislike but forget about occasions that don't stand out in any way, statistic chance is what mathematically happens most often and math doesn't lie (unless you make an error in your calculations ). Accordig to me basic penetration chance of 57.6% simply IS advantage over 31.32%

So, i never said numbers don't matter.. i only meant that these numbers does NOT necessarily mean that the Panther does ALWAYS HAVE AN EDGE over the Pershing anyhow when they get to fight each other. Panther might have a better gun at longer ranges, but not more HP... Not as early available.. etc! SO again; where is the problem? I believe it's quite equally tuned as for the current state, each tank of them has advantages and disadvantages.

I totally disagree with this. Do you realize what kind of buff it would be for Armor doc? Right now Armor doc has ONE tank that has gun strong enough to take out most Axis tanks without any bigger problem (SP). If it were done as you say, suddenly Pershing, PAce, and M36(B1) would all be just as deadly. Such a buff can in no way be considered as ballanced out by simple +1 or +2 CP to unlock.
That is why I think that 90mm guns on Pershings and M36 should be stronger than they are now, but real difference would be felt against Panthers and Tigers, super heavies would still be harder to defeat. But buffing them to the line of SP is nonsense from my point of view.

The SP is the only tank in the game that does have a real 90mm gun. If you want to buff the 90mm guns, then this is how a 90mm gun should look like! And btw, the SP's gun can still bounce off 5 tanks accordingly; JagdTiger, KingTiger, Elephant. Also can bounce off JagdPanther, and lastly Panther as well... But these 2 only at max range!
Can NEVER bounce off a Tiger, but Tigers can never die with 1 shot or just TOO RARELY. Because of high HP! Panthers often die with 1 hit in fact.

These are the correct penetration stats of normal 90mm guns to be honest with you... The only unreal thing about the cannon of the SP, is the basic splash damage on the ground, which feels more like HE rounds against inf. I believe it's made this way because SP doesn't have HE shells to upgrade. The sound of the gun is also a little bit too loud, or actually exaggerated.


And well, let me propose to you how I believe Armor doc should look like; just so you get the whole picture, as i believe Armor doc won't be OP anyhow.
-SP entirely removed.
Therefore the tech tree would be modified as following, currently.. instead of:-
Sherman 1 CP > Hellcat 1 CP > Pershing 3 CP > SP 4 CP.
It will be:-
Sherman 1 CP > Hellcat 2 CP > Pershing 3 CP > PAce 3 CP.

If you notice, this way I have delayed both the Jackson and the Pershing by 1 CP. Jackson now require 5 CPs... Pershing require 6 CP. PAce still require 9 CPs.
If the player goes for Jackson first, then Pershing would require 8 CPs.. which is just slightly later available than the Panther G. And this is holistically accurate. Just like how the Panther is available after the Tiger currently...
And if he goes straight for the Pershing, then he would have it as soon as Panther A or D. Not as soon as a Tiger anymore...

Then we implement the rest of changes as a result;
-ALL Pershings should have the same gun stats of the SP. But sound effects and splash damage on the ground untouched... ONLY penetration stats should be the same, range is also untouched.
-ALL Pershings should have same armor as SP!
-US command car should provide 10 more shooting range after activating recon ability... Means 20 in total rather than currently just 10.
-War Machine should no longer affect Pershings, becoming 75 ammo cheaper in return.
-Pershings can no longer gain 1 VET level after the unlock.
-But the Pershing should be now limited to only 2 at a time. Don't forget they have the Ace, it will be the 3rd.
-76 Jumbo should be limited to 2 at a time. instead of just 1.
-Pershing price untouched.
-As a result; Pershing Ace now should be slightly more expensive, i think the cost should be 1700 MP.
-KT untouched. JT untouched, Elephant untouched.

Now Armor doc doesn't have to worry about not losing the only once SP anymore! Leading to much better gameplay

Let me hear your thoughts about these changes, and they are not a lot btw.

[RommelsAfrikaKorps]

I like the changes proposed by tiger to the pershing. in exchange for the removal of the SP. I always found the pershings mediocre, not good at destroying tanks or killing infantry.

[Jagdpanther]

I'm in favor for anything that removes that ridiculous unit called SP.

[MarKr]

I have to skip everything else because it seems to me that I reacted on it earlier and we simply don't understand each other but I cannot help myself and simply jump right to this part:

-ALL Pershings should have the same gun stats of the SP.
-ALL Pershings should have same armor as SP!
-US command car should provide 10 more shooting range after activating recon ability... Means 20 in total rather than currently just 10.
-But the Pershing should be now limited to only 2 at a time. Don't forget they have the Ace, it will be the 3rd.
-Pershing price untouched.

Tell me, your problem with SP is what exactely? Its historical inaccuracy or its über performance when compared to other Allied tanks?
Because so many people keep saying how SP should be removed and with this changes you would give to the US Armor doc the chance to have in the field THREE SuperPershings at the same time! Yes, they would LOOK like normal Pershings, but stats-wise they would have armor of SP, gun of SP so technically, different looking SP. And even better - give them range boost of +20(!!!) from Command Car? That ability last long enough for the Pershings to fire at least two shots...so if you get those 2 Pershings + 1 PAce and activate the Command Car's range bonus, you get Accurate Long Range Shot for 3 strongest US tanks at once, being able to shoot twice each but for a fraction of ALRS price...
Also you said:

Because, Tigers and Panthers are already suffering against those earlier available and cheaper Pershings and Jacksons. And you want to buff them even further, so Axis would have no chance at all against the Pershing and Jackson? What are they going to do then against the SP later???!!!

Here in this quote you express doubts Axis could deal with single SP (as it is now) supported by several Pershings (current armor, slightly stronger gun) but then you suggest to buff the Pershings and practically let Axis somehow deal with three SPs at a time, while delaying them by just one CP...anybody else can see that this could be...problematic as hell?

[Jagdpanther]

I have to skip everything else because it seems to me that I reacted on it earlier and we simply don't understand each other but I cannot help myself and simply jump right to this part:

-ALL Pershings should have the same gun stats of the SP.
-ALL Pershings should have same armor as SP!
-US command car should provide 10 more shooting range after activating recon ability... Means 20 in total rather than currently just 10.
-But the Pershing should be now limited to only 2 at a time. Don't forget they have the Ace, it will be the 3rd.
-Pershing price untouched.

Tell me, your problem with SP is what exactely? Its historical inaccuracy or its über performance when compared to other Allied tanks?
Because so many people keep saying how SP should be removed and with this changes you would give to the US Armor doc the chance to have in the field THREE SuperPershings at the same time! Yes, they would LOOK like normal Pershings, but stats-wise they would have armor of SP, gun of SP so technically, different looking SP. And even better - give them range boost of +20(!!!) from Command Car? That ability last long enough for the Pershings to fire at least two shots...so if you get those 2 Pershings + 1 PAce and activate the Command Car's range bonus, you get Accurate Long Range Shot for 3 strongest US tanks at once, being able to shoot twice each but for a fraction of ALRS price...

You dont have to buff everything he suggested, i also think that all that buffs would probably lead to making armor OP, he's just suggesting options that can be done in order to have a balanced armor doc without the SP.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Tell me, your problem with SP is what exactely? Its historical inaccuracy or its über performance when compared to other Allied tanks?
Because so many people keep saying how SP should be removed and with this changes you would give to the US Armor doc the chance to have in the field THREE SuperPershings at the same time! Yes, they would LOOK like normal Pershings, but stats-wise they would have armor of SP, gun of SP so technically, different looking SP. And even better - give them range boost of +20(!!!) from Command Car? That ability last long enough for the Pershings to fire at least two shots...so if you get those 2 Pershings + 1 PAce and activate the Command Car's range bonus, you get Accurate Long Range Shot for 3 strongest US tanks at once, being able to shoot twice each but for a fraction of ALRS price...

Good to see you straightly jumped into the point. Which is what really matters...

I would say I have carefully studied my suggestions before I propose them. The Pershing will have the same gun of the SP, as well as the same armor... But not the same basic range of the SP. Also not the same HP! 20 more range as a boost provided by the command car means that their range will be increased for a short period of time only from 60 to 80 as total.
ALRS is 90 for Tigers and JagdPanthers, for the KT it's 100... Or am I wrong?
If you still think this is too much, well.. we can increase the price of the command car itself as well as the recon ability which provides more range as a result.

Here in this quote you express doubts Axis could deal with single SP (as it is now) supported by several Pershings (current armor, slightly stronger gun) but then you suggest to buff the Pershings and practically let Axis somehow deal with three SPs at a time, while delaying them by just one CP...anybody else can see that this could be...problematic as hell?

No, as far as I can see.. apparently people can see it won't be any problematic actually... The SP's armor is not immortal.
I have no problems with the SuperPershing either. Our problems here are with the 90mm guns and the normal Pershings! They are relatively weak. And buffing them can't be done without removing the SP first... Most importantly, I only forgot to mention on my last post that the M36's armor will also HAVE TO BE greatly nerfed by then.

And yes, like Saul has stated here on the previous post... My suggestions at the end are nothing but some possible options.. of which we need to discuss them further, as I never said these suggestions are the absolute best solution anyhow.
However, that when we finally get to agree on something, we could then perhaps release a beta version of it.. in order to have a look at how the new Armor doc would look like. If it works well, we would pass it into the official patch, if it doesn't work. We would simply dismiss them! Nothing is problematic, i think we can try it out. But things definitely need evaluation first!