Remove of the SP

[Consti255]

I've always held that the Super Pershing is super unhealthy for the game. It creates an unfun game of cat and mouse. Entire late games can revolve around this singular unit which can create a frustrating experience. Often times players will just alt+f4 out of games when they lose their spershings.

Realistically as an axis player it is very hard to kill. Your only hope is to immobilize it which is hard as its a mobile tank. Your other hope is to overwhelm it with other late game tanks which is easier said than done, but certainly possible. Both of this factors create an extremely unfun late game.

In Comparison, the Big Cats of the Axis late game are extremely slow. The King Tiger, The Elephant, The Jadgtiger are all vehicles that are easily knocked out by artillery and planes, which require them to have support elements and other things surrounded by them. Something which the Allies have a plethora of, but the axis often times do not have much of these support resources. That alone breaks the balanced "assystemtry" of

The Spershing in comparison is just the old version of the Panther, a one man army that with enough micro and gamer sweat can win a game.

The Pershing Ace is also a disgusting vehicle, though not quite perceived as strong. It does however delete infantry at an astonishing rate, faster than any 50 cal vehicle I've seen due to its coaxial buffing ability. Something that I feel is slept upon by many Armor doctrine players.

Speaking of the JT, it's actually one of the easiest units to kill.. for some reason 95mm Churchill & 105mm arty deals immense amount of damage to it.

Also, the reload time is so big and it's slow to chase anything down.. that's why i suggested to give it 80 range or 75 at least.

Keep in mind, this tank has 128mm gun; so it shouldn't be on the same category as 90mm or 88 tank cannons.

I disagree with the range increase. The vehicle may be pushed over the top as it currently is. It's main gun was not impacted by the nerfs to infantry attacking, it has a ridiculous amount of armor, and it has an amazing HE shell. Its short range despite the logical inconsistency is the short coming. The range as it stands cements its place vs the Ferdinand which is a specialized long range tank duelist that is incapable of infantry murder.

As for the vulnerability to artillery, it ensures that the tank needs a lot of support units to complement it and prevents players from overextending and microgodding a game. Again, a weakness that the Spershing lacks completely.

Thats what i was saying with Axis relys on head to head tank combat while allies have a whole aresnal of off map or other support units that can absolutely delete big and slow axis heavys.
Drescher said it in an english and logic i couldnt bring.

[Diablo]

Not sure if it belongs here, but I thoroughly disagree on the current notion that only axis units can meet foes head on. I guess it's a BK tradition from old times. But doesn't it just suck to generally lack the ability to survive direct 1 on 1 combat with allied units? The roster simply isn't nearly as saturated with power units as the Axis one.

[Red]

Since the SP does not have HE, it can well be countered by AT infantry, something that cannot be said for the KT or JT.

The argument with the resources I do not see, as in TS doc the resource investment for KT or JT are much higher in comparison, as there is no supply yard, no observation posts and no ammo/fuel trade in. So for me, all the arguments for removing the SP can also be brought forward for the KT and JT, as well as possibly the Elefant.
And if someone does not want to play with the SP, there is no need, as it can be switched out with the Pershing Ace.

What I do see is the point, that a one time call-in sucks, but in return, it does not cost fuel. Basically a bit like the Elefant in Def Doc.
So if that is the argument, why not make it a buildable unit once unlocked, lower the MP cost to 1200, have it cost 200 fuel, and a max of one deployed at a time?

[Consti255]

I always think fuel costs as allies is so tricky.
With the supply yard you can just get 10 fuel on top while also lowering your upkeep for tanks.
Plus the cheaper shermans which than only sit at 30fuel (absolute laughable if you ask me) .
So 200 fuel for allies, would be a whole different storyas 200 for the KT on the axis side.



When it comes to no HE, its still worth mentioning that ecen shreks have a hard time penning the SP, thats why i suggested a armor nerf against handheld AT, in trade off for the pershing ace beeing able to called inafter the dead of the SP.

[Frost]

I've always held that the Super Pershing is super unhealthy for the game. It creates an unfun game of cat and mouse. Entire late games can revolve around this singular unit which can create a frustrating experience. Often times players will just alt+f4 out of games when they lose their spershings.

Realistically as an axis player it is very hard to kill. Your only hope is to immobilize it which is hard as its a mobile tank. Your other hope is to overwhelm it with other late game tanks which is easier said than done, but certainly possible. Both of this factors create an extremely unfun late game.

In Comparison, the Big Cats of the Axis late game are extremely slow. The King Tiger, The Elephant, The Jadgtiger: are all vehicles that are easily knocked out by artillery and planes, which require them to have support elements and other things surrounded by them. Something which the Allies have a plethora of, but the axis often times do not have much of these support resources. That alone breaks the balanced "assystemtry" of the game.

The Spershing in comparison is just the old version of the Panther, a one man army that with enough micro and gamer sweat can win a game.

The Pershing Ace is also a disgusting vehicle, though not quite perceived as strong. It does however delete infantry at an astonishing rate, faster than any 50 cal vehicle I've seen due to its coaxial buffing ability. Something that I feel is slept upon by many Armor doctrine players.

Speaking of the JT, it's actually one of the easiest units to kill.. for some reason 95mm Churchill & 105mm arty deals immense amount of damage to it.

Also, the reload time is so big and it's slow to chase anything down.. that's why i suggested to give it 80 range or 75 at least.

Keep in mind, this tank has 128mm gun; so it shouldn't be on the same category as 90mm or 88 tank cannons.

I disagree with the range increase. The vehicle may be pushed over the top as it currently is. It's main gun was not impacted by the nerfs to infantry attacking, it has a ridiculous amount of armor, and it has an amazing HE shell. Its short range despite the logical inconsistency is the short coming. The range as it stands cements its place vs the Ferdinand which is a specialized long range tank duelist that is incapable of infantry murder.

As for the vulnerability to artillery, it ensures that the tank needs a lot of support units to complement it and prevents players from overextending and microgodding a game. Again, a weakness that the Spershing lacks completely.

This is the main reason why the panther change was so amusing to me because it made no sense to me when allies still have units like this in their arsenal when everyone is fixated on panthers. Sherman is the same thing, especially the HE version, because it can win the game on its own you can see this a lot in 1v1s.

In either case, you are also missing out on a lot. A LOT of details first and foremost, king tiger is not easily knocked down by art and planes , in fact, good players dodge these quite confidently. This is an issue with jagdtiger and elefant, which is why they are heavily undervalued by players and considered inappropriate and it's the support elements, which is a general issue with Axis where in theory your units are supposed to be cost effective but sometimes they just don't, especially when sherman 1 shot over and over.

Also, I don't understand your position for the Jagdtiger. Are you saying the gun is decent I mean yes that is true but what is the point when it instantly dies when there are literally any 95mm presented on the field and even super pershing howitzer ability takes her and on top of that the range doesn't cut it because as soon as enemy tanks see you they have all the time in the world to fall back so how are you going to use it? There's no need to utilise it over Jagdpanther because it's simply one gaint creature that does nothing but die if you are "unforunate" enough which i personally don't see the point of gamble.

1- you cannot chase.
2- extremely slow to rotate.
3- easy to flank so require heavy support.
4- you take long to aim.
5- your reload takes forever super pershing fire 2 times and you fire only 1.
6- you don't even have any ability when you vet literally no snipe shot.
7- no ambush.
8- easy to immobilize.
..... it goes on and on jagdpanther literally get veteran shot ability lmfao and AMBUSH.
and even when you meet and bypass all these you still can lose 1v1 if you are just unlucky on top of the time the thing takes to actually move the position with the high speed.

[Consti255]

This is the main reason why the panther change was so amusing to me because it made no sense to me when allies still have units like this in their arsenal when everyone is fixated on panthers. Sherman is the same thing, especially the HE version, because it can win the game on its own you can see this a lot in 1v1s.

This units are just present in 2 doc with heavy tank focus (Armor and RE). Blitz on the other hand, PS aswell, has far better infantry aswell. And when a Panther win most 1v1s against a pershing for example (your top notch tank), while storms are rapeing your whole infantry, there is something off with the balance. Armor tanks SHOULD win against Blitz tanks just has how the docs are designed and should be in the late stages. Blitz is arround overcome your enemy with pure force and agressive playstyle.

Keeping bringing up the panther debate and i keep bringing up that it was flat out "too good" in such a versitile doc.

Still, its not part of the thread nor the poll, so keep focussing on the SP and not the JT. If you want its range increased, open up a new thread so its better viewable for the Devs.

[Warhawks97]

I would like to have the SP removed. Not just because its a one time call in. But that it is a one time mega unit with mega stats (armor/gun). But at the same time one bad hit and that thing got immobilized and killed.

It does more harm to both sides than it solves issues. When you dont get lucky as axis and just bounce off or dont manage to immobilize it you get into trouble. I have had games in which a SP was down with all parts destroyed but the entire team send in waves of engineers to keep it alive. Literally WW3 was started about the SP while WW2 was still raging. At the end, when the SP was down, the entire allied frontline crumbled under the pressure of the stockpiled german tanks which had been held back for the right moment. Then again, in other situations the axis threw all they had against the SP but it just didnt die and the millions of engineers that sacraficed their lives were not in vain. After that the SP literally made a push through the axis defensive line on its own.

Having that kind of "all in, win all" or "all in, lose all" unit sucks in an RTS game. Its like a death star in star wars. It either crushes any planet or it dies to 30 filthy X-Wing fighters just because one fucking proton torpedo hit its reactor.

So my Vote is clear: "No Death Stars" in BK!


Balancing a doctrine with such a unit is damn hard.
I would go a different Route: Remove SP and Pershing Ace. The CP´s and the unlock thing could be used more usefull. I dont see any need for any of these units. On the other hand i would drop the build cost of basic Pershings by a little bit.

The main counter to german late game tanks would be the jacksons which would drop in build cost as well by a bit. Thus this doctrine wouldnt rely so much on the Death Star and could effectively outplay the enemie by numbers and tactics.