*Frustration*

Are you looking for match, a stategy, a tactic or looking for a replay? Stop right here, and look no further.
User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3866
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

*Frustration*

Postby Tiger1996 » 23 Feb 2017, 10:05

Hello!

The title says it all.. some sort of frustration we had on this recent game here... v4.9.6

Axis;
- Me >>> Terror.
- Shadow >>> Blitz.
- Paine >>> Blitz

We were altogether on TeamSpeak.

VS

- Red >>> RE doc.
- PopularCannibal >>> inf doc.
- Boba >>> Armor doc.

Our opponents were also together on TeamSpeak btw.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oflGf5YhtRg
Frustration 2.jpg
Video Thumbnail.


Was very disappointing at the end to be honest.. I am also uploading the replay file... So that you could see the game from the Allied team perspective. Just look HOW MUCH resources they were able to maintain even when we had a big part of the map to our favor!
I am not complaining about balance at all, neither I am judging it based on this particular game... However, the RE doc has a doctrinal unlock which upgrades all the command trucks.. apparently allowing them to ridiculously generate a huge amount of resources! if u check the replay from the opponents side, u would then quickly understand what I mean.

Therefore, I would suggest a price increase to Churchills.. not the MP cost... But definitely the fuel cost! They should cost significantly higher in terms of fuel.
The same way, the Armor doc player had really enough fuel, thanks to supply yard upgrades... Also, the Shermans proved not to be as much weak as most people think they are.. they can penetrate Tigers, as we have seen in previous games. And they can bounce off Axis 75mm guns too! It's honestly unfair too that Shermans are very cheap like this. As I would suggest a slight price increase for all Shermans as well.. there is just no reason that Pz.4 would remain to be more expensive than Shermans, but Shermans need to cost as much now!

Throughout the game, you can hear me complaining about the armor thickness of the Pershing, but no... I think I was probably wrong; the armor is kinda realistic and fine at the moment.. but I was only surprised a little bit, because the Pershing usually doesn't reflect that much shells. But again; it's totally fine! Even though I would honestly suggest to delay the Pershing by at least one command point.

Lastly, my SturmTiger had some pink wheels???!!! :?

Have fun :)
Attachments
temp.rec
Bk mod v4.9.6 playback file.
(3.92 MiB) Downloaded 27 times

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2766
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: *Frustration*

Postby MarKr » 23 Feb 2017, 10:42

When I read the text it is sort of funny to read this sentence first:
Tiger1996 wrote:I am not complaining about balance at all, neither I am judging it based on this particular game
and a second later:
Tiger1996 wrote:I would suggest a price increase to Churchills.. not the MP cost... But definitely the fuel cost! They should cost significantly higher in terms of fuel.
and
Tiger1996 wrote:I would suggest a slight price increase for all Shermans as well..
:D :D :D
Image

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3866
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Tiger1996 » 23 Feb 2017, 11:17

Well... :D

But these balance concerns are really not based on this particular game! As I have also clearly mentioned;
Also, the Shermans proved not to be as much weak as most people think they are.. they can penetrate Tigers, as we have seen in previous games. And they can bounce off Axis 75mm guns too!

So, these conclusions are not related to only a specific game :) But it's my overall point of view regarding balance based on all the games I have recently played on this new patch.

My evaluations might be inaccurate though, but after all I guess it's also worth mentioning that I can see some tiny glitches btw of which could have been quickly spotted and therefore easily avoided if there was a third beta.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2766
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: *Frustration*

Postby MarKr » 23 Feb 2017, 11:47

You say "they can penetrate Tigers" (76 Sherman vs Tiger = 22% penetration)...well, PIV H/J can penetrate Jumbo (~25%; 33% with Wolfram) or Pershing (20%; 26% with wolfram).

And also you say "It's honestly unfair too that Shermans are very cheap like this" well, in Armor doctrine they are cheaper with unlock...but when you play Infantry doctrine (so your shermans are not cheaper), isn't it unfair that BK has cheaper PIVs (with unlock)...same for TH doc - after unlock they build tank hunters faster and cheaper.
Image

User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 293
Joined: 26 Mar 2015, 18:51

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Devilfish » 23 Feb 2017, 12:20

In my opinion using 76 Shermans is a complete gamble. Even though they can in theory pen Tigers and Panthers.....taking into account their accuracy, RoF and pen chance......it's like hoping to get rich by playing roulette. The only exception is well microed swarm of upgraded and over-repaired E8s.

With this patch the game evolved to the point that one simply needs TH doc. People complain that pershing wrecks tigers and panthers, but on the other hand JgPanther totally wrecks pershings, even SP. So TH doc will take care of pershings and other doc Panthers/Tigers will deal with the rest. Same goes for the allied side. Armor doc deals with most of axis armor, but need help from other docs to take out TH hunters (planes, arty, zooks, mines, you name it).
"Only by admitting what we are can we get what we want"

User avatar
Leonida [525]
Posts: 139
Joined: 26 Jun 2016, 09:25

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Leonida [525] » 23 Feb 2017, 12:20

GG, but now against 2 Armors at least 1 TH or 1 def is needed I think, 2 blitz and 1 terror is too risky :)

JimQwilleran
Posts: 1107
Joined: 07 Jan 2015, 15:05

Re: *Frustration*

Postby JimQwilleran » 23 Feb 2017, 13:17

I was truly curious when Tiger finds the new patch unbalanced. I was surprised with his early posts, but now it seems that he met my expectations ;).
I have to admit, my first games as axis were frustrating. Now I learned how to counter the new dangers and made myself fit the new balance.
Just remember that german tanks are now not as op as they used to be ^^.

User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 293
Joined: 26 Mar 2015, 18:51

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Devilfish » 23 Feb 2017, 13:29

Basically what you two just said. Axis were used to having tanks in both blitz and terror that were able to deal with anything (only "hectic" part was SP and AB planes). Now it has changed.

@Tiger, dude, I haven't seen a single churchill in the game and just few shermans, so don't what you mean with the price changes.
Btw, Sturmtiger really rocks, unless you get a bugged shell. Truly can be a game changer if used in the right moment.
"Only by admitting what we are can we get what we want"

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2766
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: *Frustration*

Postby MarKr » 23 Feb 2017, 13:54

I am also surprised how people started complaining about Pershings but not a single word about Jacksons...they are cheaper, can ambush (so Panthers have no time to use smoke to avoid being hit), their guns are same as Pershings...especially when before the patch most of Tiger's comments on changed 90mm guns were about Jacksons :D

Anyway Devilfish is right - for allies the Armor doctrine is sort of a must, if the team doesn't choose armor doctrine, Axis team of BK and double Terror becomes problematic to deal with. But Axis have counter to Armor doctrine - TH doc and it counters it well. TH doesn't have good AA so it is susceptible to AB/RAF and arty doctrines (immobile THs are even easier to kill than immobile tanks). So each side has counters. Axis can no longer afford to choose whatever doctrine they want and win without bigger problems while ignoring choices on Allies side - which is good, if you ask me.
Image

Mr. FeministDonut
Posts: 333
Joined: 13 Aug 2015, 21:05

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Mr. FeministDonut » 23 Feb 2017, 14:52

MarKr wrote: Axis can no longer afford to choose whatever doctrine they want and win without bigger problems while ignoring choices on Allies side - which is good, if you ask me.

I cannot agree to the last sentence. Blitzkrieg and Terror doctrine is kinda same things, if not counting a slight difference in them and few doc fixed units. Both has good heavy vehicles, both has great infantry, but one has an additional rocket launcher, other can go in deep spam with panzers or calling in fuel (which i've seen not many players do). Both have a armor vs armor and good anti-inf measures. While USA is hunger for unique abilities (if german player won't lost in 15 minutes) to countine pressuring the enemy.
The only unique doctrine is a defence for WH.

edit: just red that your topic was about all factions, but still.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3866
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Tiger1996 » 23 Feb 2017, 15:10

MarKr wrote:You say "they can penetrate Tigers" (76 Sherman vs Tiger = 22% penetration)...well, PIV H/J can penetrate Jumbo (~25%; 33% with Wolfram) or Pershing (20%; 26% with wolfram).

And also you say "It's honestly unfair too that Shermans are very cheap like this" well, in Armor doctrine they are cheaper with unlock...but when you play Infantry doctrine (so your shermans are not cheaper), isn't it unfair that BK has cheaper PIVs (with unlock)...same for TH doc - after unlock they build tank hunters faster and cheaper.

No, wait a second here ^^
You didn't get my point, not only does the Sherman has higher chance to penetrate the Tiger than the Panzer4 could penetrate the Pershing the other way around.. while the Tiger is even more expensive than the Pershing; not only that! But also, the Sherman is CHEAPER than the Panzer4.

Now here is the point, HE Sherman costs 400 MP/40 fuel and after mass production it's then cheaper than the Quad half-track, 300 MP and 30 fuel ONLY... Even though it's actually better than the Panzer E, F1 or whatever. Yet, those ones actually cost more than the Sherman! They cost around 500 MP and 50 or 55 fuel.
So, the question is; why is the HE Sherman so cheap compared to Axis counterparts??!! Although it's actually more powerful with higher mobility and better suppression. Sukin recently has once pointed this out too, when he said:-
Sukin-kot (SVT) wrote:Why HE pazner in TH doc costs almost twice of a HE sherman in Armor doc?

The Panzer4 H for example, costs 80 fuel whereas the 76 Sherman only costs 55 fuel on the other hand! I am talking about the basic prices as well. After mass production, Shermans get even cheaper... I know Panzer4 will be cheaper as well. The price gap would be much less after mass production though.. but like I said, I am also addressing the basic prices. I mean.. really, the Sherman E8 is cheaper than the Panzer4.F2 ??? o.O

SO... What I am suggesting here, is that 76 Sherman and regular 75 Sherman, should all cost more.. being as much as the Axis counterparts; because the Axis ones aren't any better in fact.
Devilfish wrote:In my opinion using 76 Shermans is a complete gamble.

And using Panzer4s isn't much better... The 76 doesn't struggle much penetrating them, Shermans can also bounce off Pak40 and 75mm guns. While they already have better HP as well, thanks to over-repairing and sandbags!
This brings me back to my point.. in short; why are Shermans less expensive than Panzer4s?!

JimQwilleran wrote:I was truly curious when Tiger finds the new patch unbalanced.

At first, I couldn't have believed it.. until I just witnessed it! Even though I am not saying that it's un-balanced now... I am just addressing some specific certain points concerning balance. Not the whole balance at once! ;)

Devilfish wrote:@Tiger, dude, I haven't seen a single churchill in the game and just few shermans, so don't what you mean with the price changes.

Yes, there weren't any Churchills on this game. But like I said, I am not building my conclusions only based on this game...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> IMPORTANT <<<
I uploaded the replay file for a reason... Because you can't see the Allied side on the video! If u check the replay; RE doc player had full resources almost the entire time! If Churchills would cost 100 fuel per each, this wouldn't even hurt him at all. Armor doc player also had twice as high fuel income compared to ours!!! EVEN when we had more ground, somehow.

And I checked the map, nothing is wrong with the points... SO, it's really true that Allied can generate as much res as the Axis team.. even when Allied have much less territory. Keeping in mind that Allied units are usually cheaper as well... Which makes it even worse!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonida [525] wrote:GG, but now against 2 Armors at least 1 TH or 1 def is needed I think, 2 blitz and 1 terror is too risky :)

True... After all, I am not complaining that we lost though.

>>> Last but not least:-
HE rounds for Hellcats, Achilles, Comets and any other TDs from both sides... MUST be removed!
But the JagdPanther for example already doesn't have HE rounds...

User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 293
Joined: 26 Mar 2015, 18:51

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Devilfish » 23 Feb 2017, 15:43

I always feel confident in a pz4H/J against shermans. Shermans miss very often, got worse rate of fire and I think even pen chances are in a favor of pz4 (don't know the numbers).
With armor doc, shermans get cheaper, can pay for upgrades (sandbags and sidecrap) and can overrepair. Well it's a freakin' armor doctrine. All it can do is armor. Blitz doc can pay muni for fuel. Muni for MP. Getting tank+inf call-in. Can armor doc do that?
Shermans get totally slaughtered by 75mm paks, any other result is just RNG bitch.
Tiger1996 wrote:And I checked the map, nothing is wrong with the points... SO, it's really true that Allied can generate as much res as the Axis team.. even when Allied have much less territory.
Nothing is true, everything is permitted. But really, you need to do a real analysis if you want to make a point. How many units did you and them have? What unkeep do they have? What about supply yard? What about OPs? Give me the real numbers and then we can talk.

Edit: I agree that TDs shouldn't have a HE round. Same as AT guns. Comet is a cruiser/medium tank, predecessor of british MBT, so it deserves HE.
"Only by admitting what we are can we get what we want"

Mr. FeministDonut
Posts: 333
Joined: 13 Aug 2015, 21:05

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Mr. FeministDonut » 23 Feb 2017, 15:47

Tiger1996 wrote:
MarKr wrote:You say "they can penetrate Tigers" (76 Sherman vs Tiger = 22% penetration)...well, PIV H/J can penetrate Jumbo (~25%; 33% with Wolfram) or Pershing (20%; 26% with wolfram).

And also you say "It's honestly unfair too that Shermans are very cheap like this" well, in Armor doctrine they are cheaper with unlock...but when you play Infantry doctrine (so your shermans are not cheaper), isn't it unfair that BK has cheaper PIVs (with unlock)...same for TH doc - after unlock they build tank hunters faster and cheaper.

No, wait a second here ^^
You didn't get my point, not only does the Sherman has higher chance to penetrate the Tiger than the Panzer4 could penetrate the Pershing the other way around.. while the Tiger is even more expensive than the Pershing; not only that! But also, the Sherman is CHEAPER than the Panzer4.

Now here is the point, HE Sherman costs 400 MP/40 fuel and after mass production it's then cheaper than the Quad half-track, 300 MP and 30 fuel ONLY... Even though it's actually better than the Panzer E, F1 or whatever. Yet, those ones actually cost more than the Sherman! They cost around 500 MP and 50 or 55 fuel.
So, the question is; why is the HE Sherman so cheap compared to Axis counterparts??!! Although it's actually more powerful with higher mobility and better suppression. Sukin recently has once pointed this out too, when he said:-
Sukin-kot (SVT) wrote:Why HE pazner in TH doc costs almost twice of a HE sherman in Armor doc?

The Panzer4 H for example, costs 80 fuel whereas the 76 Sherman only costs 55 fuel on the other hand! I am talking about the basic prices as well. After mass production, Shermans get even cheaper... I know Panzer4 will be cheaper as well. The price gap would be much less after mass production though.. but like I said, I am also addressing the basic prices. I mean.. really, the Sherman E8 is cheaper than the Panzer4.F2 ??? o.O

SO... What I am suggesting here, is that 76 Sherman and regular 75 Sherman, should all cost more.. being as much as the Axis counterparts; because the Axis ones aren't any better in fact.
Devilfish wrote:In my opinion using 76 Shermans is a complete gamble.

And using Panzer4s isn't much better... The 76 doesn't struggle much penetrating them, Shermans can also bounce off Pak40 and 75mm guns. While they already have better HP as well, thanks to over-repairing and sandbags!
This brings me back to my point.. in short; why are Shermans less expensive than Panzer4s?!


You can't just compare Pz4 with Shermans while they are having a MG42 that making this tank more fitting in a multi-purpose role.
Everybody knows that shermans has low reloading speed as well as the penetration chances even with HVAP in comparing with axis "equals".
While shermans getting upgrades, lets say, enemy is spending resources and it should be taken into account, too

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2766
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: *Frustration*

Postby MarKr » 23 Feb 2017, 15:53

My point was that in the past as BK doc player you got your Tiger or Panther (though people don't favor BK Panther but still) and you could roll out, knowing that not many things can directly endanger you. At allies side it was pretty much just airstrikes and AT rushes, maybe some other things but you knew that for most part if a dangerous situation appeared the tank could (more often than not) handle it or retreat. Similar goes for terror who has Panther G, but also Tigers and KTs. In the past a 2v2 combination of terror + BK could work in most cases well, no matter what doctrines opponent chose, now it works too but it is harder because if there is Armor player he can use Pershings to destroy your Panthers/Tigers rather easily and Terror doesn't even have to get to build KT, which can eat Pershings for breakfast so armor doctrine can now counter certain Axis doctrine but there are direct counters to armor doctrine too.
That is what I meant by "Axis can no longer afford to choose whatever doctrine they want and win without bigger problems while ignoring choices on Allies side"

Oh, Tiger posted in the mean time...man, I am not going to address every single point but I will react to what I see as the greatest flaw in your argument:
You compare advantages of ONE doctrine to the conditions of an ENTIRE faction. You say that Shermans are cheaper and more durable because of sandbags (advantages of one doctrine), while Axis PIVs are more expensive (Axis in general) - this puts things out of context.
Either compare general conditions:
Sherman M4: 400MP 40F
Sherman 76: 430MP 55F
Sherman E8: 500MP 70F
vs
PIV E: 430MP 50F
PIV H: 550MP 80F

OR compare similar situation in two specific doctrines:
US Armor with cheaper Shermans unlock:
Sherman M4: 300MP 30F
Sherman 76: 335MP 45F
Sherman E8: 365MP 53F
vs
BK doc with cheaper PIVs:
PIV E: 360MP 35F
PIV H: 450MP 55F
When you see the numbers and I would use your logic then I can say that for Infantry doc Sherman 76 costs 430MP and 55F while BK can get much better unit (PIV H) for only 20MP more ;).

And yeah, Sukin asked about PIV F1...TH doctrine is meant to hunt tanks, not infantry. The fact that they have actually best stubby PIV in the game has its cost. Also why is the price of F1 such a problem? TDs are cheaper in TH doctrine, you save ammo on Wolfram and periscope upgrades (you unlock them in command tree) so you can use the fuel trade more often and Assault grens, Pgrens and Asault pios are cheaper already...what else would you want here?
(I know the answer - cheaper tank support building and cheaper F1, but with the current price drops it is not really needed)
Image

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3866
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Tiger1996 » 23 Feb 2017, 16:31

Devilfish wrote:But really, you need to do a real analysis if you want to make a point. How many units did you and them have? What unkeep do they have? What about supply yard? What about OPs? Give me the real numbers and then we can talk.

Exactly that's why I uploaded the replay file... :P Did you check it? Take a look at the Allied team resources around minute 20:00 throughout the replay.. it's just shocking, I was like; "HOW THE F***??!!" when I watched it.

Devilfish wrote:Edit: I agree that TDs shouldn't have a HE round. Same as AT guns. Comet is a cruiser/medium tank, predecessor of british MBT, so it deserves HE.

The Comet's gun just can't shoot HE rounds anyway... Just like the 6pdr.

Mr. FeministDonut wrote:You can't just compare Pz4 with Shermans while they are having a MG42 that making this tank more fitting in a multi-purpose role.

Not really, the Sherman can suppress better... But let's say that the MG is really that much better than the 50.cal (even though I think it's actually not) Yet, would an MG justify such a price difference? 80 fuel for IVH and 55 fuel for 76 Sherman??!! Just because of the MG? 76 Sherman and IVH are the same.. as I believe they should also cost the same.

MarKr wrote:Either compare general conditions:
Sherman M4: 400MP 40F
Sherman 76: 430MP 55F
Sherman E8: 500MP 70F
vs
PIV E: 430MP 50F
PIV H: 550MP 80F

OR compare similar situation in two specific doctrines:
US Armor with cheaper Shermans unlock:
Sherman M4: 300MP 30F
Sherman 76: 335MP 45F
Sherman E8: 365MP 53F
vs
BK doc with cheaper PIVs:
PIV E: 360MP 35F
PIV H: 450MP 55F
When you see the numbers and I would use your logic then I can say that for Infantry doc Sherman 76 costs 430MP and 55F while BK can get much better unit (PIV H) for only 20MP more ;).

I am not comparing a doctrine with an entire faction, but let's stick with basic prices.. just take a look:-
Sherman 76: 430MP 55F
Sherman E8: 500MP 70F
VS
PIV H: 550MP 80F

That's my exact point... :) Now, why these prices??

76 should be at 500MP 65F and E8 should be at 530MP 80F.
Also, Blitz doc doesn't have Pz4.E, So i think you meant Pz.4.D which costs 360MP and 35F after mass production like you said.. but this version easily dies to Quads and MGs... HE Sherman should cost 500 MP and 50F, and then 400MP and 40F after the mass production.
Because F1, and Panzer4.E both cost the same way!

MarKr wrote:Also why is the price of F1 such a problem?

So, my point here... The prices of all Panzer4s are fine.. just Shermans need to cost a bit higher, being as much. Specifically after adding aim time to handheld AT weapons! This wouldn't hurt Armor doc at all... Because they already have higher fuel income.

Churchills the same way, just the fuel cost need to be higher... Because; RE doc is usually swimming in a lot of ammo and fuel.. thanks to the doctrinal unlock + the resources upgrade from the CW trucks themselves.

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2766
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: *Frustration*

Postby MarKr » 23 Feb 2017, 16:42

Man, you build your whole "price increasing" argument on what exactly? "They should cost more because PIVs cost more."? So what? PIV (at least H/J) have higher rate of fire = fire more often = higher damage potential. Also Axis medium tanks have lower fuel upkeep in general - PIV H = 2.24, Sherman 76 = 3.84 (even after fuel upkeep reduction of Armor doc it is 2.53 - more than Axis basic). So when Allies field same number of Shermans and Axis of PIV H, Allies have lower income, while having less overall damage because of Axis tanks having faster RoF...all off this projects to costs.
Image

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3866
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Tiger1996 » 23 Feb 2017, 16:55

Hmm, you probably have a point here... As I also almost completely forgot about the combat support group coming from off-map by Blitz doc! So, never-mind about Sherman prices.. however, I am also still unsure to be honest about the price of Churchills. Though I am still surprised how the Allied team had actually maintained so much resources compared to what we did on the other hand... You might have to check the replay file when u have enough time ^^


Anyway, how about removing HE rounds from TDs btw?

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 23 Feb 2017, 16:55

Regarding the SturmTiger pink tracks, its coming from a bad installation of Bk mod, the SturmTiger use Tiger tracks, so it shouldn't be like that, make sure your installations is clean.
Image

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3866
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Tiger1996 » 23 Feb 2017, 17:17

Hmm, it's not always pink.. actually! That was just the first time I see it happening btw... But I will see about cleaning directory.

Regarding the HE rounds of TDs; I think they should be really removed! Also no one objected as far as I can see.

And btw.. from the change-log, i would like to quote the following:-
- Applied workaround for the "Kingtiger floppy gun" bug****

****It is a workaround, not fix - when it gets "main gun destroyed", the weapon cannot fire but doesn't look damaged and thus after fixing doesn't remain broken. Unfortunately the visual bug is part of the model and we cannot fix it, we don't want to remove the vehicle either so we used this solution.

Unfortunately, it's still bugged :P

User avatar
MarKr
Team Member
Posts: 2766
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 19:17
Location: Czech Republic

Re: *Frustration*

Postby MarKr » 23 Feb 2017, 23:28

Tiger1996 wrote:Unfortunately, it's still bugged :P
Thanks for report.
Image

User avatar
Redgaarden
Posts: 338
Joined: 16 Jan 2015, 03:58

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Redgaarden » 24 Feb 2017, 00:56

Regarding the HE rounds of TDs; I think they should be really removed! Also no one objected as far as I can see.


I'm objecting to removing HE shells from Tank destroyers as I see no reason to remove them.

You can't just compare Pz4 with Shermans while they are having a MG42 that making this tank more fitting in a multi-purpose role.
Everybody knows that shermans has low reloading speed as well as the penetration chances even with HVAP in comparing with axis "equals".
While shermans getting upgrades, lets say, enemy is spending resources and it should be taken into account, too


HVAP is far supperior than the axis counterpart. Sherman upgrades are not needed early game and is only and upgrade, It's your fault getting an upgrade you dont even know what does.
Almost all panzer 4 and shermans are very common statistically but then again very different for different purpose.
Rifles are not for fighting. They are for building!

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3866
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Tiger1996 » 24 Feb 2017, 01:33

Redgaarden wrote:I'm objecting to removing HE shells from Tank destroyers as I see no reason to remove them.


Spoiler: show
HOW. DARE. YOU. OBJECT. :?:

Democracy at its best! :D


Well... It just sucks that AT squads with aim time are dying to tank destroyers for god's sake! :P

User avatar
ShadowIchigo
Posts: 333
Joined: 26 Nov 2014, 20:25
Location: Philadelphia Born N Raized, US

Re: *Frustration*

Postby ShadowIchigo » 24 Feb 2017, 01:45

Devilfish wrote:I always feel confident in a pz4H/J against shermans. Shermans miss very often, got worse rate of fire and I think even pen chances are in a favor of pz4 (don't know the numbers).
With armor doc, shermans get cheaper, can pay for upgrades (sandbags and sidecrap) and can overrepair. Well it's a freakin' armor doctrine. All it can do is armor. Blitz doc can pay muni for fuel. Muni for MP. Getting tank+inf call-in. Can armor doc do that?
Shermans get totally slaughtered by 75mm paks, any other result is just RNG bitch.
Tiger1996 wrote:And I checked the map, nothing is wrong with the points... SO, it's really true that Allied can generate as much res as the Axis team.. even when Allied have much less territory.
Nothing is true, everything is permitted. But really, you need to do a real analysis if you want to make a point. How many units did you and them have? What unkeep do they have? What about supply yard? What about OPs? Give me the real numbers and then we can talk.

Edit: I agree that TDs shouldn't have a HE round. Same as AT guns. Comet is a cruiser/medium tank, predecessor of british MBT, so it deserves HE.


My point was that in the past as BK doc player you got your Tiger or Panther (though people don't favor BK Panther but still) and you could roll out, knowing that not many things can directly endanger you. At allies side it was pretty much just airstrikes and AT rushes, maybe some other things but you knew that for most part if a dangerous situation appeared the tank could (more often than not) handle it or retreat. Similar goes for terror who has Panther G, but also Tigers and KTs. In the past a 2v2 combination of terror + BK could work in most cases well, no matter what doctrines opponent chose, now it works too but it is harder because if there is Armor player he can use Pershings to destroy your Panthers/Tigers rather easily and Terror doesn't even have to get to build KT, which can eat Pershings for breakfast so armor doctrine can now counter certain Axis doctrine but there are direct counters to armor doctrine too.
That is what I meant by "Axis can no longer afford to choose whatever doctrine they want and win without bigger problems while ignoring choices on Allies side"

Oh, Tiger posted in the mean time...man, I am not going to address every single point but I will react to what I see as the greatest flaw in your argument:
You compare advantages of ONE doctrine to the conditions of an ENTIRE faction. You say that Shermans are cheaper and more durable because of sandbags (advantages of one doctrine), while Axis PIVs are more expensive (Axis in general) - this puts things out of context.
Either compare general conditions:
Sherman M4: 400MP 40F
Sherman 76: 430MP 55F
Sherman E8: 500MP 70F
vs
PIV E: 430MP 50F
PIV H: 550MP 80F

OR compare similar situation in two specific doctrines:
US Armor with cheaper Shermans unlock:
Sherman M4: 300MP 30F
Sherman 76: 335MP 45F
Sherman E8: 365MP 53F
vs
BK doc with cheaper PIVs:
PIV E: 360MP 35F
PIV H: 450MP 55F
When you see the numbers and I would use your logic then I can say that for Infantry doc Sherman 76 costs 430MP and 55F while BK can get much better unit (PIV H) for only 20MP more ;).

And yeah, Sukin asked about PIV F1...TH doctrine is meant to hunt tanks, not infantry. The fact that they have actually best stubby PIV in the game has its cost. Also why is the price of F1 such a problem? TDs are cheaper in TH doctrine, you save ammo on Wolfram and periscope upgrades (you unlock them in command tree) so you can use the fuel trade more often and Assault grens, Pgrens and Asault pios are cheaper already...what else would you want here?
(I know the answer - cheaper tank support building and cheaper F1, but with the current price drops it is not really needed)
Image



you couldnt have said it any better. That is what i like to see as well. to make such an a proposition i want to see the entirety of the analysis. Well said dunnie, well said.

Edit:
and markr, i think you validate dun's point by providing this information. Thank you! you da man. btw what are wolframs?

Mr. FeministDonut
Posts: 333
Joined: 13 Aug 2015, 21:05

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Mr. FeministDonut » 24 Feb 2017, 12:32

Redgaarden wrote:
Regarding the HE rounds of TDs; I think they should be really removed! Also no one objected as far as I can see.


I'm objecting to removing HE shells from Tank destroyers as I see no reason to remove them.

You can't just compare Pz4 with Shermans while they are having a MG42 that making this tank more fitting in a multi-purpose role.
Everybody knows that shermans has low reloading speed as well as the penetration chances even with HVAP in comparing with axis "equals".
While shermans getting upgrades, lets say, enemy is spending resources and it should be taken into account, too


HVAP is far supperior than the axis counterpart. Sherman upgrades are not needed early game and is only and upgrade, It's your fault getting an upgrade you dont even know what does.
Almost all panzer 4 and shermans are very common statistically but then again very different for different purpose.

wow, so what's my fault on that replay?

User avatar
Panzerblitz1
Team Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 24 Nov 2014, 00:12
Location: Paris, right under the Eiffel tower.

Re: *Frustration*

Postby Panzerblitz1 » 24 Feb 2017, 13:20

ShadowIchigo wrote: Pgrens and Asault pios are cheaper already...


PE Assault Grenadiers are also cheaper.
Image


Return to “Matchmaking & Strategies”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest