[1.72]SU vs PE

[neox88]

The USA has no tank hunter too
And it works with the USA.
Think no one will tell me that USA cant counter enemy's armour.

yeah, and USA cant produce heavy tanks, so let us remove IS 2 , it s just not needed since USA doesnt need it...wait, why dont we make soviets like USA, that will be the best!

[neosdark]

I am, too, starting to question many of these decisions. I get the feeling that Lord Rommel is getting a large hand in balancing, considering how often he is posting to back up these decisions made by the new balance team, something never down when the previous one was in seat.

I normally have nothing against Devs who want to be balancers, you are more than welcome, but I have never ever seen you play Rommel, nor heard anyone discuss your playing style, etc. As such I don't believe you have the right to decide/defend/attack the actions of any balancer. Let the balancers speak for themselves, in full light.

What I've heard so far from Dreamerbg and Bandaro (who I assume are balancers) is the elimination of Tank Hunters, and addition of some new unit.

Dreamer also mentioned about being able to use SSC (Tier 2) of the bat and as such access the AT Gun, but if memory that has been the case since ~1.4 or so.

There is a mention of a test game, but the general public hasn't seen it, thus no one may agree or disagree to the balancers' decisions.

I will wait and watch, but to me this change of events seems quite a bit like a travesty.

[Pac-Fish]

I must profess, despite the fact I normally get into balance arguments with many of these ppl, they raise valid points.

[krupp steel]

wait, why dont we make soviets like USA, that will be the best!

I think since they are so similar factions that, Soviets would have made the best skinpack for USA in vCoH

Anyways lets get back on topic.  So the point was Soviets had an upper hand against PE in infantry battles most of the time.  Going back to this earlier statement that has affected this thread in a very topic changing way:

In next version tank hunters will be delate. Alone ATG can't fight with AC's.

[Dreamerbg]

The problem is that someone said only that the TH are removed... and this is maybe the worst way to introduce something... just wait a bit more and you will see all of the changes , then you wont be so dissapointed 

[Wekwekboris]

Meh. I dont use THs anyway that is because I always go propaganda and Naval Infantry look much cooler and they are tougher 

[Dann88]

The only real reason to use TH is their powerful AT mine. And yeah that's all, in old patch, 2 AT nades of them can kill a HMG team instantly but they're quickly patched that

[Gerrit 'Lord Rommel' G.]

I am, too, starting to question many of these decisions. I get the feeling that Lord Rommel is getting a large hand in balancing, considering how often he is posting to back up these decisions made by the new balance team, something never down when the previous one was in seat.

Well. The point is; I'm not balance dev  I'm too noob-like to be a balancer 
I just talk quiet often with our balance devs (welcome to mumble ^^).
I see the "effectiveness" of the tank hunters ingame. I see a number of replays with the tank hunters.

But the good news is; we will test a lot of new stuff in the beta. This feedback will influence the final decisions
for balance and units. Till this point the dev balancers try to find the best configuration.

[krupp steel]

I'm confused, so there are Devs that are also balancers, and there are just regular Balancers that aren't devs?

Also I like TH.  they aren't a must have unit, but they aren't completely useless.

[neox88]

I'm confused, so there are Devs that are also balancers, and there are just regular Balancers that aren't devs?

Also I like TH.  they aren't a must have unit, but they aren't completely useless.

hej, 132, are you also discussing on this forum maybe? :-)
http://forums.relicnews.com/showthread.php?271151-2v2-America-is-Fundamentally-Flawed&s=db38739d0cb9be6784dd26f92586a954

[BurroDiablo]

I'm confused, so there are Devs that are also balancers, and there are just regular Balancers that aren't devs?

Pretty much. Ideally we'd all regularly take part in the balance process but we all have different workloads to be taking care of, on the mod and elsewhere, which is why we need dedicated balancers. That said, I think Devs are taking a more active role in balance testing these days, when they can.

[Wekwekboris]

Will the KV-85 be added again? 

[Blackbishop]

Let's wrap some things for now:

1) Tank Hunters removed: They were never really balanced, either OP or UP, and most of the time they replaced Strelky role because were easier to get and provided AT measures. The addition of the "stun grenade" was because of this inbalance, which added even more AT stuff to the already big Soviet AT stuff (AT nades, Stun AT nades, AT mines, THs, ZiS2s), too much IMO; it wasn't possible to balance THs and we also tried merging them with Strelky, which didn't work very good and needed a lot of tweaks. We removed them for testing and they play fine without it.

2)

The USA has no tank hunter too
And it works with the USA.
Think no one will tell me that USA cant counter enemy's armour.

yeah, and USA cant produce heavy tanks, so let us remove IS 2 , it s just not needed since USA doesnt need it...wait, why dont we make soviets like USA, that will be the best!

Yeah, and because it only has the ZiS2 for AT duties it becomes automatically the new US faction. Because everyone knows US has sturmovie ingenery squads, commissars and Guards as additional infantry, ZiS2 in T2 and no HMGs. Do not confuse an offensive faction with an US cloned faction.

You are entitled to have your opinions but some times I can read a lot of sarcasm being written, and most of the time it doesn't help a topic move forward. The idea of letting everyone know that THs were removed was not a good one, nor something it should have been spoiled right now. Because we still have some time left until the Beta goes live, and players will only speculate unnecessary thoughts/will be concerned due to this. It could have been chosen a more close date to the Beta to say this so they could judge by themselves soon-ish after hearing the news .

I liked THs as well, but I always thought they weren't really needed. The truth is than they have been a problem since 1.0, regardless the changes they got.

Will the KV-85 be added again? 

I'd hope to, depends of many factors.

[Bandaro]

No tank hunters mean no non-doctrinal infantry AT.  I don't like being forced to go Propaganda just for their infantry AT. It's just like removing the Panzerschreck upgrade for Wehrmacht Grenadiers.

Light tanks cost was decreased. Now it is 45 fuel as i remember, not 55. I usually play armor and i don't need propaganda for infantry AT. More, i don't need infantry AT because firstly i have light tanks, then medium tanks/at guns. Also sometimes i go to KW.

Yeah, and because it only has the ZiS2 for AT duties it becomes automatically the new US faction.

You've got light tanks, su-76, doctrinal kw/su-85, doctrinal navals, with russian op on fuel you can have early t-34... (and camping on op and then tanks is really good tactic)

I am, too, starting to question many of these decisions. I get the feeling that Lord Rommel is getting a large hand in balancing, considering how often he is posting to back up these decisions made by the new balance team, something never down when the previous one was in seat.

We're balancers. So we balancing and talking in close-team. Not in forum. I sometimes put post, but i won't always reply about users questions. As i see devs usually do it. Anyway don't worry, the biggest part in balance have people which can play good in CoH.

[Wekwekboris]

Russians have a big range of AT.
I do sometimes use the TH when AI spams them armoured cars but thats it.
T-34/85 can destroy most tanks with ease while having a decent amount of health and armour to survive encounters long enough with Panthers and Tigers to get away.

Naval Infantry. Much tougher than TH but you dont get the mines and AT grenade (which is okay IMO but I do like the stun AT nade)

IS-2 can destroy any German tank/Vehicle with enough micro. Just close the distance and have slugfests with Tigers/Panthers. Also eats Marders and G-Wagons along with Stugs and Armored Cars for breakfast.

SU-76. Great early AT tank. I support my T-34/85s with these if I didn't go breakthrough, speaking of which....

SU-85. Much better gun than the Hetzer's and has quite good health. Only problem are going to be paks and shrecks (unless you have cage armour) but you don't use TDs for tank destroyers right???

ISU-152. They don't call it beast killer for a reason. (Though the barrage shot right now is utterly useless unless the enemy is on full stop)

Strelki. They have AT nades that are just as effective or better than the PE ones. (IF you went urban)

ZiS-2 AT Gun. Better than all the AT guns. (Except 17 Pdr but that is immobile)

ZiS-3 AT Gun. Good starting AT gun that has same punch with most AT guns (And you could upgrade to the ZiS-2....)

Guards. AT NADES.

Tank Hunters. They do much more damage to tanks than regular inf and I also liked them but it is not like the only change in the upcoming patch.....

*Formerly SU-100. Upgraded Version of the SU-85

*Formerly KV-85 Upgraded Version of the T-34/85

So that is 13 AT units? Technically 11 as of the patch right now and then 10 at later patches.