Panthers in the Beta version

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

While the HP nerf is a good solution, speed and acceleration reduction kills the whole advantage of Panthers over Tiger tanks.

Going to the root of the problem - the whole story started when camo modifiers got changed and HE shells together with coaxial mg’s started to work properly. From that point Panthers became able to advance through the ambushes of TD’s and absolutely spit on any infantry with their pathetic zookas.

My vision on how to solve this issue:

1) HP and price stays the same like in beta (Panther G in TS also should cost much less btw)
2) The speed and acceleration gets reverted.

In return all allied TD’s (M10, Jackson, Hellcat, Achilles) should receive improved camo modifiers for damage, pen and accuracy. The Panther that drives into the ambushed Hellcat or other TD with the tank commander and activated AP must be dead in 9 out of 10 occasions.


Bazooka rockets also receive significant penetration buff against all kinds of Panthers.

That way Panthers will have affordable price, still be deadly when fighting with tanks in the open field, but at the same time won’t be able to drive into ambushes and hold hordes of infantry on their own without any support.

Moreover it will distinguish them from Tigers very well. Panther - rather cheap and agile main battle tank that however gets destroyed easily when drives into ambush. Tiger on the hand is slower, but can survive the ambush due to its massive HP pool. Also, Tiger will have better protection against zooks while Panther will rely on its speed to kite infatry.

What do you think?

[Consti255]

Sadly i couldnt played the Beta vs other players right but i hope there will be games up today!
I just played a couple AI matches.

But just from hearing. Yeah i could see that. (Btw i LOVE the cost changes for the Panther great change Devs.)
But yeah i think the speed was just the best part of the Panther and fun element to play arround.
I think Bazooka wise, mhhhhh. Maybe only for the M6A3C rockets which are for the following Units: All zooks from the Inf doc after the upgrade, 82.AB,SAS.
Since the Panther has much less HP than before, every AT infantry would be too good vs the Panthers, even tho they have the speed.

In terms of TDs yes i could see that but i think a good call would be the camo modfiers change for the Hellcat and not the M10.
The Hellcat is so underused right now because since the lost of his flank speed there is no point getting a hellcat over a m10, while the hellcat is even more expensive and has no HEAT shot.
So the dedicated Panther counter is the Hellcat and the Tiger,Stugs etc. the M10.

But there are also counter arguemnts. The stuggeling Pershing should be now able to stand up vs Panthers really really well.
less HP and speed = more oneshots and more ability for the pershing to chase.

I think i really need some games to make a clear standpoint.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

Yeah, I meant M3A3C rockets. By significant penetration chance, I mean something around 25%, so that approx. every 4th rocket pens. By the way, I know that the "realism factor" does not apply in our discussions anymore, but the lower armor plate of the Panther could be penetrated by zook as it was way less thick than the upper part.

[MarKr]

In return all allied TD’s (M10, Jackson, Hellcat, Achilles) should receive improved camo modifiers for damage, pen and accuracy. The Panther that drives into the ambushed Hellcat or other TD with the tank commander and activated AP must be dead in 9 out of 10 occasions.

Probabyl the main problem with this is that the camo bonuses apply to everything, so it would not make them more deadly just against Panthers but also against Tigers, Kingtigers, and everything else.

Secondary problem is that camo bonuses were unified some time ago. If we change it for allies, there will be requests to do the same for Axis, camo will become a lot stronger in general - won't that lead to a more campy games in general?

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

In return all allied TD’s (M10, Jackson, Hellcat, Achilles) should receive improved camo modifiers for damage, pen and accuracy. The Panther that drives into the ambushed Hellcat or other TD with the tank commander and activated AP must be dead in 9 out of 10 occasions.

Probabyl the main problem with this is that the camo bonuses apply to everything, so it would not make them more deadly just against Panthers but also against Tigers, Kingtigers, and everything else.

Secondary problem is that camo bonuses were unified some time ago. If we change it for allies, there will be requests to do the same for Axis, camo will become a lot stronger in general - won't that lead to a more campy games in general?

I see what you mean. The HP of Tiger, KT and Panthers differ a lot, the life will get a bit harder for Tigers indeed, but it was sort of the same in the old BK. Achiles and Hellcat used to one-shot Panthers from the ambush most of the time, while Tigers always could survive a shot and then shoot back destroying the TD. All other axis tanks usually get oneshoted from the ambush anyway...

The thing is that Axis tank hunters that cost CP already can reliably stop any allied tank besides MK7. That's why some differences in camo bonuses won't somehow ruin the balance in my opinion.

Besides, I wouldn't mind improving the ambush bonuses across both factions. Axis TD's could also receive a good boosts to their camo, in return becoming more vulnerable to handled AT.

[Warhawks97]

In return all allied TD’s (M10, Jackson, Hellcat, Achilles) should receive improved camo modifiers for damage, pen and accuracy. The Panther that drives into the ambushed Hellcat or other TD with the tank commander and activated AP must be dead in 9 out of 10 occasions.

Probabyl the main problem with this is that the camo bonuses apply to everything, so it would not make them more deadly just against Panthers but also against Tigers, Kingtigers, and everything else.

Secondary problem is that camo bonuses were unified some time ago. If we change it for allies, there will be requests to do the same for Axis, camo will become a lot stronger in general - won't that lead to a more campy games in general?

I see what you mean. The HP of Tiger, KT and Panthers differ a lot, the life will get a bit harder for Tigers indeed, but it was sort of the same in the old BK. Achiles and Hellcat used to one-shot Panthers from the ambush most of the time, while Tigers always could survive a shot and then shoot back destroying the TD. All other axis tanks usually get oneshoted from the ambush anyway...

The thing is that Axis tank hunters that cost CP already can reliably stop any allied tank besides MK7. That's why some differences in camo bonuses won't somehow ruin the balance in my opinion.

Besides, I wouldn't mind improving the ambush bonuses across both factions. Axis TD's could also receive a good boosts to their camo, in return becoming more vulnerable to handled AT.

The camo change is a difficult thing. I am on markrs side here. Soon people will question why their panthers and tigers get frequently penetrated by M10 and hellcat while Jumbos and churchills will run over hetzers and stugs. But boosting their camo bonus would again ruin jumbos which for the first time are actually able to serve their purpose.
German TDs recently became a lot more vulnerable to infantry anti tank weapons.

Also, increasing bonuses on camo (or bonuses in general) have a limited effect when base values are kept low since all boosts are related to base values.

So for me, i am still favouring a slight armor change so that Panthers armor strenght vs medium velocity guns is about the same as Pershings armor. I dont see why Panthers armor has to be superior to Pershings armor which most of us would consider to be ok. That way current ambush modifiers would work as well.

Perhaps it would be enough to just change 76 guns a bit while the cheaper M10 with its 3 inch gun remains slightly weaker.
Or again, when 76 pen power goes up -what i still think is the better solution- the cost (fuel) for them could rise up. E.G. 45 for M10 and hellcat, 60 to 65 for any 76 sherman. That way two 76 armed tanks would already cost as much as one panther (and even more in terms of MP).


Also i hope Jacks gets the same treatment as the Jagdpanzer IV/70. Being just cheaper in terms of MP. Its dump now that Jacks cost more than a Panther.

While the HP nerf is a good solution, speed and acceleration reduction kills the whole advantage of Panthers over Tiger tanks.

Going to the root of the problem - the whole story started when camo modifiers got changed and HE shells together with coaxial mg’s started to work properly. From that point Panthers became able to advance through the ambushes of TD’s and absolutely spit on any infantry with their pathetic zookas.

My vision on how to solve this issue:

1) HP and price stays the same like in beta (Panther G in TS also should cost much less btw)
2) The speed and acceleration gets reverted.

In return all allied TD’s (M10, Jackson, Hellcat, Achilles) should receive improved camo modifiers for damage, pen and accuracy. The Panther that drives into the ambushed Hellcat or other TD with the tank commander and activated AP must be dead in 9 out of 10 occasions.


Bazooka rockets also receive significant penetration buff against all kinds of Panthers.

That way Panthers will have affordable price, still be deadly when fighting with tanks in the open field, but at the same time won’t be able to drive into ambushes and hold hordes of infantry on their own without any support.

Moreover it will distinguish them from Tigers very well. Panther - rather cheap and agile main battle tank that however gets destroyed easily when drives into ambush. Tiger on the hand is slower, but can survive the ambush due to its massive HP pool. Also, Tiger will have better protection against zooks while Panther will rely on its speed to kite infatry.

What do you think?

As for the Panther now i also only had two test games vs bots. And i miss the Panthers speed. The acceleration feels more "natural" now and still good. But it really feels like i have a tiger or Pershing now. Its not that kind of tank i wished. The only difference now is that the Panther is cheaper but any pen hit kills you when compared to Tigers. I would have rather kept the Panthers speed rather than its armor.

Later, when my Panther was vet 4, a pen hit only took roughly Half HP away. So at that point and combination with its armor it feels like the old panther a bit.

Also, the low fuel upkeep cost led to a real snowball effect. I only had one medium fuel point upgraded and one small one. When playing on maps like rosmalen with a generally good MP income, you can really spam a lot of panthers now. So i would have kept the fuel upkeep from the previous version to prevent late game snowballing effect and stockpiling of panthers.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

An increase of basic gun stats of aforementioned TD's with better penetration chance for zooks will do the job as well.

[MEFISTO]

I may be agree with a camouflage buff only when use AP increasing penetration chances for m10 and hellcat; and no any buff for 17 pounder it’s already strong.
No buff for 76mm it performs good vs axis medium tanks.
And no nerf for panthers front armor either.
I am agree with ring back panthers acceleration and speed, that is one of the big difference with Tiger 1 and we should keep it.

[Red]

From a first PvE impression, I like the changes to the Panthers in Blitzkrieg doc.
The tanks still handle well, and are now properly priced.
If there was one thing I could chose to be changed, it would be the top-speed. But would I want a higher top-speed for a higher cost? Definitly no!
The new acceleation I still deem very playable.

One thing I would like to add, in BK there is no Tiger. So I do not follow the Tiger-comparisons brought to the Panther discussion. If there is an issue in Tank Support doc, then maybe a rework of that doc with a reduction of available tanks is needed in order to better balance things there. But for BK or Luft, no one is going to say: "I am not going to build a Panther because I will rather save the ressources to build a Tiger."

[Warhawks97]

Acceleration is OK for me. But the top speed is not.

[Krieger Blitzer]

1) HP and price stays the same like in beta (Panther G in TS also should cost much less btw)
2) The speed and acceleration gets reverted.

In return all allied TD’s (M10, Jackson, Hellcat, Achilles) should receive improved camo modifiers for damage, pen and accuracy. The Panther that drives into the ambushed Hellcat or other TD with the tank commander and activated AP must be dead in 9 out of 10 occasions.


Bazooka rockets also receive significant penetration buff against all kinds of Panthers.

Why should M10 & Hellcat become so deadly against Panthers??? It's understandable for Achilles and jackson.. but definitely not for Hellcat & Wolverine...
I am against buffing the camo bonuses.


And the Zookas shouldn't be buffed vs Panthers either...

I think we are messing things around.. why buffing a cheap tank such as Hellcat vs Panthers.. when we could just add the jackson to docs that need it?? I was against messing around with the Panther values to begin with.

[Viper]

No buff for 76mm it performs good vs axis medium tanks.
And no nerf for panthers front armor either.
I am agree with ring back panthers acceleration and speed, that is one of the big difference with Tiger 1 and we should keep it.

+1

Besides, I wouldn't mind improving the ambush bonuses across both factions. Axis TD's could also receive a good boosts to their camo, in return becoming more vulnerable to handled AT.

already the tank destroyers became weaker versus handheld anti tank last patch............also do not want to see any stronger camo bonus.

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

There were never problems with Panthers when TD’s were able to take them down from the ambush reliably, that’s why I suggested this solution knowing that it worked perfectly before.

@Tiger

M18 or M10 will never handle the Panther toe to toe in the open field, but what does Panther has more chances to destroy an am ambushed TD with the AP? Makes no sense.

We have a working proof of this concept in the previous Bk versions.

[Krieger Blitzer]

There were never problems with Panthers when TD’s were able to take them down from the ambush reliably, that’s why I suggested this solution knowing that it worked perfectly before.

@Tiger

M18 or M10 will never handle the Panther toe to toe in the open field, but what does Panther has more chances to destroy an am ambushed TD with the AP? Makes no sense.

We have a working proof of this concept in the previous Bk versions.

Camo was deemed too OP back then, that's why it got standardised.. so in my opinion, with this suggestion; we are just going around the same circle over and over again.

Thing is, a Hellcat or Wolverine aren't supposed to be hard counters to Panthers.. just the same way Hetzer & JPz L48 are not supposed to be hard counters to Pershings/Churchills/jumbos.

The classic TD counter to Panthers is jacksons/Achilles.
Whereas the classic TD counter to Pershings/Churchills/Jumbos are bigger Axis TDs on the other hand.

So, i don't see why Hellcats/Wolverines should become so deadly vs higher tier tanks from camo.. those however can still harm Panthers by flanking (Hellcat has good mobility and fast turret rotation, Wolverine uses flank speed to shoot HEAT round and escape) but tanks such as Panthers/Tigers certainly shouldn't die right away to a much cheaper Hellcat/Wolverine ambush.. they could be badly damaged, and it's currently the case... However, of course they shouldn't become a "death sentence" as you tell.

If there is still a balance problem.. then please enough messing around with Panthers, and let's improve jacksons instead... Panthers became cheaper, so now it makes much more sense to see B1 jackson becoming cheaper as well.. then improve their accuracy, while perhaps also adding them to AB doc if needed... This would be less lethal than converting every Hellcat in the game into some sort of a TD that behaves like a cheaper jackson somehow.

[Viper]

We have a working proof of this concept in the previous Bk versions.

i think it was too bad experience................all tank destroyers from ambush were too powerful no matter which tier.

[Warhawks97]

A Jagdpanzer IV/48, Marder, Hetzer.... they all have a roughly 33% chance to pen a pershing from max range with ambush and APCR rounds. A 76 mm armed tank has 22% vs Panther under same conditions.

And the Pershing was better protected against german medium 75 mm guns than the Panther was against 76 mm guns.

Technically speaking, all we ask for is that Panthers are roughly as vulnerable/protected as Pershings are in terms of armor. Why would anyone not like it?

[Red]

May I ask how with the change of HP of the Panthers the crit tables changed?

With the BK Panther D2, I get "lots" of crits (subjective feeling of course) from 76mm Shermans. I think that could be a reason, why the new D2 seems to struggle against 76mm Shermans with sandbags front and side now.

[Krieger Blitzer]

A Jagdpanzer IV/48, Marder, Hetzer.... they all have a roughly 33% chance to pen a pershing from max range with ambush and APCR rounds. A 76 mm armed tank has 22% vs Panther under same conditions.

And the Pershing was better protected against german medium 75 mm guns than the Panther was against 76 mm guns.

Technically speaking, all we ask for is that Panthers are roughly as vulnerable/protected as Pershings are in terms of armor. Why would anyone not like it?

it's the Pershing that should be buffed to be as resistant as the Panther.. not the opposite.

Why are we trying to make lower class TDs more capable of dealing with high tier tanks?
This way higher class TDs (such as jackson) would simply become less useful...
So, if somebody is having problems with Panthers.. fine! Add/improve jacksons already.
This is what should have happened since the very start without touching the Panther at all... So, i'd like to flip your own question right back; why should anyone not like it? Do you guys hate the jackson or something?

[MarKr]

Technically speaking, all we ask for is that Panthers are roughly as vulnerable/protected as Pershings are in terms of armor. Why would anyone not like it?

I kept my browser opened from the last night when there was just your post and under it Red's post and I wanted to post:
How long do you think it will take before someone says "so make Pershings as durable as Panthers".

And now it's showing me that Tiger's already done it.

Why are we trying to make lower class TDs more capable of dealing with high tier tanks?

Because very resistant higher tier tanks lead to shitload of frustration on both sides. Allies have extremely hard time destroying them even if they outnumber the high tier with medium tanks 4:1. This leads to allies using mostly arty and other abilities to destroy these heavy tanks which in turn leads to Axis complaining about "arty camper noobs" because their heavy and expensive stuff gets destroyed by something that the tanks cannot even directly shoot at.
Prime example just yesterday Wald and Drescher streamed a 3v3 game where they faced Panthers, KTs and Elefants and after losing the SP the most effective way they had was to just arty the tanks all day long, to which the Axis team wrote complaints about arty "noob camping" several times.

This way higher class TDs (such as jackson) would simply become less useful...

Requested 33% chance to pen at max range with active AP and camo vs 100+% to pen. at max range with AP and camo with Jackson. Sure, if you feel like Jacksons would be less useful and not worth their cost, don't use them, I guess?

So, if somebody is having problems with Panthers.. fine! Add/improve jacksons already.

Aaaand here we go again..."don't touch my Panther, rather just buff other stuff". I think I've already mentioned the never ending "buff spiral". But I'm done arguing about this over and over, so fine...Panthers will go back to what they were and Jacksons will get a buff:
- 70 basic range
- guaranteed accuracy vs Panthers
- guaranteed penetration vs Panthers
- buffed damage vs Panthers to x8 (from x5)
- Slight cost increase to counter the buffs
Due to stats standardization, penetration and damage values have to be applied to Pershings too.

There we go. Panthers will be just like before, and their counters are buffed, everyone should be satistied now. Changes are final.

Topic closed.

[Krieger Blitzer]

@MarKr

Because very resistant higher tier tanks lead to shitload of frustration on both sides. Allies have extremely hard time destroying them even if they outnumber the high tier with medium tanks 4:1.

And buffing those "mediums" would mean that it would be easier to outnumber those high tier tanks using much cheaper counterparts.. so you don't really need to unlock high tier TDs anymore, but simply stick to dozens of mid game units. Leading to frustration from the players who are using the high tier tanks...

A player using a Panther/Pershing would not complain to see his tank destroyed by a jackson/JPz L70.
However, they would complain when the same thing happens vs a Hellcat/JPz L48.

The proof to that is how you can see some players currently complaining how Pershing currently isn't worth it.

increasing the pen to 33% vs Panthers would mean that jacksons would have to remain trash.. high tier tanks are supposed to be countered by high tier TDs.

Yet, it's all about player preference. Though it's worth to mention everyone would welcome any improvements aimed to make jacksons/Pershing better...

[Viper]

Aaaand here we go again..."don't touch my Panther, rather just buff other stuff". I think I've already mentioned the never ending "buff spiral". But I'm done arguing about this over and over, so fine...Panthers will go back to what they were and Jacksons will get a buff:
- 70 basic range
- guaranteed accuracy vs Panthers
- guaranteed penetration vs Panthers
- buffed damage vs Panthers to x8 (from x5)
- Slight cost increase to counter the buffs
Due to stats standardization, penetration and damage values have to be applied to Pershings too.

There we go. Panthers will be just like before, and their counters are buffed, everyone should be satistied now. Changes are final.

Topic closed.

yes please buff the pershing.........please.......please.

[MarKr]

And buffing those "mediums" would mean that it would be easier to outnumber those high tier tanks using much cheaper counterparts.. so you don't really need to unlock high tier TDs anymore, but simply stick to dozens of mid game units. Leading to frustration from the players who are using the high tier tanks...

Just as you said - "OUTNUMBER" if you have to use 3 or 4 medium tanks to be sure to take down one high tier tank, then the high tier didn't get destroyed by 1 cheaper unit but by the combined power of 3-4 cheaper units that together cost more than the higher tier tank AND require more micro than using one tank to successfully pull that off.

In the end it is only about how much resources you invest into your units and how much resource loss they can inflict on your opponent's units.
3x 76mm Shermans:
1350MP 165F 11.52 Fuel upkeep (1140MP 135F in Armor doc with cost drop; 7.6 Fuel upkeep with Armor doc upgrade)

4x 76mm Shermans:
1800MP 220F 15.36 Fuel upkeep (1520MP 180F in Armor doc with cost drop; 10.13 Fuel upkeep with Armor doc upgrade)

Panther D
650MP 95F 2.88 Fuel upkeep

Panther A
700MP 110F 2.88 Fuel upkeep

Panther G:
880MP 130F 2.88 Fuel upkeep

Tiger Early:
840MP 165F 4.56 Fuel upkeep

Tiger Late:
865MP 170F 4.56 Fuel upkeep

King Tiger:
1400MP 210F 7.16 Fuel upkeep

King Tiger Henschel:
1200MP 200F 7.16 Fuel upkeep

That's presuming that with those 3-4 Shermans you actually win the fight which still isn't guaranteed, especially against the KTs later on. I guess you can see why it is simply not cost-effective to try to counter those higher tier tanks with medium tanks - thus the frustratio circle with allies bombing/artying these tanks and axis complaining that allies camp and arty their tanks instead of facing them head on.

Well, anyways. The Jackson/Pershing buffs should help with this although...looking at the price difference and the fact that we cannot touch axis higher tier tanks, they will probably need to get buffs against those too. And I forgot to mention that Achilles/Firefly (all 17 pounders included because of stats-unification) are the intended counters to Panthers on CW side so they will need to get same buffs - Achilles is essentially different looking M36 and Firefly is different looking B1 anyway.

[Krieger Blitzer]

It's not as hard as you think it is to flank and destroy a Panther using just 2 Hellcats.. although this all comes down to players skill and the given situation.

You see... MarKr, we have 2 different perspectives here:

- The one you support:
Panthers back to old state but buff 76 against them (possibly buff Zookas vs Panthers as well).

- The one i support:
Panthers back to old state but improve Jackson/Pershing in return.


I can tell you it's about player preference here.. but i definitely prefer the 2nd perspective, why?
Because the first one more or less aims to make Panthers similar to Pershings in a negative way... Meaning that Panthers need to be brought down to current Pershing level, while it's not a secret that Pershings currently are under-performing actually.

Thus, i prefer the 2nd approach because it aims to make Pershings similar to Panthers in a positive way... Meaning that Pershing would need to become as effective as Panthers.. just as they should.
Though, it's worth to mention that you can't really "flank" the Pershing with Axis TDs as they are slower.. whereas you can flank Axis tanks using Allied TDs, so i would be more careful when buffing 17pdr, etc.

I know you are trying to be a bit sarcastic rather than acting serious.. but you are over-doing it, or at least your statements about buffing the Pershing/17pdrs are a bit exaggerated. I mean.. sure, you can buff the Pershing, but that doesn't mean 100% accuracy or whatever.

If you like to know what i think should happen.. then there you go:
- Panther back to old prices (before 5.2.7) and HP with speed values also reverted.
- Pershing becomes more resistant vs L48 guns.
- Jackson B1 cost reduced to be same as regular jackson.. accuracy buffed for both.
- jacksons & Firefly would get 65 basic range (from 60 now)...
- Firefly comes back to RAF.

[Warhawks97]

@Tiger:

Its stupid to have a unit from a certain tier that is allowed to be countered by a unit of the same tier. In that logic any def doc TD wont be allowed to kill a Pershing bc all of them are essentially a tier that def doc doesnt even have, esspecially not in terms of CP.


It also makes any micro gameplay and positioning far less relevant and rewarding and forces every player to rush "same tier counters". For TS player it means always rush Jagdpanthers asap since its the only unit allowed to kill a pershing, And likewise all US docs would rush jacksons to counter german heavies, making any other path basically pointless to go for.


And this "flanking" stuff is most of the time a death sentence and trap rather than a serious way of playing the game. It is possible only when the enemie tank has 0 support units (no 50 mm gun, schreck or even 20 mm gun) and no vision to see what is coming. Meanwhile the guy rushing with TD´s needs to have perfect vision to the enemie tanks surroundings and a pre-arty strike clearing all possible support assets. I saw games with more than just two tanks rushing for a flanking maneuver and all getting killed. I would believe this tactics to be a sure solution when the player talking this nonsense would pull off this tactics in every single game successfully.
And even when you flank it, you have to make the RNG rolling rear hit or the shot will still bounce off from the front armor even when you fire it from an angle where it should be impossible to hit the "front armor" of a panther. Already happend many many times.


I am a player of total war games if anyone knows them. And there its normal to be able to beat high cost and tier units with cheaper once. Simply bc you have to. Like beating a spanish heavily armed with galeon with a cheap and agile Brigg is possible. You just have to know how.




I would keep the new Panther prices. Bring back its old top speed, keep current acceleration. Make heavier guns more accurate like 90 mm guns etc. and drop Jackson MP cost.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Its stupid to have a unit from a certain tier that is allowed to be countered by a unit of the same tier. In that logic any def doc TD wont be allowed to kill a Pershing bc all of them are essentially a tier that def doc doesnt even have, esspecially not in terms of CP.

Def doc has JPz & Nashorn.. only those should be capable of countering Pershing.
How is it stupid that units are based on tier? It's not fine that Pershing currently sucks vs lower tier tanks.
I would go even further and improve Pershing more vs even L70 & 88 guns.. currently it's just underperforming.