[1.60] What do you think of Soviet Tank Hunters?

[jojorabbit]

This reminds me of Spike TV when they show the "Deadliest Warrior' and a comp generates several battles to see whats the outcome

Idk what is Spike TV , but it goes same way generated battles and write results to file later on i can save replay if i ever need it, all numbers rounded to 2 decimal places, etc.

holy crap, you cant argue with jojo!

You can try but am not sure you can win my arguments and tools every time 

Hey jojo your battle simulator is looking pretty good.

Thanks it is ok but i know it can do more stuff .

[Yhcrana]

That would be a simulator that tests the base values of units against each other? Does it take into account how quickly those PE cars gain veterancy from killing so many men? The ranges? The accuracy against constantly moving targets?
I always have to question simulators... like how come in Deadliest Warrior the Americans always seem to win?

Anyways there were a lot of different factors in that game, I had all my men in the top middle section of Stalingrad Railroad just above the train station in the light/heavy cover.
The PE armoured cars came up from the middle of the map, kept moving and stayed out of range as best they could.
When they got damaged they retreated back south to some repair bunkers that I couldn't get to without running into a heap of MGs, none of my men had any veterancy.
As soon as the cars were repaired they'd attack again, take out another squad then repeat the same pattern.
When I got down to four squads of tank hunters, one strelky and 2/5ths of the command squad I retreated.
I had no fuel or manpower left to unlock the long range upgrade for the support barracks and buy proper AT guns.

Yes it was good playing on the PE guys part but seriously man eight sqauds of tank hunters firing 16 ptrd should be an instant kill against a light armoured car, instead they miss most of the time and the one or two shots that hit deal very little damage.
Compare that to the 5 squads of rangers you could get for the same amount of manpower, 5 ranger squads would one shot kill a PE armoured car with their bazookas.

Perhaps it was just a fluke or bad play on my part but in my own experience tank hunters have been consistently lacking in performance in every game I've played since 1.6.0.

Maybe we could just rename them to something more appropriate for a 'soft counter'/'cheap support unit'? The name 'tank hunter' suggests they're something that's actually a dedicated anti-tank unit...  Change their name to something like 'tank annoyers', 'panzer ticklers' or 'kettenkrad chasers'. Anyone who's ever attacked a kettenkrad with tank hunters will get that.

[Otto Halfhand]

@ Yhcrana:
 You are engaged in SP no? The Ai has a responce time up to 8 times faster than human response times. When you attack with your first TH the AI will start evasive action, (normally withdraw). To maintain the attack you need to move and fire , thus encruing  accuracy penalties. Since the ACs are moving as well they receive a bonus towards their received accuracy. Since the AI SAKA it can stopjust outside your line of sight. IIRC ACs have a greater LOS than THs (might be wrong), when you come into range the faster responce time allows the AC to get first shot.  All this spells defeat for the compstomper. If you want to defeat AI vehicles with THs you must immobilize or at least slow down the enemy. TH's have more than one ability. Spend some of your precious muni's and lay an AT mine or two. If you are too cheap for that build a mortar squad. They are available at the same time as THs if you also have T1. Mortar fire is particularly effective in yielding mobility critical hits. Once upon a time molotovs were good for this too, but they were nerfed because it required too much micro to evade the molotov's mobility criticals. Personally I hope they buff the Molotov back to the way it was but I expect that has as much chance of happening as does a snowball in Hell. BTW the AI will target your blob of THs with artillery.

[Yhcrana]

I had no munitions left to spend

As I've already said I was playing against human players.

So for tankhunters to be even partially effective you need to spend a huge amount of munitions on them? Great... I would rather dick about with American Infantry with Sticky Bombs.
I just find it annoying that 8 squads of Strelky would take out a PE armoured car more easily than 8 squads of Tank Busters, if you upgrade them with submachineguns or LMGs they can even take out Pumas.


The molotov was a real tragedy... it's whole purpose was to immobilize tanks by overheating the engine.
Remember the good old days when the command squad threw mollies? It was one of the best abilities in the game, I used to mess up people's panthers with molotovs so much...
Now they still do a ridiculous amount of damage to tanks and vehicles but rarely ever damage the engine.

It always pisses me off that a few molotovs will destroy the gun part of a flakvierling 38 before it kills the crew... 30 munitions = destroyed flak.

Although it's short range and conscripts tendency to die before they throw it leaves something to be desired.

I'd say either fix them properly so they're like a PE incendiary grenade or make it the way it should be so that they disable tanks and vehicles without blowing them up so rapidly.

[Killar]

we reworked the AT managment for the next patch so this wont be an issue anymore

[Cranialwizard]

Tank Hunters seem fine, but already are being changed in a new function.

That wasn't the purpose of molotovs initially, that was a mistaken value on the team's fault.

Anything you say I can not take seriously if you don't provide a replay, because your post seem pretty geared towards being a hardcore soviet fanboy. I have not observed issues with using Tank Hunters or molotovs for that matter. They (molotovs) are designed to be an early flame induced weapon because of the lack of a early flamethrower, you need the sturmovie upgrade to get a flamethrower. You need something to chase MGs out of houses and cover in lack of flamethrowers. (This is why PE has a incdy nade)

[Killar]

I just find it annoying that 8 squads of Strelky would take out a PE armoured car more easily than 8 squads of Tank Busters, if you upgrade them with submachineguns or LMGs they can even take out Pumas.

Already forgot. Pls provide replay or didnt happen!

[TheVolskinator]

Is the TH issue linked to an RR-like phase bug? The projectiles might just pass through an AC since PE vehicles and the Puma lack a target box to clip.

[Otto Halfhand]

Is the TH issue linked to an RR-like phase bug? The projectiles might just pass through an AC since PE vehicles and the Puma lack a target box to clip.

I've noticed the phase thru with acs

[Hendrik 'DarcReaver' S.]

Is the TH issue linked to an RR-like phase bug? The projectiles might just pass through an AC since PE vehicles and the Puma lack a target box to clip.

I've noticed the phase thru with acs

Sure, but that is a bug/design/balancing feature from relic to balance airborne rangers with recoiless rifles. It has been in CoH for ages, back in 1.00 Shermans had the "phasing bug" when the Schreck was super accurate at long range (60% accuracy, yay!), after that was fixed Pumas and M8 got the phasing, and with the release of OF it was removed from M8 and shifted over to Puma and ACs.

The only thing you can do to avoid this is to get close to enemy vehicles, which is quite easy to do with CS charge and skills like "inspired Speech" or "For the Motherland". Also the Tankhunter's PTRD gets a huge rate of fire bonus when you engage in short range.

[Otto Halfhand]

The only thing you can do to avoid this is to get close to enemy vehicles, which is quite easy to do with CS charge and skills like "inspired Speech" or "For the Motherland". Also the Tankhunter's PTRD gets a huge rate of fire bonus when you engage in short range.

Ah there's the rub. between the THs jumping out of cover and the stagger effect I have trouble getting off a couple of shots even when approaching fro flanks or cover. the least little disruption and it seems like ATinfantry gets thrown back and off its orders. At that point I believe the AI may take control  if only for a second. In these sitiuations the ai makes the squad pause a couple of ticks.
 I am sure there are ways to overcome this . the soviet CT abilities you mention are a good start. Sprint for PE is somewhat less than usefull because of its arrival time. I find that tank buster in a Halftrack work well. AFAIK the TBs are considered to be stationary while the HT moves. Do you have any other tactical suggestion when afoot?

[Hendrik 'DarcReaver' S.]

Yes, pgs with panzerschrecks in halftracks are considered "stationary", they're pretty effective.

And as for tactics: Well, you can just use a huge mob with Men against Tanks upgraded THs (4-5 squads) and try to kill everything that approaches your force. Quite easy to micro, however also pretty ineffective.

In this replay can watch how to use tank hunters against PE. I'd always advise to use them defensively to protect AT guns or Strelky from flanking pumas/tanks.

When we'll release the next soviet patch we'll buff tank hunters indirectly by adding a stun-riflegrenade to Strelky, which works similar to the Phosphor bomb from the T17. It will enable tank hunters to get into close range against Pumas or halftracks and fight them in optimal range. However we're still testing and it's not final yet.

[Otto Halfhand]

Yes I think the use of AT_infantry with light vehicles is a very effective combo. The brits can use sappers with piats to support Armored Ops, as can pios and PGs. I thin the PGs have the best of it with AT, Sniping or AI abilities and repair to support the Schwerpunkt. The Sas raiders are good AI and AT infantry and can make use of the Bren to conduct effective base raids. It seems a waste to put the Bren carrier with its relatively slow speed with fast moving SAS raiders or Rangers in HTs for that matter. I note that the T2 Ostheer HQ is scheduled for AT infantry AT infantry and HTs . Preumably the 251s can carry a squad of each type. SturmPios can repair correct?

Much of this irrelevant to Soviet Tank Hunters of course. the have no vehicles to ride in. I always like to use them as early infantry especially against PE. better capping speed 3 rifles and AT to boot. BTW there seems to be a conflict in the Dev_files concerning the fuel costs of THs_MAT and zis3 upgrades in the armory. I noted that two different Fuel requirements are cited for these AT upgrades.

What is the skinny on the fast firing rates for THs at short range. It seems strange that a manually loaded long range weapon should have these characteristics. I posted a picture earlier in this thread showing a PTRD41 being loaded. doesn't look to be a quick operation. but back to the game. at close range does the PTRD have a higher firing rate than the H35 without an upgrade?

[GodlikeDennis]

The PTRD behaves as an M1 Garand does and gets a large fire rate boost up close. It also has double penetration. The fire rate is more tied into representing aim time than reload for the PTRD. Since at long range you assume it takes time to line up the shot. Basically, you will only want to fire at long range if the target has paper armour or is showing the rear. If it's a decently heavy vehicle, you will need to get up close to hurt it at all, or use it defensively with AT guns so you make the enemy come to you (less risky than charging).

Lots of abilities cancel out the AI avoidance of explosions, such as CS charge. The AI avoidance is what makes tank blobs and Ostwinds very strong because the enemy is forced to jump around between cover because of all the explosions. This is avoided by garrisoning buildings or using the abilities to cancel the AI takeover.

[Joshua9]

Currently my only problem with Tank hunters is that due to the way they function, they are not so good against acs, or at least not too good...they can always use their ambush, their long range, and their mines as deterrents, but harassing them with acs is quite effective 

yet they are absolutely monstrous against PIVs,  partly because even though they do little from long range, PIV sight range is not so good and they can just continue to peck at it, keeping this high investment unit essentially unused,  partly because PIV's only get good when locked down, and against a few PTRD squads, that is a death sentence in seconds. 
This gives fast PIV's only one path to pseudo-effectiveness, relying on the enemy to build a double AT-gun anti vehicle deterrent, and then just avoiding that protected area.  (although I admit I haven't seen PIVs in action against a light vehicle Russian build...not sure how the fixed gun vehicles stand up.)

I don't like this at all, because I like my PIV's but almost never use them against my russian competitor.  That said, I'm not sure what should be done, given that the match-up feels mostly balanced at the moment.  I had some complaints about the strength of a Russian outpost + med truck, which is really effing strong, but I think that i've found a solution to dealing with that slightly more effectively lately. 

I think other tweaks are coming to balance out the early game since people seem to think that the ht rush is overpowered(I didn't know what you guys were talking about at first but now that I'm not over-investing in half-tracks(2 +mortar half used to get me torched, so now I spam infantry backed by 1 ht) I see its effectiveness.  So maybe a little decrease to at-nades damage against  skirted PIV's would be in order.