Login

russian armor

My Proposal to change Allied TDs

3 Nov 2019, 10:19 AM
#41
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

The analysis is simply flawed

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2019, 19:43 PMEsxile

  • Ostheer having stock panther and stock brumbar

Both units have a armor value which is similar Churchill with less HP

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2019, 19:43 PMEsxile

  • Ostheer having the Tiger in almost half of its doctrines

There 4 commander with Tiger and 2 with Ace out of 22 commander, do the math
Soviet have 2 commanders with IS-2 2 commander with KV-2, 2 commander with T-34/85, 3commander with KV-1.
UKF have 3 commander with Croc and 1 with AVRE
USF have 1 Pershing, 1 Easy8, 1 Dozer, 2 with dozer upgrade

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2019, 19:43 PMEsxile

  • Elefant in two doctrines

2 soviet commanders with ISU-152

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2019, 19:43 PMEsxile

  • Atgun being a joke vs heavy tank, they can depop them from the front.

The M1 with Sabot has higher penetration than the Pak, better ROF, wider angle.

More specifically about the Jackson

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2019, 19:43 PMEsxile

  • Stock sherman being AI specialist and poor AT penetration vs Axis Armor values

Stock sherman is one of the most cost efficient medium tank that can also be upgrade with dozer in to doctrines bringing close to OKW PZIV levels.

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2019, 19:43 PMEsxile

  • ATgun behind a specific tier and requiring munition to be effective vs Pz4

Pak and Zis is also behind a specific tier and they do not provide a "free squad", M1 is the cheapest stock ATG, M1 has 72% chance to penetrate the Ostheer PzIV at range 60-70.

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2019, 19:43 PMEsxile

  • Zook being trash if not in blob

4 commander have access to super bazookas and some of the best AT infatry

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2019, 19:43 PMEsxile

  • USF still having to fight the above with just one unit: the jackson

Not really, Easy8, Sherman dozer upgrade, Sherman 76mm, M10 can fight PzIV
Persning can fight everything.

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2019, 19:43 PMEsxile

  • Really few AT strafing runs, in fact it is maybe the only faction that have only one AT strafing run.

I&R pathfinder barrage is devastating to slow moving Tanks

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2019, 19:43 PMEsxile

  • Ez8 being unreliable vs Panther and above

Panther is a more expensive TD so of coarse the Ez8 "unreliable", try facing 2 Easy8 with Panther

jump backJump back to quoted post2 Nov 2019, 19:43 PMEsxile

  • 76mm being unreliable vs Panther and above

The same.
76mm Sherman is dirty cheap and its vet bonuses are simply OP, Try a vet 3 76mm with radio net bonus and see.

3 Nov 2019, 11:03 AM
#42
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Nov 2019, 10:19 AMVipper
The analysis is simply flawed


Both units have a armor value which is similar Churchill with less HP


There 4 commander with Tiger and 2 with Ace out of 22 commander, do the math
Soviet have 2 commanders with IS-2 2 commander with KV-2, 2 commander with T-34/85, 3commander with KV-1.
UKF have 3 commander with Croc and 1 with AVRE
USF have 1 Pershing, 1 Easy8, 1 Dozer, 2 with dozer upgrade


2 soviet commanders with ISU-152


The M1 with Sabot has higher penetration than the Pak, better ROF, wider angle.

More specifically about the Jackson


Stock sherman is one of the most cost efficient medium tank that can also be upgrade with dozer in to doctrines bringing close to OKW PZIV levels.


Pak and Zis is also behind a specific tier and they do not provide a "free squad", M1 is the cheapest stock ATG, M1 has 72% chance to penetrate the Ostheer PzIV at range 60-70.


4 commander have access to super bazookas and some of the best AT infatry


Not really, Easy8, Sherman dozer upgrade, Sherman 76mm, M10 can fight PzIV
Persning can fight everything.


I&R pathfinder barrage is devastating to slow moving Tanks


Panther is a more expensive TD so of coarse the Ez8 "unreliable", try facing 2 Easy8 with Panther


The same.
76mm Sherman is dirty cheap and its vet bonuses are simply OP, Try a vet 3 76mm with radio net bonus and see.



What's the point to compare with what soviet or UKF have? Does the automatch allows USF vs Soviet nowaday?
What's even the point to talk about I&R pathfinder barrage. You're so desperate to give credit to your flawed logic that you're bringing everything coming through your mind and try to use it as an argument.

But hey:
Panther is a more expensive TD so of coarse the Ez8 "unreliable", try facing 2 Easy8 with Panther
Jackson is a more expensive TD so of coarse the Pz4 "unreliable", try facing 2 Pz4 with Jackson.

I guess we can now close all the topics about allied TDs and more particularly the Jackson, you gave yourself the definitive answer.
3 Nov 2019, 11:10 AM
#43
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Nov 2019, 11:03 AMEsxile


What's the point to compare with what soviet or UKF have? Does the automatch allows USF vs Soviet nowaday?
What's even the point to talk about I&R pathfinder barrage...

What is the point of all your "points"?
You tried to paint a picture where M36 is the only AT option USF have and that is simply not true.
3 Nov 2019, 11:34 AM
#44
avatar of SuperHansFan

Posts: 833

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Nov 2019, 10:19 AMVipper
The analysis is simply flawed


Both units have a armor value which is similar Churchill with less HP


There 4 commander with Tiger and 2 with Ace out of 22 commander, do the math
Soviet have 2 commanders with IS-2 2 commander with KV-2, 2 commander with T-34/85, 3commander with KV-1.
UKF have 3 commander with Croc and 1 with AVRE
USF have 1 Pershing, 1 Easy8, 1 Dozer, 2 with dozer upgrade


2 soviet commanders with ISU-152


The M1 with Sabot has higher penetration than the Pak, better ROF, wider angle.

More specifically about the Jackson


Stock sherman is one of the most cost efficient medium tank that can also be upgrade with dozer in to doctrines bringing close to OKW PZIV levels.


Pak and Zis is also behind a specific tier and they do not provide a "free squad", M1 is the cheapest stock ATG, M1 has 72% chance to penetrate the Ostheer PzIV at range 60-70.


4 commander have access to super bazookas and some of the best AT infatry


Not really, Easy8, Sherman dozer upgrade, Sherman 76mm, M10 can fight PzIV
Persning can fight everything.


I&R pathfinder barrage is devastating to slow moving Tanks


Panther is a more expensive TD so of coarse the Ez8 "unreliable", try facing 2 Easy8 with Panther


The same.
76mm Sherman is dirty cheap and its vet bonuses are simply OP, Try a vet 3 76mm with radio net bonus and see.



You keep bringing up doctrinal USF tanks vet 3...

Maybe you should take a look at how vet 5 P4s absolutely ruin infantry and hey why we are looking at this vacuum why not elite armor HEAT shells where it clubs 76mm Shermans too and drops arty on AT guns too.


If 76s rolled out at vet 3 and were non doc like a P4 you would have a point, but they don't. If you're gonna make a comparison to something like OKW P4 you could at least compare it with the doctrinal goodies it gets. Then there's the issue USF tanks are a lot harder to keep alive on average compared to axis armor to reach those vet levels.
3 Nov 2019, 11:37 AM
#45
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8



You keep bringing up doctrinal USF tanks vet 3...

Maybe you should take a look at how vet 5 P4s absolutely ruin infantry and hey why we are looking at this vacuum why not elite armor HEAT shells where it clubs 76mm Shermans too and drops arty on AT guns too.

If 76s rolled out at vet 3 you would have a point, but they don't and their pretty hard to keep alive that long unlike axis armor.

No, you can't do this, because the moment P4 drives on the base sector from being produced, it blows up to jackson instantly, while USF tanks are imprevious to any kind of damage while having 100% accuracy and no scatter, that's why USF tanks are always and only to be considered at vet3 and why P4s can never be built due to being magnets to jacksons shots, regardless of where both of them are on the field.
3 Nov 2019, 11:55 AM
#46
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1



You keep bringing up doctrinal USF tanks vet 3...

Not really. Out of whole pare I simply used 1 sentence to pointed out that 76mm veterancy bonuses are OP, and they are.
76mm Sherman is a very cost efficient medium tank.

3 Nov 2019, 12:14 PM
#47
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Nov 2019, 11:55 AMVipper

Not really. Out of whole pare I simply used 1 sentence to pointed out that 76mm veterancy bonuses are OP, and they are.
76mm Sherman is a very cost efficient medium tank.



Cool story, open a thread about it. Smell like your "inconsistency" thread where you only picked-up allied units that doesn't fit your personal balance logic.

3 Nov 2019, 12:51 PM
#48
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

In the end of the day if things are "so bad" in the AT for the USF department increase cost of the M1 to 320 give it the zis stat with "take aim" as vet 1 ability and nerf the "monstrosity" the m36 is.
3 Nov 2019, 15:04 PM
#49
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

What if you returned the Jackson to 480 HP, but gave it a cloaked lockdown similar to the one in Tank Hunter Tactics (cloaked but completely immobile)?

That'd make the Jackson vulnerable to being flanked again (it can only take 3 hits) but it'd retain its viability in long-range slugging matches because of the cloak.

It'd also be historically accurate: the US did hide their tank destroyers for ambushes like that.
3 Nov 2019, 15:49 PM
#50
avatar of BlueKnight

Posts: 320

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Nov 2019, 15:04 PMLago
What if you returned the Jackson to 480 HP, but gave it a cloaked lockdown similar to the one in Tank Hunter Tactics (cloaked but completely immobile)?

That'd make the Jackson vulnerable to being flanked again (it can only take 3 hits) but it'd retain its viability in long-range slugging matches because of the cloak.

It'd also be historically accurate: the US did hide their tank destroyers for ambushes like that.

480 HP is not an option for a Jackson as a lot of axis doctrines have AT loiters that would insta finish off any damaged TD. A lot of resources dying quickly in a game about preservation is a bad idea.
3 Nov 2019, 16:06 PM
#51
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Nov 2019, 11:03 AMEsxile


What's the point to compare with what soviet or UKF have? Does the automatch allows USF vs Soviet nowaday?
What's even the point to talk about I&R pathfinder barrage. You're so desperate to give credit to your flawed logic that you're bringing everything coming through your mind and try to use it as an argument.

But hey:
Panther is a more expensive TD so of coarse the Ez8 "unreliable", try facing 2 Easy8 with Panther
Jackson is a more expensive TD so of coarse the Pz4 "unreliable", try facing 2 Pz4 with Jackson.

I guess we can now close all the topics about allied TDs and more particularly the Jackson, you gave yourself the definitive answer.

Vipper is clearly showing that if OST has X things its because Y factions also haves them, Its not only OST vs USF or UKF, its Axis vs Allied and that means a lot of complex combinations of balance, making the faction available tool list very dependent on all the opposing factions, not only one of them.

Panthers are expensive just to punish axis players into going for a "safe" bet. Of course its more durable and has the best stock AT of all non TD tanks. Thats why they cost.
2 Pz4 cost more than a jackson, or 2 Ez8 cost more than a Panther, you own logic backfires you here. Even when the outcome is known its unknown why those units are "forced" to engage, all of them have equal mobility and thus not necessarily need to fight. A medium skilled players will know the odds of winning in each situation and force a win with other tools instead of AFK tank fights.

But the point IMO is panthers are durable to outfight most allied mediums and cheese some TDs because it is more mobile (which it shoulnt be) and jacksons have better firepower and on-the-move accuracy to secure themselves, only a bad player will expose them into a certain death.

I found a very few of the allied main players understanding this situation and even fewer want to do something about it.
3 Nov 2019, 16:10 PM
#52
avatar of CODGUY

Posts: 888

I just find it hilarious that people are saying since the Jackson is effective and overshadows the other Sherman variants (except the M4A3) the solution is to nerf the Jackson instead of buff the Easy 8 and 76mm Sherman. It's funny because that's not what they do with OST and especially OKW. If Fallschrimjagers, JLI, and PFs don't preform well relative to Obers or Volks well, we just buff those units to OP territory and see what happens.

The real solution is to make the E8 and 76mm a little better at killing infantry, something the Jackson cannot do. Just give them WP shells for this.

You can't nerf the Jackson. That will screw the whole faction.
3 Nov 2019, 16:13 PM
#53
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Nov 2019, 16:10 PMCODGUY
I just find it hilarious that people are saying since the Jackson is effective and overshadows the other Sherman variants (except the M4A3) the solution is to nerf the Jackson instead of buffing the Easy 8 and 76mm Sherman. It's funny because that's not what they do with OST and especially OKW. If Fallschrimjagers, JLI, and PFs don't preform well relative to Obers ir Volks well we just buff those units to OP territory and see what happens.

The real solution is to make the E8 and 76mm a little better at killing infantry, something the Jackson cannot do. Just give them WP shells for this.

You can't nerf the Jackson. That will screw the whole faction.

There is this little thing called

P O W E R C R E E P

Until you get that, please keep reading instead of ranting.
And stop burning and spamming all the well spoken threads.
3 Nov 2019, 16:35 PM
#54
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

480 HP is not an option for a Jackson as a lot of axis doctrines have AT loiters that would insta finish off any damaged TD. A lot of resources dying quickly in a game about preservation is a bad idea.


This is true of any damaged vehicle. The Jackson didn't get 640 HP to resist skillplane loiters, it got 480 HP so it didn't lose the long range slugging matches it's designed for.


jump backJump back to quoted post3 Nov 2019, 16:10 PMCODGUY
The real solution is to make the E8 and 76mm a little better at killing infantry, something the Jackson cannot do. Just give them WP shells for this.


Giving the E8 and 76mm a pretty hard counter to AT guns is not a good idea.


jump backJump back to quoted post3 Nov 2019, 16:10 PMCODGUY
You can't nerf the Jackson. That will screw the whole faction.


You can't make the Jackson less effective at killing armour at range without tweaking the rest of USF's AT arsenal to compensate.

You can make it weaker in other situations: USF would still function if you gave it the SU-85 or the Firefly instead.

But finding a way to do it that doesn't turn the Jackson into a Firefly clone or weaken it in long-range slugfests is easier said than done.
3 Nov 2019, 17:57 PM
#56
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358


u seriously protect him ? This guy is dumb and eveybody easliy shows that. This is borring how desperate he is. Sherman 76 vet3 op? I don't remember when was the last time I saw Sherman 76.
So? Whats next? op ambulance ?

I find very funny that you ignore any backed up argument with stats and concrete numbers. If you dont see S76 often it doesnt mean its OP/UP, it only shows you it is not part of the meta game.

Vipper is one of the very few members of the forums that always back up their arguments on solid evidence, player skill level independent and taking account units design and purpose. I am not defending him, i am defending his objective and constructive way of thinking. He is most of times right also.

Or do you prefer the more biased, feeling based and skill capped style of CODGUY or Hitler kind of users?
3 Nov 2019, 17:57 PM
#57
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

u seriously protect him ? This guy is dumb and eveybody easliy shows that. This is borring how desperate he is. Sherman 76 vet3 op? I don't remember when was the last time I saw Sherman 76.
So? Whats next? op ambulance ?


He's right in that a Vet 3 Sherman 76 with level 3 Radio Net and Combined Arms has an absolutely mental rate of fire.

But it's so difficult to assemble that combo that I'm not really worried by it.
3 Nov 2019, 18:02 PM
#58
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

I agree with lago about Jacksons/USF relationship, a good way to give a healthy feedback to this topic is to tweak jackson neither into a firefly clone nor a useless unit.

If only jacksons were "nerfed" to not have good on-the-move accuracy it could level a lot of unfair situations. Maybe add some wind up time to aim shots too. It doent need too much to keep the unit attractive to main USF players but also level the field for lategame tank warfare.
3 Nov 2019, 18:05 PM
#59
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1


Vipper is clearly showing that if OST has X things its because Y factions also haves them, Its not only OST vs USF or UKF, its Axis vs Allied and that means a lot of complex combinations of balance, making the faction available tool list very dependent on all the opposing factions, not only one of them.


Well, I didn't say anything else than Jackson is what it is because of Factions design. Not only USF faction's design but all of them together.

And
... only a bad player will expose them into a certain death.


Same about Panther, Comet, IS2, M24, ISU, KT, Tiger, Churchill... There isn't a single Jackson that can take on 1vs1 any of late game tank.
3 Nov 2019, 18:13 PM
#60
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 2358

jump backJump back to quoted post3 Nov 2019, 18:05 PMEsxile


Well, I didn't say anything else than Jackson is what it is because of Factions design. Not only USF faction's design but all of them together.
And
Same about Panther, Comet, IS2, M24, ISU, KT, Tiger, Churchill... There isn't a single Jackson that can take on 1vs1 any of late game tank.

You are right on both cases. I just wanted to point out the detail of his argument. There is nothing wrong on the elaboration.

I agree that missplays will have dire consequences but i wouldnt say that jacksons cant 1v1. Its certain they can zone out (not necessarily kill or destroy) any other tank 1v1, because of its superior range compared to mediums and heavies. In my experience, In the long run between self repairs and having superior positioning a single jackson can be very dominant.
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

956 users are online: 956 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49107
Welcome our newest member, Falac851
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM