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

:) This is my first post in the Eastern front mod forum and I have a balance concern.

My concern lies with the Soviet Tank Hunter,they have been Nerfed HUGELY(every aspect was nerfed) after patch 1.6 and I am starting to wonder if they have much use at all ???.

Before I got man v tank,they have only 1 anti tank rifle,I mean seriously???1 anti tank rifle(worst than even bazooka) for a dedicated AT infantry?It may have been fine before the patch,now its dam and pen have been reduced I seriously doubt its usefulness.

My experience with them ,re just terrible they could hardly stop a puma while in green cover with man v tank upgrade.
You may argue that the first strike bonus added is a buff,nooo way,how would a weapon which rely on speed of fire ever benefit from a first strike bonus?I really don,t see why you increase the cloak time as well.

Now they seem to die incredibly FAST to anything,I could rarely get them in the range of the German vehicle just to scratch their paint job :'(.
The cost effectiveness sucks as well,you spend the almost same amount of mp as the at gun to get something with only 1/8 of its fire-power.

I really do not understand what tick off the devs soo much that they nerf the tank hunters to this state of oblivion and I don,t think doing its job well is a very good reason.

I really think tank hunters needs to be restored to a more useful state,they are a waste of manpower and there is hardly reason to get close range support. :'(

Opinion?

Last edited May 22, 2012 at 8:36 AM by Walki

Try Giga-blob TH+Rifleman+CS and you will change your opinion.

Desert_Fox wrote:
Try Giga-blob TH+Rifleman+CS and you will change your opinion.

You make it sound like amassing infantry is very easy and if you allow blobs to build up with have no proper counter then it,s not the unit,s fault.

pretty much ALL the factions could blob infantry(of course it,s going to be effective to have 5 TH grouped together against a few puma which are arriving one by one) and how was blobbing related to the cost effectiveness of the tank hunters anyway?They are hardly a deterrence to even armoured car unless in numbers and with man v tank.One of the problem is that there,s completely no reason to use Th to at gun.

Maybe a replay may prove it is effective.Plus the Mg42 and mortar with take down blobs effectively.

Last edited April 27, 2012 at 9:57 AM by BreadBox

While I personally don't like THs I don't think they are that UP that they should be given a new buff. Before they were sorta just blobbed to no end. They could take out a Panther for crying out loud even though they were front armor shots (it was my panther too  :'()!

Tank Hunters were actually substantially buffed at close range but heavily nerfed at long range. They are better for supporting your AT guns now. However, the AT nade is quite crap and doesn't do the job it's supposed to - stopping circle-strafing units. THs are still useful against light vehicles or when hitting the rear of an enemy vehicle and are especially deadly up close. They can even wear down tanks at long range from the front, it just takes a lot more time.

THs aren't a shock AT unit like say, shreks. They wear enemy vehicles down through attrition, ambush and immobilisation.

The team is very happy with the PTRD stats AFAIK but the unit itself is still being discussed.

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Tank Hunters were actually substantially buffed at close range but heavily nerfed at long range. They are better for supporting your AT guns now. However, the AT nade is quite crap and doesn't do the job it's supposed to - stopping circle-strafing units. THs are still useful against light vehicles or when hitting the rear of an enemy vehicle and are especially deadly up close. They can even wear down tanks at long range from the front, it just takes a lot more time.

THs aren't a shock AT unit like say, shreks. They wear enemy vehicles down through attrition, ambush and immobilisation.

The team is very happy with the PTRD stats AFAIK but the unit itself is still being discussed.

Agree

Soviet Tank Hunters were formerly OP in the sense that you were able to blob them as an efficient tactic against enemy tanks and you could successfully come out on top, and that's not their role. Their role is exactly how Dennis states:

GodlikeDennis wrote:
THs aren't a shock AT unit like say, shreks. They wear enemy vehicles down through attrition, ambush and immobilisation.

Don't forget about their AT mines which if placed correctly can devastate tanks and vehicles. Then you can use the Tank Hunter to get in close for the kill if it's immobilized or it has a huge chunk of health missing.

If you want an infantry shock unit  with AT capabilities, you'll have to look into Navals with their PTRD. They're a bit more resilient to enemy fire. Or go for the SU-85/T34 Riders for a quick tank that has excellent/decent AT capabilities. Spamming tank hunters at long range will achieve you nothing.

Replays are always good evidence for everything.

Like they say. Have them in giant infantry blobs and they are devastating against everything with armour! XD One singel tank hunter aint that good. Its like putting one singel PE tank buster against a sherman.
They need support! :>

Maybe it,s just my luck,but the shots from the at rifles either bounce off the armour of armoured car or warp through the car entirely 70 per cent of the time. ??? now they,re pretty much obsolete against late game armour.

Last edited April 27, 2012 at 11:51 AM by BreadBox

The TH's are a good soft counter to vehicles and tanks. Early game their 3 rifles provide much needed support to the 4 rifle conscript squads and and in obtaining map control as well. I consider the vanilla THs as AI with ATability. When MAT comes on board the THs become ATinfantry with reduced AI effectiveness. Not really a problem since normally Strelky and TH become available at the same time and given the resources can be produced in tandem. Early game TH+Strelky >9 rifles + 1ATrifle  or (8 rifles + 2PTRD) a potent combination when the additional Fire and Maneuver tactics are added into the equation. At vet2? THs again regain stature as an AI AND AT infantry, (3 rifles +2 PTRDs). Herein is my only bitch. My OB will normally consist of 3-4 TH squads. when vet2 arrives the TH in question frequently has to retreat anyway. I end up with 3-4 depleted THs at HQ with extra squad member(s) available but insufficient Pop to get my TH company up to full strength. grrrh!

Balance concerns end here'

GodlikeDennis wrote:
THs aren't a shock AT unit like say, shreks. They wear enemy vehicles down through attrition, ambush and immobilisation.

The team is very happy with the PTRD stats AFAIK but the unit itself is still being discussed.

Discussion concerns start here:

I became involved with EF too late to influence THs design and development. If I were to start from scratch with THs I would have given them a Tread Breaker Ability w/muni cost and an old Style Molotov global ability (before vehicle crits were nerfed). I understand Tread Breaker was OP as a global ability - maybe not so much so as a pay per use? In this version the long range penetration values of PTRD would be severely nerfed ie low damage. M vs Ts would 2nd PTRD add camo, AT nades and AT mines (and perhaps remove molotov ability). Veterancy would be set up like Falls def=off-off >> allowing camo to quickly cycle on and increased damage (like PE Shreks).

Perhaps this can experimented with when panzerbusch comes on line.

End Discussion points. Return to balance arguments.

Treadbreak is OP, even when you pay for it. Better to give THs button which relies heavily on units supporting.

Oh well given the poll result i guess the th are fine as they are.though i still hope they will a few useful ability or slightly more pen so  :-\shot would at least pen amoured car when their shots did not phase through

GodlikeDennis wrote:
Treadbreak is OP, even when you pay for it. Better to give THs button which relies heavily on units supporting.

Yes Tread break is very powerful. Button is good. I think minor engine damage crits would be worth considering as well.

I think the really essential point with THs is the design of their AT rifles. They should have better range and acc than 'schrecks, but only have superior penetration at close range. Maybe not have a tread-breaker ability, but make wheel/track hits more likely?

IMO THs are too strong atm against infantry close range. They make alot of their PTRD shots and they cause lots of damage to infantry. IDK if its because THs were heavily buffed close range but I think this should be looked into.

I played a game a couple of months ago Stalingrad Railroad Station as Soviets vs a PE and Wehrmacht player, I attacked with eight full squads of Tank Hunters supported with two strelky and a command squad... I had placed them in heavy cover, they had men vs tanks upgrade and they were attacked by 2 PE light armoured cars with no supporting infantry or artillery.

Neither PE armoured car was destroyed and all that remained of my infantry was four badly wounded tank hunter squads, one squad of strelky and 2 guards from the command squad.
Now if I had known Tank Hunters had been made so absolutely useless I could have just built eight squads of strelky and wiped the floor with those light armoured cars instead of wasting all my manpower on infantry that are supposed to be dedicated anti-vehicle/anti-tank... on that note I could have also built eight ZiS AT guns... or called in three tank riders etc etc etc.

Seriously when eight squads of tank hunters can't kill a single light armoured car as it drives by there has to be something wrong...

As for tank hunters being too strong vs infantry... that made me laugh hard. They used to be decent vs infantry just like any other small squad with bolt action rifles... now they are just as pathetic against infantry as they are against tanks.
Unless you're sending non-upgraded pioneers against them tank hunters will get raped by any infantry... although that's not saying much since pretty much everything rapes them nowadays.


Personally I'd say forget the tread breaking, screw anti-tank mines and give Tank Hunters back their old AT rifles and enough accuracy that they can at least shoot in the same general direction as their target.
I can imagine the 37mm cannon of a PE light halftrack breaking a tread cog but a 14mm ptrd? What's wrong with regular mines deployed by ingineery?
AT grenades are only useful if the target doesn't move, just like with PE AT grenades you'd have to be damn lucky to hit anything with them and not just be wasting munitions.

So remember kids, when you're thinking about taking tank hunters... just say 'no'.

Really?
Last time I check Sublime replay 2 days ago I found them wasted Panther...

Yhcrana wrote:
I played a game a couple of months ago Stalingrad Railroad Station as Soviets vs a PE and Wehrmacht player, I attacked with eight full squads of Tank Hunters ....Seriously when eight squads of tank hunters can't kill a single light armoured car as it drives by there has to be something wrong...

As for tank hunters being too strong vs infantry... that made me laugh hard. They used to be decent vs infantry just like any other small squad with bolt action rifles... now they are just as pathetic against infantry ...
Unless you're sending non-upgraded pioneers against them tank hunters will get raped by any infantry...

Personally I'd say forget the tread breaking, screw anti-tank mines and give Tank Hunters back their old AT rifles and enough accuracy that they can at least shoot in the same general direction as their target.
I can imagine the 37mm cannon of a PE light halftrack breaking a tread cog but a 14mm ptrd? What's wrong with regular mines deployed by ingineery?
AT grenades are only useful if the target doesn't move, just like with PE AT grenades you'd have to be damn lucky to hit anything with them and not just be wasting munitions.

You are right when 8 to 16 PTRDs can't KIA a single AC something is not right. In SP the AI has certain advantages over player but TH squads are less effective than I like to see. Shreks are the same, but for different reasons.

If you employ THs with at least two Squads, (second does'nt need to be TH though); at medium to long range and in cover they will chew up upgraded pios and VG with SR MP44s/Flamers.

THs are a soft counter. to MVeh, HVeh. If they can slow down or immobilize enemy AFVs you should have other Squads that can take them down. Historically AT rifles, including the PTRD could break Treads, smash vision blocks and perforate cannon barrels at ranges of 1400 yards. most of the damage is critical hits though. The 37mm ATHT supposedly could fire 1700 yds plus and achieve penetration. IDK Seems to me at long range criticals would be more important. AT mines should disable AAFVs. regular mines don't .

You are absolutely right about the Accuracy of AT grenades, (although guard nades seem to be pretty accurate). PG and TH AT nades accuracy is very bad.

Yhcrana wrote:
I played a game a couple of months ago Stalingrad Railroad Station as Soviets vs a PE and Wehrmacht player, I attacked with eight full squads of Tank Hunters supported with two strelky and a command squad... I had placed them in heavy cover, they had men vs tanks upgrade and they were attacked by 2 PE light armoured cars with no supporting infantry or artillery.

Neither PE armoured car was destroyed and all that remained of my infantry was four badly wounded tank hunter squads, one squad of strelky and 2 guards from the command squad.
Now if I had known Tank Hunters had been made so absolutely useless I could have just built eight squads of strelky and wiped the floor with those light armoured cars instead of wasting all my manpower on infantry that are supposed to be dedicated anti-vehicle/anti-tank... on that note I could have also built eight ZiS AT guns... or called in three tank riders etc etc etc.

Seriously when eight squads of tank hunters can't kill a single light armoured car as it drives by there has to be something wrong...

As for tank hunters being too strong vs infantry... that made me laugh hard. They used to be decent vs infantry just like any other small squad with bolt action rifles... now they are just as pathetic against infantry as they are against tanks.
Unless you're sending non-upgraded pioneers against them tank hunters will get raped by any infantry... although that's not saying much since pretty much everything rapes them nowadays.


Personally I'd say forget the tread breaking, screw anti-tank mines and give Tank Hunters back their old AT rifles and enough accuracy that they can at least shoot in the same general direction as their target.
I can imagine the 37mm cannon of a PE light halftrack breaking a tread cog but a 14mm ptrd? What's wrong with regular mines deployed by ingineery?
AT grenades are only useful if the target doesn't move, just like with PE AT grenades you'd have to be damn lucky to hit anything with them and not just be wasting munitions.

So remember kids, when you're thinking about taking tank hunters... just say 'no'.

I can't tell if you're a troll because when you say "8 Tank Hunters" I take it that you're not playing conventional play style.

Pretty sure this is L2P issue. Tank Hunters are fine for this patch.

Do you at least have a replay ???? Usually better to back your story with visual evidence  :P

He's trolling for sure. He's never provided evidence to his claims on Tank Hunters yet does it constantly. Remember his "Guide?"

I didn't realize this was the same person :P. But we should try to judge on what we see, not what we have seen

Last edited May 22, 2012 at 1:24 AM by Cat Fishy

Dude I'm not saying the guy I was playing against was retarded and just sat the cars in front of my guys for them to shoot, but I am serious about eight squads failing to kill either car.

Believe it or not I don't save replays of every single game I've ever played, if you really want to see how bad tank hunters are why don't you have a play match some time and test them out?

If you micro your cars probably they'll shredder infantry. Tank Hunters were never supposed to be a hard counter against armoured cars, they are a cheap support unit. I guess this was already mentioned by somebody in this thread. A good counter would be a T70 or an AT-Gun. At them moment we have a quiet good balance so they are not overpowered and not useless.

#Added missing version tags.

Last edited May 22, 2012 at 8:38 AM by Walki

Yhcrana wrote:
Believe it or not I don't save replays of every single game I've ever played, if you really want to see how bad tank hunters are why don't you have a play match some time and test them out?

Just like in a court case, you can not prove your evidence based on simply hear-say or you could easily be lying.

I could say I had 16 Heavy Mortars against a bunker that didn't die all day long. And no one would believe me because there is no replay evidence, there is no plausibility either because the general opinion is that Tank hunters are fine.

On that record, I play games everyday testing different units and strategies.

Well you didn't know about saving a THs replay b4. Maybe you could get one now (since you have been asked for one) to prove this point? :P. Show us the conditions in which you feel were unfair that u fought in. No offense is meant.

Sorry but am not sure that it happened (No offence), i don't say that it is not possible it depends on lot of factors like AC veterancy, inf cover etc.

Could you be a little more specific, how many cars were there? How many TH you had? In what cover were THs, etc.
Maybe even to tell me the map and spots where that battle happened so i can test that scenario :).
Thanks.

Here is reason why am not sure that it is possible:
I had some extra free time this weekend and to make my life easier i made a little tool, won't tell you much cuz it is WIP :P.

I tested Tank Hunters vs Axis Puma and vs PE Armored Car.
And here are results:



NOTES:
unit1/unit2 = first/second unit in battle
upg1/upg2 = upgrade that unit has
start1/start2 = how many man are in squad -> 8 in case of TH means 2xTH
end1/end2 = how many man left in squad after battle
eff1/eff2 = the effectiveness of unit -> formula = left/start
health1/health2 = health left after battle
time = how long was battle in seconds

SDKFZ_234 = PUMA
PTRD_TEAM = Tank Hunters
222_ARMORED_CAR = PE Armored Car

Each battle was fought 3 times, as you can see in table PE AC only won in 1 battle vs 1xTH and one vs 2x TH.
Puma won all vs 1xTH but also lost all vs 2xTH. Puma is a little stronger then PE AC but it loses to 2 x TH in all 3 battles so idk what happened in your case.

That seems ok to me idk what opinions others have.
Also i can post replay with these battles if you need it.

As Walki said:

Quote Tank Hunters were never supposed to be a hard counter against armoured cars, they are a cheap support unit.

So IMO if they are soft counter they seem pretty ok to me sometimes even pretty strong, puma and PE AC are both medium vehicles and TH did pretty good vs them so i don't see any problems with them.

No offense to anyone  :).

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

holy crap, you cant argue with jojo!

Hey jojo your battle simulator is looking pretty good.

Last edited May 23, 2012 at 4:49 AM by Otto Halfhand

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

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.

stealthattack1 wrote:
holy crap, you cant argue with jojo!

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

Otto wrote:
Hey jojo your battle simulator is looking pretty good.

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

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.

@ 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.

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.

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

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)

Yhcrana wrote:
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!

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.

TheVolskinator wrote:
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

Otto wrote:

TheVolskinator wrote:
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.

Last edited July 9, 2012 at 3:37 PM by dArCReAvEr

dArCReAvEr wrote:
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?

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.

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?

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.

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.

Joshua9 wrote:
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 

Yap, i think the Problem is they work like the RRs, but they should be "ligth at" (good vs SC Acs Pumas Hts and Stuff like that)

e-gon wrote:

Joshua9 wrote:
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 

Yap, i think the Problem is they work like the RRs, but they should be "ligth at" (good vs SC Acs Pumas Hts and Stuff like that)

True, as of now, the Sturmovie PPsH is way more effective against the AC than the PTRD. It penetrates the Shit out of PE vehicles.

Like I said... Use the THs defensively to protect your AT guns and to place mines. They can immobilize enemy tanks and let your AT guns destroy them easily.

They ALWAYS immobliize tanks ????

They're special AT mines which always cause criticals on tanks, similar to stickies.