I hope u do know normal mines already one shoot LV right
Normal mines don't even one-shot Kubelwagen, they do one-shot SOV M3 though.
Posts: 320
I hope u do know normal mines already one shoot LV right
Posts: 4474
forgot to add 2 fixed it
Normal mines don't even one-shot Kubelwagen, they do one-shot SOV M3 though.
Posts: 3260
I don't think it's wrong at all. The Jackson is the best tank destroyer in the game, no argument from me on that point. I just don't see a problem with it being the best TD in the game, I mean one unit has to be the best TD right? I think the real problem isn't that it's the best TD in the game so much as it's the best TD and belongs to USF.
Posts: 2243
Posts: 3260
Jackson is like a sniper infantry from USF which have 3models, running all the time, counter all other sniper easily and can self heal on field, can fast turn the body and has better accuracy than all other snipers.
and this for only 370mp.
this is Jackson compared to all other TDs
Posts: 2243
How do you have better accuracy than a unit that always hits?
If you're looking for a non-tank metaphor, it's an ATG with a turret.
Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1
The Jackson's design neither presents any positional counterplay nor allows the opponent to just buy a bigger gun (commanders notwithstanding). You can only counterplay it with non-vehicular AT. Otherwise it can only be outmacroed.
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
I hope u do know 2 normal mines already one shoot LV right
Posts: 503 | Subs: 1
Bashing someone's opinion by refering to his/her rank, as presented in this thread, is rude.
One can protect his SU-85 or Firefly with mines on the flanks, you can't do that as USF because you don't have mines available unless you pick a right doctrine. Also both SOV and Brits have ATGs with decent penetration that can support you and provide extra DPS. USF ATG will ask you for MU tax and even after you pay that you may or may not pen axis armour. This means that if you make Jackson vulnerable to flanking or just nerf it in other way, USF is dead in lategame. As USF you don't have any reliable lategame AT platform other than Jackson unless you pick a doctrine with Rangers and spend 150 MU on 3 bazookas, this should be good enough for P4, but not for the MetaTiger that you see every game now.
I say Panther and Jackson are okay as they are now. Both are hard to kill, both are very mobile and costly to replace if one is lost.
Also listing T34/85 as the best medium is a joke lol. It fights infantry exactly the same as T34/76 while being 40FU more expensive, taking longer to vet and it still doesn't pen P4 reliably.
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
The Jackson's design neither presents any positional counterplay nor allows the opponent to just buy a bigger gun (commanders notwithstanding). You can only counterplay it with non-vehicular AT. Otherwise it can only be outmacroed.
The Jackson's original design didn't have this problem: it cost 125 FU and had 480 HP, meaning it had to play carefully at range like the other two TDs. Spamming Jacksons wasn't really an option: because of their fragility you needed something else to defend them.
This was changed as a balance necessity: USF's shitty tech structure was full of holes thanks to Relic's ~2014 obsession with shipping factions with huge gaps in their basic tool roster. That change made USF functional in larger gamemodes, but it also made the Jackson what it is today.
While USF's tech structure has improved, I don't think you could just revert the Jackson to its better designed but less balanced earlier incarnation. What USF needs is a full review of the rest of its AT roster (currently entirely geared against LVs for some inconceiveable reason) and then changes to be made to its other units so the Jackson isn't the only mediums-up nondoc AT tool.
Then, and only then, could they look at turning the Jackson back into the nimble sniper it was designed as.
Posts: 1351
Purely a L2P issue on your side. Virtually all good players agree that the T34-85 is the best (or at the very least top 3) medium. Its cost-effectiveness is through the roof since it is highly capable at fighting infantry as well as bullying other mediums. Its health pool also makes it a great choice for taking on the KT.
You might not realise that it has 800 health, more armour, and a lot more pen than the T34-76, but that really matters in tank vs tank fights. Statistically it has approximately a 90% chance of winning 1vs1 against an Ost p4 (significantly higher % chance to pen + 25% more health), which costs 30mp and 10 fuel less. There's literally no medium as cost-efficient as the T34-85.
Ost has plenty of counters to the T34-85, but that doesn't change the fact that the T34-85, in and of itself, is a top-of-class unit. If Ost had a unit that good, you and CODGUY would have quit the game already. Ost P4s already have a slight edge vs Shermans, T34-76s, and Cromwells, but the P4 still gets blown away by T34-85s.
The OKW p4 has high armour that gives it a very light repair burden and great survivability, so certainly an argument can be made that it's the best medium. But dissing the T34-85 simply means you're a really bad player who doesn't understand how incredibly cost-efficient the T34-85 is.
Posts: 3260
Even Sniper misses...(more in houses and much more on retreating units
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
...
While USF's tech structure has improved, I don't think you could just revert the Jackson to its better designed but less balanced earlier incarnation...
Posts: 2358
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Give jacksons 70 range. Reduce its HP pool to 480. Call it a day.
Vs jtiger or elephant will not win unless kites, vs mediums will have to keep very long distance.
If needed reduce its speed also
Posts: 320
Purely a L2P issue on your side. Virtually all good players agree that the T34-85 is the best (or at the very least top 3) medium. Its cost-effectiveness is through the roof since it is highly capable at fighting infantry as well as bullying other mediums. Its health pool also makes it a great choice for taking on the KT.
You might not realise that it has 800 health, more armour, and a lot more pen than the T34-76, but that really matters in tank vs tank fights. Statistically it has approximately a 90% chance of winning 1vs1 against an Ost p4 (significantly higher % chance to pen + 25% more health), which costs 30mp and 10 fuel less. There's literally no medium as cost-efficient as the T34-85.
Ost has plenty of counters to the T34-85, but that doesn't change the fact that the T34-85, in and of itself, is a top-of-class unit. If Ost had a unit that good, you and CODGUY would have quit the game already. Ost P4s already have a slight edge vs Shermans, T34-76s, and Cromwells, but the P4 still gets blown away by T34-85s.
The OKW p4 has high armour that gives it a very light repair burden and great survivability, so certainly an argument can be made that it's the best medium. But dissing the T34-85 simply means you're a really bad player who doesn't understand how incredibly cost-efficient the T34-85 is.
Posts: 3260
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Funny how everyone thinks the best medium tank is the one they usually play against.
Posts: 789
Posts: 789
7 | |||||
25 | |||||
7 | |||||
1 |