+  Operation Market Garden
|-+  General Category
| |-+  OMG Balance
| | |-+  Gripes (Moderators: UnLimiTeD, PztKrieger)
| | | |-+  So, Panzer Elite again
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 3 [4] Print
Author Topic: So, Panzer Elite again  (Read 1095 times)
Tommy952
Rules & Regulations Member
Development
*****

Reputation: 2717
Offline Offline

Posts: 2194
Steam Name: w952

View Profile
« Reply #45 on: January 22, 2017, 05:12:13 pm »

SE gets +5 range as a doctrinal option for the P4 IST, plus stun rounds.

Might be interesting to give that to TH instead, and give the SE IST a flamethrower...
Logged

Saavedra
epic lolcat
*****

Reputation: 4455
Offline Offline

Posts: 4028


View Profile
« Reply #46 on: January 22, 2017, 05:48:09 pm »

Or incendiary rounds.

I mind, thatīs kind of a no-brainer for a Scorched Earth IST. Although I can imagine some people wouldnīt be too happy with how powerful that would be. You could flank an AT gun, drop an incendiary round on it as you circle it, and proceed to destroy every other infantry unit around it as you continue moving around the AT as its crew burns.
Logged

sdauz
OMG Shoutcaster
****

Reputation: 275
Offline Offline

Posts: 134

View Profile
« Reply #47 on: January 23, 2017, 12:22:15 am »

Currently, the only way an IST is useful is having stun on it and to make it basically a shield while other units do damage.
Logged
The trap
Jr. Member
**

Reputation: 346
Offline Offline

Posts: 220

View Profile
« Reply #48 on: January 23, 2017, 01:02:03 am »

Why does the Hetzer cost 10pop?

The Marder has a better gun in most respects (longer range, wider angle of fire, more damage) and only costs 5pop. I seriously doubt the extra armour/health and one MG are worth +5pop when its only real uses are a) take hits and b) be a less agile Stug. As for the ambush, does anyone really use it? You even have to invest in doctrinal abilities just to get the damn thing to rotate while cloaked. And the gun only does 87 damage anyway (when it penetrates...).

The Hetzer is just way too specialized (and too bad at what it is supposed to do) for its cost. It is a Marder with a way worse gun and better protection, but it gets countered pretty much the same way Marders do, and there is little it can do by itself. And it is yet ANOTHER damned unit that has to lock down to do its best in a faction that is supposed to be mobile, but canīt do it like the Marder, which at least can be moved and locked down immediately.



The PIV IST also costs 10pop.

It can only be used as an anti-infantry unit, unless you buy willy pete rounds for it in the Scorched Earth doctrine so it can STUN vehicles. However, it is another unit with questionable performance. When used against Allied elite infantry (and why the hell would you use this thing for anything else given that it is just a PIV so AT guns and tanks counter it much the same, except it can barely retaliate against the latter unlike the Wehr PIV), you can constantly see it underperform. RRs laugh at the sideskirts, and zooks will laugh just a little bit quieter, as Ashfallīs calculations showed in an older thread. Also, it has shorter range than the Wehr PIV, so it is likelier to take damage.

And yet again, its special skill is "letīs take away our mobility so we can fire a little faster".

I mean, Ok, I have been using this thing pretty heavily lately and at least it can DO stuff, unlike most PE units (though the lack of Axis Expert Engineers means it cannot reach the kill counts I have been seeing Staghounds get), but it is still not worth 10pop.



Speaking of anti-infantry vehicles that are way over-popped: the Nashorn costs 13pop.

I like the Nashorn because while it is fragile, big and slow, at least it can kill infantry from a distance. And does that pretty damn well. Except this thing needs even more support than the PIV IST when it comes to Allied tards just doing suicide charges against PE vehicles. Wait, excuse me, I shouldnīt call Allies tards for doing that because if it is works, it isnīt stupid, after all. And if you combine that with even a single light vehicle, the Nashorn is toast since it is yet another goddamn assault gun in a faction that already has FOUR (LATHT, Marder, Hetzer and Stupa... so itīs five assault guns with this thing).

Oh, by the way, it is another one of those units that becomes more powerful by locking down.



Generally speaking, PE are a faction too easy to overwhelm, so I do not understand why their units have such high pop costs, particularly when most combinations cannot properly support each other the way other factions can. Why is the PE Panther 15pop when PE donīt get pop-less repairs, MG42s to stop counter-attacking Allied elite infantry and other stuff? Hummel 10 but costs more fuel than Howitzers and fires less shells? Stupa 11 (why the hell would this thing cost 11pop when its main fighting power works on cooldowns and its Allied counterpart, the Churchill AVRE with Petard, costs 10pop? ) ?

And on top of this, you see that PE are paying a premium for their mobility not only in pop, but in fuel. What? Why? Why the hell are you making PE pay more pop when they already have to pay extra fuel for mobility? Is the Hummel more versatile for being mobile artillery? Is the mortar halftrack a good AT weapon for being mobile?

And all of this leads us to a very interesting little problem when you compare PE specialist vehicles to Allied specialist infantry: whereas some Allied units lose pop but not effectiveness, PE only lose pop when the unit dies completely. A six-man Ranger unit is just as good as a two-man Ranger unit if the PE player is somehow unable to concentrate enough firepower to nullify those Rangers, same deal with Airborne. And given these guysī toughness, you know as well as I do what the chances of that are. But do they pay extra pop for this? Six Rangers = 6pop. Six RRs = 6pop. Very few Allied elite infantry units pay more pop for less people (assault Airborne and mechanized infantry).

PE gets discriminated against by making its players pay premiums for mobility, even though a) that mobility does not come associated with the toughness other factionsī mobile vehicles get, b) a number of its vehicles have to lock down to squeeze their greatest potential out of them and c) they are not noticeably versatile so as to justify their cost.

The hetzer is 10 pop because its PE's MBT, ala sherman/p4 it doesnt have a turret but makes up for it by being more pop efficient.

We dont need 8 pop IST's that would just make them way too pop efficient, 2 of them together are already a nightmare do we need to make that the staple start of PE?

The nashorn is a bit trash, i dont think pop reduction is the right way to go it should simply recieve a bit of a range buff.
Logged

I convinced Snarks i was a moderator once, Managed to ban robieman for five minutes.
Join the AFA initiative (Ashfall for allies) Today!
Good goy trapmaker.
Resident alt right representative.
Member of the triple K mafia
Saavedra
epic lolcat
*****

Reputation: 4455
Offline Offline

Posts: 4028


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: January 23, 2017, 11:19:27 am »

Currently, the only way an IST is useful is having stun on it and to make it basically a shield while other units do damage.

That is a bit of an exaggeration. The PIV IST can do some damage on its own. The problem is thatīs an oddity in PE. There are hardly any other units that combine the ISTīs agility, turret, toughness and damage output, even if it is only against infantry.

It doesnīt help that Rangers will do a number on it, and that the cheeky bastards playing Infantry know they can get away with tanking Pgren damage and gibbing them right back with zooks.



The hetzer is 10 pop because its PE's MBT, ala sherman/p4 it doesnt have a turret but makes up for it by being more pop efficient.

We dont need 8 pop IST's that would just make them way too pop efficient, 2 of them together are already a nightmare do we need to make that the staple start of PE?

The nashorn is a bit trash, i dont think pop reduction is the right way to go it should simply recieve a bit of a range buff.

1- The Hetzerīs lack of a turret, lack of AOE damage, lower health and APCR round availability, as well as the cloak (that nobody uses) donīt seem to describe a MBT.

2- Two PIV ISTs are a nightmare? As compared to what? Any other vehicle-based start that usually can wipe out a standard start?

3- It wouldnīt hurt to make the spotting scope actually work as it is supposed to.
Logged

UnLimiTeD
Rules & Regulations
Global Moderator
*****

Reputation: 10059
Offline Offline

Posts: 9191

Last of his kind

View Profile
« Reply #50 on: January 23, 2017, 12:38:27 pm »

Please enlighten me as to the purpose of the spotting scope. What isn't working?
Logged

I hereby officially state I have absolutely no beef with Dr.Nick!
Quote from: userstupidname
I have never done any retarded quotes?
Quote from: Saavedra
 101 did not answer just with opinions. He answered with facts and math, [...] I donīt know what else you expect him to do. 
Saavedra
epic lolcat
*****

Reputation: 4455
Offline Offline

Posts: 4028


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: January 23, 2017, 06:05:51 pm »

Please enlighten me as to the purpose of the spotting scope. What isn't working?

Excuse me, mistake on my part. I misremembered a thread where I pointed out that the Nashorn and the Hetzer got different LOS ranges with the scopes, except the Nashorn has 5 less basic LOS than the Hetzer, for some reason. So it is not a problem with the scopes, it is a problem with substracting 5 LOS range from the Nashorn for no reason.
Logged

SilentAlfa
Jr. Member
**

Reputation: 214
Offline Offline

Posts: 97
XBox Live Account: SmallArtifact
Steam Name: OctaMurk

View Profile
« Reply #52 on: January 23, 2017, 07:34:19 pm »


The hetzer is 10 pop because its PE's MBT, ala sherman/p4 it doesnt have a turret but makes up for it by being more pop efficient.

We dont need 8 pop IST's that would just make them way too pop efficient, 2 of them together are already a nightmare do we need to make that the staple start of PE?

The nashorn is a bit trash, i dont think pop reduction is the right way to go it should simply recieve a bit of a range buff.

I wouldn't call the Hetzer an MBT ala Sherman/P4, it's not very good against infantry. More like a StuG IV equivalent.
Logged
Saavedra
epic lolcat
*****

Reputation: 4455
Offline Offline

Posts: 4028


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: January 23, 2017, 10:51:21 pm »

So I thought about adding a pak 40 to my Tank Hunters company.

The Tank Hunters pak40 is 450mp, 160mu. It costs 50mp less than a Wehr pak, 20mu more than the 57mm, and as much as a 17lber. It seems to do more damage than the 17lber within its AOE, but it has a smaller one. Also, on average, it is better (particularly, more accurate) against German tanks.

So what is this f***ing thing supposed to be good at? It will get decrewed easier than literally any other crew-served weapon in the game thanks to grenades, mortars, and the very tanks it is supposed to counter, and when it inevitably gets stolen by the larger-manned Allied squads, it will actually work better against German vehicles than it did against Allied vehicles.

WTF?
Logged

Tommy952
Rules & Regulations Member
Development
*****

Reputation: 2717
Offline Offline

Posts: 2194
Steam Name: w952

View Profile
« Reply #54 on: January 24, 2017, 01:09:57 am »

I'm not sure it's true to say it works better against Axis vehicles than Allied vehicles. Let's look at the stats.

Discounting the tanks that they both penetrate with 100% reliability, and bearing in mind neither have damage modifiers against armour (just 1 against all):

Panther
17P: Pen (1.11) Accuracy: 
P40: Pen (0.681)

Tiger
17P: Pen (1.38)
P40: Pen (0.842)

Hetzer
17P: Pen (0.918)
P40: Pen (1.12)

Jagd
17P: Pen (0.883)
P40: Pen (0.54)

And the Pershing, the only allied tank that the guns can't penetrate

Pershing
17P: Pen (0.965)
P40: Pen (0.6)

So as far as target tables are concerned, the only anomaly I see here is with the Hetzer, and that's a very minor chance to bounce from the 17P compared to guaranteed penetration with a (stolen) Pak 40. I'm not sure if the target tables were custom made for the Pak 40 or edited from another weapon, but I imagine the Pershing penetration was probably a manual change for balancing purposes (by comparison, 0.6 is still much better than 0.45 of the Pak38).

It's true that it has better accuracy against skirted P4s, Stugs and Axis light armour, most notably in the latter case, 0.5 vs 1. However, both weapons have low scatter angles (7.5 for the Pak40, 5 for the 17P). The Recoilless Rifle, everyone's favourite scatter weapon, also has a scatter angle of 5. Against large units like Stugs and P4s, this makes the accuracy difference fairly inconsequential. The accuracy difference against light vehicles is more significant, but is on par with the Pak38.

It has the same base damage as the 17 (150, compared to 115 with the Pak38 - a Pak out of cloak does 144), although a worse deflection multiplier (0.15 vs 0.35). However, given that the Pak40 only bounces on Pershings and Axis tanks, this is not much cause for concern. Base penetration is for all intents and purposes the same.

Wind up and wind down is higher in the 17 - a total of 1.8 effectively added to the reload, vs 1.3 in the Pak 40.

The Pak 40 is marginally more effective against infantry with slightly better accuracy and AoE, although this is not a significant factor.

It does however have low crew survivability - just 55hp (soldier armour) per man, vs 70hp (infantry armour) on the Pak38 and 65hp (soldier armour) on the 17.

Punching the weapons into the OMG stats website DPS calculator, we get the following results;

17P
Long: 51
Medium: 54
Short: 60

Pak40
Long: 56.67 (+11%)
Medium: 66.67 (+23%)
Short: 66.67 (+11%)

I would say that on the whole, the Pak 40 is an effective weapon at the current price. It has high damage and penetrates tough Allied armour (Churchills, Jumbos) with ease, something the Pak 38 often struggles with. Having better accuracy against Axis light armour, and slightly better accuracy against Stugs and P4s is not significant enough to warrant a price drop on its own. The low crew survivability and lack of effective recrew units in the PE arsenal are not insignificant factors however; on that basis, there may be justification for a small manpower decrease by 20-30mp.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2017, 01:43:09 am by Tommy952 » Logged

Saavedra
epic lolcat
*****

Reputation: 4455
Offline Offline

Posts: 4028


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: January 24, 2017, 10:21:28 am »

The low crew survivability and lack of effective recrew units in the PE arsenal are not insignificant factors however; on that basis, there may be justification for a small manpower decrease by 20-30mp.

Thank you for the proper interpretation of stats, but I still donīsee a reason to take it even with the manpower decrease you suggest. If the Allies capture this thing (and they will), the cost of a single PE light vehicle, Kettenkrad aside, lost to pak40 fire is between five and ten times higher than that manpower decrease you suggest.

If you want to keep the pak40 in PE, it needs something extra to justify its very existence, nevermind its cost. The 57mm has AP rounds and extreme ease of recrewing, the 17lb has AP rounds and can be put in emplacements, and the Wehr pak has camo. The pak40 has nothing except being the one PE AT "vehicle" that cannot be countered with extreme prejudice by Allied AT guns, and if I already hate that my Wehr teammates allow their paks to fall into the hands of the Allies, I am not going to emulate them with a gun that is at an even higher risk of being taken.
Logged

Tommy952
Rules & Regulations Member
Development
*****

Reputation: 2717
Offline Offline

Posts: 2194
Steam Name: w952

View Profile
« Reply #56 on: January 24, 2017, 12:06:40 pm »

We can't price based on the effect of something might happen - it's just impossible to accurately quantify.

However, it's a fair point that it lacks a USP. If it were to get some kind of unique ability (and I'm not promising anything, just interested), what would you like to see?
Logged

Saavedra
epic lolcat
*****

Reputation: 4455
Offline Offline

Posts: 4028


View Profile
« Reply #57 on: January 24, 2017, 01:08:17 pm »

We can't price based on the effect of something might happen - it's just impossible to accurately quantify.

PE support units (mortar, Marder, scout car) were priced higher than any of their counterparts in total resources and pop because of what the devs at the time thought might happen (muh mobility). That sounds very much like pricing according to expectations, though to be fair, I understand why you would want to discontinue that practice, given the end result.



Quote
However, it's a fair point that it lacks a USP. If it were to get some kind of unique ability (and I'm not promising anything, just interested), what would you like to see?

The way I see it, there are three things you can improve: the gunīs performance, the crew, and/or the units around it.

The gun has less "long range" than the 17lber (not sure how that reads), with the 17lber having 65 and the pak 47.5. You could give it APCR rounds to make it even better at its job. But in my opinion, upgrading the gun itself is kind of useless since it will not make up for its survivability weaknesses and also will help the Allies once stolen. HE rounds have been suggested over a million times but never implemented, so whatever.

The crew definitely could use with an upgrade in health. Make it a hero-like unit by letting it keep its soldier armour but giving it the same health as other crews. That will make it more survivable and worth taking. It can be a three-men unit, or you could make it a four-men unit to reflect a special status (something like "AT gun aces" the way Wehr has tank aces). You could also give the crew (not the gun) medkits, or special health regeneration, or whatever you can think of to make them more survivable. Another possibility would be giving the crew MP40s so Allied infantry will think twice before charging it. A final idea would be making it so the crew can "spike" the gun and run away. Booby-trap the gun so either it explodes on its own, or does so after it has been recrewed. Or instead of exploding, an incendiary grenade could go off, not killing the gun but damaging the recrewers.

Now, as for upgrading the units around it, what I mean is giving the pak 40 an area buff so that the units defending the pak will fight harder to keep it from falling to the enemy. You can buff accuracy, accuracy received, whatever you can think of.


Out of all these options, I definitely prefer making the crew special in comparison to that of other AT guns. Improving the gun itself will not really make it more survivable, and buffing the units around would probably make the thing an artillery magnet even more than it already is since people would suspect they can bag extra enemy units by hitting anyone trying to use its area buffs.
Logged

Tommy952
Rules & Regulations Member
Development
*****

Reputation: 2717
Offline Offline

Posts: 2194
Steam Name: w952

View Profile
« Reply #58 on: January 24, 2017, 02:12:58 pm »

Pretty sure that 47.5 is a mistake on the wiki, it should be 60 range, same as the Pak and 57mm.

An extra crew member is a fairly harmless upgrade that should be easily doable, and it'd fit with PE's existing ability to boost squad sizes.
Logged

Saavedra
epic lolcat
*****

Reputation: 4455
Offline Offline

Posts: 4028


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: February 03, 2017, 11:45:54 am »

Dat feel when I get kicked out of vCoH games because of my 52/75 win rate as PE, which is mostly owed to OMG, but I actually handle myself just fine in vCoH and have won the first two games I have tried (the first one quite handily).



Anyway, I wanted to inquire about something specific: could I get numbers on cooldowns for G43 Slow, Sprint, Fire Up and Commando Smoke?
Logged

Pages: 1 ... 3 [4] Print 
 

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 2.0 Beta 4 | SMF © 2006–2008, Simple Machines LLC Developed By Lee Sherwood Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!