Remove t17?

[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

[nugnugx]

T17 imo is not needed and brakes balance in gameplay, allies got plenty of other AI weapons. It's one of those weird ToV wtf units.
As an american player i can effectively spam them and practicaly lock down axis inf/paks/hts.

[TheIcelandicManiac]

i would agree if they would remove the p4 Inf-support lockdown or just less powerfull.

[nugnugx]

ist is fine because with lockdown you cannot move

[Unkn0wn]

We've already nerfed the T17 quite significantly, care to elaborate on why you feel this unit is broken?
(Is it it's health? dodging? damage? etc etc)

i would agree if they would remove the p4 Inf-support lockdown or just less powerfull.

Feel free to create a new thread if you have any concerns about this.

[TheIcelandicManiac]

ist is fine because with lockdown you cannot move

you cant?

i swear that i have seen p4´s driving towards my atguns and the the Ist is activeded and it still moves.

too be fair i have not played for half a month now so things may have changed.

[TheIcelandicManiac]

We've already nerfed the T17 quite significantly, care to elaborate on why you feel this unit is broken?
(Is it it's health? dodging? damage? etc etc)
Feel free to create a new thread if you have any concerns about this.

well just gonna point out this aint nothing major sense the m10´s can take them out quite easeley but its still annoying when they slaughter my rangers but i am not gonna whine.

[nugnugx]

We've already nerfed the T17 quite significantly, care to elaborate on why you feel this unit is broken?
(Is it it's health? dodging? damage? etc etc)

Yes i know it has been nerfed but it still brakes the balance.

Its ability to snipe infantry is OP.
Since day 1 of CoH axis only had AI firing tank (ostwind) while allies had the croc. In opposing fronts axis got expanded with the IST which continued the tradition of axis AI tanks.

t17 was just meant to be an OP weapon for allies that bought ToV and played vanilla CoH.

That is why t17 is not meant for EiR.

you cant?

i swear that i have seen p4´s driving towards my atguns and the the Ist is activeded and it still moves.

THat's scorched earth T3 ability , other than that , it cannot move.

[puddin]

Its 9 pop cap, cost 125 FU... Thats 5 more than 2 Pumas, On top of which it can not penetrate armor, even pumas it bounces.  Its solely an anti infantry weapon, At 9 pop cap its the most expensive light vehicle in the game.  


Honest;y i find M-8s to be more cost effective and at 8 pop cap make more sense, If you feild 2-3 M8s your saving that 2-3 popcap which is what you need to stay alive.  

I ran armor on board mechanics and didn;t even use any, To costly, and your unable to combat even the most basic of armor with the T-17, it can not even penetrate an INf ht effectively against PE and you see tons of those so theres not much point to have them.  

[nugnugx]

Its 9 pop cap, cost 125 FU... Thats 5 more than 2 Pumas, On top of which it can not penetrate armor, even pumas it bounces.  Its solely an anti infantry weapon, At 9 pop cap its the most expensive light vehicle in the game.    

Even more sense to remove it. 

To low pop and FU and it's op. To high and no one will be using it.  Why have such a unit?

It's giving problems for everyone since day 1 of when it was implemented.

[Unkn0wn]

We can do more than just change its price and pop you know.

[puddin]

OK, So remove snipers Too for that logic.  

[nugnugx]

OK, So remove snipers Too for that logic.  

eh no. sniper is a different thing.

[NightRain]

Why not remove kangoroos as well...? Remove units that actually have no real deal? Like nug said, if T17 is too cheap its utterly overpowered, even in its current cost it performs awfully well, too well in fact (Mobile repairing to escape tricky spots) add in rapid firing miniostwind gun and nice dodge armor and you'll get a piece that makes everyone want to cry. Replace it with a British Staghound instead, that bugger is more balanced than T17

[Spartan_Marine88]

T-17 is not OP, if anything M8 is OP.

I refuse to run T-17's as everything it can do an m-8 can do better, cheaper, faster and it 2 of them can suppress and pin inf blobs.

Don't forget, when the Puma does its 20 mm burst it shreds rifles, atg's, hmg's and mortars probably better then a t-17

[nugnugx]

T-17 is not OP, if anything M8 is OP.

I refuse to run T-17's as everything it can do an m-8 can do better, cheaper, faster and it 2 of them can suppress and pin inf blobs.

rofl

Don't forget, when the Puma does its 20 mm burst it shreds rifles, atg's, hmg's and mortars probably better then a t-17

jesus

[Groundfire]

Nug, ive seen you use PE armored cars in the exact same role that T17s are used by armored players.

Sniping infantry and decrewing AT guns.

The only difference is that PE ACs are more fragile and by association, more spammable, allowing you to put more firepower out for cost.

Why dont we remove the PE AC as well? It follows the exact same role, preforms the exact same funciton, an AI light vehicle. Just because the T17 is a tad beefier is no reason to remove it since it's been constantly nerfed, it's fine.

Bring more AT or a P4 for christ sakes.

Increase in T17 + M8 usage is only a direct result of so much fucking Assault grenade spammage that has been permeating the metagame lately.

[Mysthalin]

Useless thread, fueled by emotion. Please come back with a properly backed up statement (use facts and figures) before expecting proper discussion.

Just to put your own post into perspective : kettenkrad. A unit built in OF to be OP because OF was all about PE and brits being OP so OF would sell well.
Remove kettenkrad from the game because Relic is retarded.

[nugnugx]

Nug, ive seen you use PE armored cars in the exact same role that T17s are used by armored players.

T17 dies to 2 pak shots ? no
AC to 2 atg shots ? yes

Sniping infantry and decrewing AT guns.

2 t17 snipe inf faster than 5 AC

The only difference is that PE ACs are more fragile and by association, more spammable, allowing you to put more firepower out for cost.

2 t17 provide more firepower than 6 AC

Increase in T17 + M8 usage is only a direct result of so much fucking Assault grenade spammage that has been permeating the metagame lately

There is no increase in t17 , i'm pointing out the obvious

[shockcoil]

Useless thread, fueled by emotion. Please come back with a properly backed up statement (use facts and figures) before expecting proper discussion.

Just to put your own post into perspective : kettenkrad. A unit built in OF to be OP because OF was all about PE and brits being OP so OF would sell well.
Remove kettenkrad from the game because Relic is retarded.

To be fair brits and PE were pretty OP when they first came out but they got balanced out. The only difference now is no one really cares enough about vcoh anymore to complain about ToV units.

[nugnugx]

Just to put your own post into perspective : kettenkrad. A unit built in OF to be OP because OF was all about PE and brits being OP so OF would sell well.
Remove kettenkrad from the game because Relic is retarded.

You cannot see the role that  t17 provide and kettenkrad , really ?


If anything at all , ToV provided OP units to allies and shitty to axis.

Pre ToV there was no t17 and no one complained about a lack of AI vehicle because people used croc , now you don't see crocs because who would take a croc if you can use t17