New Super Heavy Tank Request

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[RikiRude]

KT and jagd should be at 1, but i think pershing and tiger could stay at 2.

[AmPM]

KT and Tiger are both really easy to kill. The KT is a little harder, Jadg is just harder to catch.

[spinn72]

KT and Tiger are both really easy to kill. The KT is a little harder, Jadg is just harder to catch.

if the KT and Tiger are 'really easy', can you tell me 1 unit thats therefore hard to kill???

KT can be limited to 1.  With repairs, its enough of a misery for the Allies.  Let's say if the allies thrive to go to your spawn and kill your vehicle its annoying to say the least.  Jagd again can really, really annoy the crap out of allies too, with 2 of them that's 3200 health excluding repairs.

Pershings, Crocs and Tigers are much less survivable, in that Handheld AT and AT guns will penetrate them more often than not.

[Pak88mm]

i say wait until docs are fully implemented. remember we still are flowing in beta stream. Last i remember old EiR reapers made super heavy tanks cry more. Patience they arent all bad and only are good in the hands of a few good players.

[Malevolence]

KT and Tiger are both really easy to kill. The KT is a little harder, Jadg is just harder to catch.

Jagd being easier to catch than any of those is illogical, captain.

[Killer344]

what kind of crack are you on lol?

[Tymathee]

Jagd = 1600 health, KT = 2000 health.

KT's and Jagd's have pretty much same frontal armor but the jagd is faster with no turret and the kt is way slower with a turret and can attack infantry. I'd hate to play against a KT, TH and Blitz with HEAT player :shivers:

[acker]

Jagd = 1600 health, KT = 2000 health.

KT's and Jagd's have pretty much same frontal armor but the jagd is faster with no turret and the kt is way slower with a turret and can attack infantry. I'd hate to play against a KT, TH and Blitz with HEAT player :shivers:

At least one thing is wrong here. Judging from the target tables for the 17pdr (Firefly), 57mm, 3 inch gun (M10), 75mm Sherman, 6pdr (Cromwell) and the 76mm Sherman, the Jagdpanther is anywhere from 200% to 20% more penetration-resistant than the KT. Same trend for everything except the PIAT and the M18 gun, I think.

"Pretty much the same frontal armor" isn't exactly accurate.

[EIRRMod]

Not a particularly good idea, IMO.
It won't help to limit the super heavies at all, just give a short period of 'no heavy tank from player x' and a load of pain trying to restructure your company for said player.

Im with Mysthalin on this one.

People like to make their build, and have the capacity to rebuild that build each game.  (Not always the case, but still)

I think the issue atm with this, is that everyone is rank 8, and full doctrines - so there is literally nothing to spend PP on other than Heavies and Offmaps.
While this will still be possible to pull off, you wont (probably) see multiple people doing it constantly.

Still on the fence about limiting a total number of heavies in a company, but its probably a way to go.

[Tymathee]

Jagd = 1600 health, KT = 2000 health.

KT's and Jagd's have pretty much same frontal armor but the jagd is faster with no turret and the kt is way slower with a turret and can attack infantry. I'd hate to play against a KT, TH and Blitz with HEAT player :shivers:

At least one thing is wrong here. Judging from the target tables for the 17pdr (Firefly), 57mm, 3 inch gun (M10), 75mm Sherman, 6pdr (Cromwell) and the 76mm Sherman, the Jagdpanther is anywhere from 200% to 20% more penetration-resistant than the KT. Same trend for everything except the PIAT and the M18 gun, I think.

"Pretty much the same frontal armor" isn't exactly accurate.

You forgot to check out the rear shots, which tigers and kt's both tend to bounce but forget it on the jagd, you hit it in the rear armor, it wont bounce.

KT's are just big tigers, so they have the same armor and more health.

[LeoPhone]

Not a particularly good idea, IMO.
It won't help to limit the super heavies at all, just give a short period of 'no heavy tank from player x' and a load of pain trying to restructure your company for said player.

and how about the allies that have to make new companys all the time being desperate finding something that kills these things? 

[AmPM]

I kill these things on a pretty routine basis.

Its not all that tough. The support around them is the hard part to get through.

[Baine]

I kill these things on a pretty routine basis.

Its not all that tough. The support around them is the hard part to get through.

You mean every heavy tank except for the Jagd.

[Draken]

And here we go again, now you want over do it with limiting heavies to 1. I'm almost sure then after 2 months you will resign from this idea, people will whine that they can't build their companies around heavy tanks, and you are limiting their freedom (which already is by paying pps for oversuplying).

Allow people for this, but give it big downsides. Increase heavy tanks manpower cost, so if someone wants 2 jags he won't have to much infantry to support it.

Make Jagd 950 manpower for example.

[LittleHillBilly]

I agree with Draken on this. The only feasible way to make a player second think buying two of the Supertanks is to make them cost more. Currently the cost of both the KT and Jadg are way too low looking at the hp's that they posess. They both need to be raised in accordance with the hp's that you have on the other tanks in the game. To put it simple the more health a tank has the more it should cost. Currently the Jadg  and KT have almost twice the health of any other tank so their cost should reflect closer to this.

By raising the cost then it would limit other units that the players are able to get. therefore if they want two of these beasts then they would not be able to have alot of supporting units for them and it would hurt them. At the current cost they can have one of the superheavies and still have almost the same ammount of supporting units as the players that dont have one. (inf, crew weapons ect) It is simple math based on the health of your units and forces you to judge if you want more units or less units but stronger. If you look at inf it is based almost the same way already. The inf with the greater health and strength usually costs more.

I may be wrong but i dont think any player can argue. To put it simple if you could get stormies for the same cost or just a small amount more than volks you would get the stormies. The same is true for allies if airborne was the same as rifles or just slightly more then you would get more airborne.

Feel free to tell me if i am just off my rocker.

[Lutefisk44]

I am just wondering since everyone is saying that you should limit the axis heavy's to 1 per game and really hard to get, i must say WTF ABOUT THE ALLIES...

[CafeMilani]

And here we go again, now you want over do it with limiting heavies to 1. I'm almost sure then after 2 months you will resign from this idea, people will whine that they can't build their companies around heavy tanks, and you are limiting their freedom (which already is by paying pps for oversuplying).

Allow people for this, but give it big downsides. Increase heavy tanks manpower cost, so if someone wants 2 jags he won't have to much infantry to support it.

Make Jagd 950 manpower for example.

ppl shouldnt build companies around heavy tanks because they are strong. simple.

i say limit all of them to 1 per company. in right hands, all of them are powerful weapons.

[Killer344]

Jagd = 1600 health, KT = 2000 health.

KT's and Jagd's have pretty much same frontal armor but the jagd is faster with no turret and the kt is way slower with a turret and can attack infantry. I'd hate to play against a KT, TH and Blitz with HEAT player :shivers:

At least one thing is wrong here. Judging from the target tables for the 17pdr (Firefly), 57mm, 3 inch gun (M10), 75mm Sherman, 6pdr (Cromwell) and the 76mm Sherman, the Jagdpanther is anywhere from 200% to 20% more penetration-resistant than the KT. Same trend for everything except the PIAT and the M18 gun, I think.

"Pretty much the same frontal armor" isn't exactly accurate.

You forgot to check out the rear shots, which tigers and kt's both tend to bounce but forget it on the jagd, you hit it in the rear armor, it wont bounce.

And how do you do to shot a jagd in the ass?, explain please, I'm so eager to hear your awesome strat to catch up one of the fastest tanks in the game.

[sgMisten]

Just wondering, is a time-dependent dynamic PP scaling system possible?

E.g.
Your first heavy tank costs 5 PP to buy.

You lose it next game.

PP costs jumps up to 30 PP. If you're crazy or too rich (end game) you have to pay 30 PP to get it.

Every hour the PP costs drops by 1. Hence it takes 25 hours or about a day to get a new tank at the old PP cost, which is the minimum.

---

+ New / still growing companies get a chance to play with their shiny new toys without stunting their growth too much if they lose it.

+ Players with a lot of time to play and accumulate PPs now have a huge PP sink if they insist on using the heavy tank often.

+ Reduces the occurrence of heavy tank spam by 1 player to at most once a day once the heavy tank is killed.

[Selmis]

if u increase the cost of kt, tigers,jaghs,persh and so on u will see more combo of kt + 2 p4 which are better than 2 slow kt, jaghs + 2 hetzers which are better at range and sniping infatry, and so on and ppl will still whine about tank blobs as they always do.and comparing tiger which repairs 1 time and pershing which can repair 2 times shooting and moving and 2 times moving and saying they are not same as kt and jagh is silly.