Jagdpanzer IV Refit

It has pretty much exactly the same vet 1-3 requirements as the Firefly and the Jackson (see my previous post). Only the SU-85 has slightly lower requirements, but then the SU-85 is a lot less durable.

i mean vet 1-5 equal to vet 1-3 i mean the 5 vet are comparable to the 3 vet of other tanks

yea pro too always use it..... wait a second

i mean i do agree that its a bit of a niche... hence support at least widening its capabilities by introducing switchable round types... but i am opposed to a direct JP4 buff... its current stats make it a beast vs all nondoc allied armor...

another idea instead of switchable rounds would be fixing its vet costs and vet performance... perhaps that may make the unit more attractive than it was before?

i mean vet 1-5 equal to vet 1-3 i mean the 5 vet are comparable to the 3 vet of other tanks

Which part of "stat bonuses and requirements for vet 1-3 are comparable and vet 4 and 5 are extra"?
Or are you suggesting removing what they are getting at vet4 and vet5 and spreading stats from vet2 and vet3 over 4 and 5?

The jp4 vet 1 to 5 is similar to vet 1 to 3 of the su 85

The jp4 vet 1 to 5 is similar to vet 1 to 3 of the su 85

Which Sander93 just said is not the case. Vet 1-3 is equal, OKW's Vet 4 and 5 are bonuses that no other faction gets.

What everyone ignores for some reason is accuracy and target size.

No we have not.

Ok lets compare the JP 4 and SU-85 at vet 0

Accuracy:
0.065/0.05/0.04 vs 0.055/0.045/0.04
....

Target size: 17 vs 18..

The accuracy and target size is inline with the other case-mate TD the cheaper SU-85

For comparison reason
accuracy
FF 0.066/0.055 (at range 45!!)/0.044
M36 0.05/0.045/0.035

Target size
FF 23
M36 24

JP4 has a 96% chance to score a natural hit against a Jackson at range 60.

Jackson has a 59% chance to score a natural hit against a JP4 at range 60.

That alone makes a huge difference.

Funny that for example you choosed the allied TD with biggest target size and lowest far accuracy, instead of the SU-85 which is also a case-mate. I guess that choosing M36, that scores the lowest in your example, was completely accidental.

I also have to guess, that you accidentally forgot to mention that the same example on the move the JP4 would have a 48% chance and M36 44% (but also have to guess one can "glide shot" with slower non turreted JP4...)

JP4 can duel and win vs allied TD but chasing an M36 and scoring a kill is another story and actually the performance of JP4 vs other TDs is not the issue. JP4 is designed to win slug fights vs allied TDs.

The issue has more to do with the fact that one pays more than SU-85 for a unit that slightly better vs mediums and allot worse vs heavies.

If trying to claim that JP4 performs superior to M36 I doubt you will find many people to agree with you.

The JP4 will win a slug-fight vs a M36 but that does not make a "huge difference". Actual it make a small difference because very few people would use an m36 to slug-fight vs JP4.

the JP4 can counter the churchill pretty well as it isnt that well armored... its just very beefy... it struggles against the IS-2/ISU but thats doctrinal



isnt the IS-2 doctrinal aswell?

Yes, i'm saying the panther cannot counter the churchill even though it is a "heavy tank" and the panther according to many is supposed to "counter heavy tanks".


The IS-2 is doctrinal yes, but that doesn't mean it should be overpowered. If that were the case, the JT/Ele would still 2 shot 640HP meds.

Yes, i'm saying the panther cannot counter the churchill even though it is a "heavy tank" and the panther according to many is supposed to "counter heavy tanks".

I think the PV can deal with it, but it will not do so cost effectively. You get a PV for mobility, HP and increased penetration compared to the alternative.

Churchill doesn't have extreme armor (240, +6 against OKW PIV) but it has a high HP pool (1400HP), which puts its in an awkward position between choosing either tank (PV or JPIV/Stug). On the contrary, you probably want the PV against the Crocodile/Avre which are 290 armor 1080HP.

I think the PV can deal with it, but it will not do so cost effectively. You get a PV for mobility, HP and increased penetration compared to the alternative.

Churchill doesn't have extreme armor (240, +6 against OKW PIV) but it has a high HP pool (1400HP), which puts its in an awkward position between choosing either tank (PV or JPIV/Stug). On the contrary, you probably want the PV against the Crocodile/Avre which are 290 armor 1080HP.

In a tank fight 1v1 yeah the panther is fine, but there is probably zero chance of winning in a 2v2, 2 panthers vs a churchill/ff, and it just gets worse the more TDs you stack on it.

Yes, i'm saying the panther cannot counter the churchill even though it is a "heavy tank" and the panther according to many is supposed to "counter heavy tanks".


The IS-2 is doctrinal yes, but that doesn't mean it should be overpowered. If that were the case, the JT/Ele would still 2 shot 640HP meds.

Panther very much counters churchill, it just doesn't do it cost efficiently alone, because of churchills role of soaking damage.

To get back to the original proposal a 60 mu upgrade as described by OP would help the JP4 become a more attractive options. It is a good suggestion.

But imo the unit has other issues than need be addressed also.

Buffing JP4 offensive capabilities would make it super broken.

If JP4 is to be buffed it should be done through buffing it's defensive capabilities that makes it perform better against opponents TDs but hinders performance against others:

-high vet level also adds incoming damage reduction to the camouflage mode.

Effectively would enable JP4 to take one more shot if you had camo toggled throughout combat at the cost of mobility.

Yes, i'm saying the panther cannot counter the churchill even though it is a "heavy tank" and the panther according to many is supposed to "counter heavy tanks".


The IS-2 is doctrinal yes, but that doesn't mean it should be overpowered. If that were the case, the JT/Ele would still 2 shot 640HP meds.

Imo that was the biggest detrimental change to Elefant. It went from Herr Elefant to the elephant. It was a very passive change to the unit. I mean you can tweak its defensive stats and its counter, but to also hit its damage makes it a question mark.

I went from saving to unlesh Herr Elefant. Now i will think twice to call in. Only if playing double Churchill spamming Ukf, or if game have gone 50% of VP, and we get a small or equal map control, then i call in the elephant to try and defend a side. Else i need to depend on Panther for AT duties, and wont even call in if we are behind.

It is just too passive now. So members like Katitof who keep throwing out Elefant as a counter of all, ime its not that case for me in 2v2 now.

i mean vet 1-5 equal to vet 1-3 i mean the 5 vet are comparable to the 3 vet of other tanks

How so? It gets +160hp with veterancy which is a huge difference, a permanently useful vet 1 ability (Firefly has nothing, SU-85 has a meh ability, Jackson's forces a reload and costs munitions), and ultimately higher, it gets +38% accuracy while the others get +30%, and all other buffs (reload, mobility) are roughly the same. On top of that, most of its basic stats (target size, reload, and accuracy) are better than the other TDs in the first place (sole exception is that Firefly has equal vet 0 accuracy and slightly better with the tank commander).

The vet 5 ambush bonuses are still decent. Even if the extra damage doesn't do anything, it still gets better accuracy and penetration for every first shot.

The only thing it lacks is a penetration bonus, but again, that is on purpose.


Beyond vet 5 being a bit lackluster, there is absolutely nothing about its veterancy to complain about. I can only agree with:

JP4 counters every single non-doctrinal Allied vehicle with high efficiency. JP4 is criminally underrated on this forum.

I almost always use Jagdpanzer IVs, they are fantastic to play with, and a real pain in the ass to deal with when playing against them. It is a really good unit.

, SU-85 has a meh ability,

I wouldn't describe an ability that allow a 60 range TD to self spot at range 49 and provide mini map information at range 70 and can provide focused self spot range of 105 as "meh"...

it gets +38% accuracy while the others get +30%,

vs how many targets does that make a difference? since most of these unit can fire with almost 100% chance once they get bonus accuracy. (Difference here being that allied TDs will also penetrate with 100% vs most targets).


In the end of the day if JP4 "fantastic" and "JP4 is criminally underrated (only) on this forum" why is so much underused compared to FF/M36/SU-85?

Does any seriously claim that it comes near being as cost efficient as M36?

I wouldn't describe an ability that allow a 60 range TD to self spot at range 49 and provide mini map information at range 70 and can provide focused self spot range of 105 as "meh"...

I was only comparing vet 1 abilities, since the comparison was about veterancy. Tracking, with slightly extended sight range and infantry getting spotted on the minimap, for 20 seconds, for 35 munitions, is in my opinion pretty meh compared to the JP4's permanent and free mobile ambush camouflage that allows it to catch enemy vehicles by surprise.

In the end of the day if JP4 "fantastic" and "JP4 is criminally underrated (only) on this forum" why is so much underused compared to FF/M36/SU-85?

The answer to your question here is the part that you quoted.
It's an underrated unit. Overshadowed by the more popular Panther, but definitely not any less cost effective.

To be honest I don't even think that JP4 is actually a bad unit. It has simply been Nerf so much while allied TD have been buffed so much that it has simply been power creeped to be a non cost efficient unit by comparison. If other TDs remain at the same power level the unit simply need a redesign.


Jagdpanzer IV/70 (V)
Show Spoiler

I was only comparing vet 1 abilities, since the comparison was about veterancy. Tracking, with slightly extended sight range and infantry getting spotted on the minimap, for 20 seconds, for 35 munitions, is in my opinion pretty meh compared to the JP4's permanent and free mobile ambush camouflage that allows it to catch enemy vehicles by surprise.

The ability reveals infatry and support weapon even cloaked ATG in the mini map...It allow the SU-85 to check for ambushes or continue to fire to target that would have move into the FOW.

The fact that "Tracking" can be combined with "focus sight" makes the ability even better, with a sight of 105 (if not borderline OP) especially after the nerf the doctrinal "spotting scopes" have received making almost a useless upgrade for case-mate TDS.

The answer to your question here is the part that you quoted.
It's an underrated unit. Overshadowed by the more popular Panther, but definitely not any less cost effective.

I am pretty sure many people would not agree that the JP is as cost effective as Panther...

The part I have quote say that is underrated in the forum so you are now claiming that it also underrated in game.

Actually the unit probably sees only action in 3vs3 and above because the only stock counter OKW have to extremely cost efficient allied TDs and one of the few unit that deal with TD spam.

And that bring us back to my original claim, the unit is simply not cost efficient for what it does, it cost too much and has to high population for the unit it can counter so it is only viable in large modes where the cost is not important...

It allied counter parts can counter nearly every axis vehicle (JT Ele not included) while costing about the same while their infatry can deal with axis infatry (no Fallj pls).

Sander's actually right, turns out.

The Jagdpanzer IV deals more damage per second per point of fuel than the Panther against every target in the game.

It's also outright superior against anything below 200 armour at all levels of veterancy.

I am pretty sure many people would not agree that the JP is as cost effective as Panther...

Against everything with less than 200-170 armor, the Jagdpanzer IV is way more cost effective than the Panther due to higher DPM while costing a lot less. Against anything above, the Panther does not have a clear advantage because of its low DPM.

The only thing that makes the Panther arguably more cost effective is that it can also deal decent damage to infantry. Against vehicles however, both units are roughly on par when facing heavy tanks (in terms of costs vs performance), while the Jagdpanzer IV takes the cake against all mediums/premiums/TDs.

[...]
And that bring us back to my original claim, the unit is simply not cost efficient for what it does

It will win versus all Allied TDs, and demolishes them with veterancy, two of which are more expensive, so I'd definitely call that cost effective. When fighting Allied mediums, any Allied mediums, the Jagdpanzer IV is the more cost effective choice because the Panther is simply way more expensive without being much better, while the Panzer IV is a liability against any premium tank because of its low penetration.

Another thing to consider is that it has longer range and lower target size compared to the Panther, which should reduce the amount of damage it takes in a fight quite significantly, resulting in much lower repair times.