Login

russian armor

jackson armor nerf

PAGES (19)down
20 Jan 2020, 19:44 PM
#61
avatar of blvckdream

Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1

60 range Stug would be WAY too op. Please stop with this.
20 Jan 2020, 19:45 PM
#62
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392

60 range Stug would be WAY too op. Please stop with this.


op? Where it will be op when you are paying for it? Herr, lass Hirn regnen.


EDIT: But oll over, I think there would be a better solution. Removing the StuG E as commander vehicle, making it a tankhunter instead, 45 range and At ammo. Still 90fuel. Give it one high-explosive shell on target (as extra ability) instead of weak-point.

T4 upgrade StuG E to StuG G 40fuel + 100mp. it gets long barrel and 60 range (stats of actual StuG but +10 range). Maybe a timed HEAT like Jackson with Vet1.

Also option to build it new, so not upgrade for StuG E is needed.

So: One useless unit, current StuG E, will be removed. Current StuG E will become useful. Ostheer becomes a late-game option to survice arty-play.
20 Jan 2020, 20:01 PM
#63
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2



Even then, if we assume a 100% hit rate combined with a 100% pen rate, it'll take the Puma six hits to destroy the M36, which will take around 23 seconds. Meanwhile the M36 can 2-shot the puma - meaning a single hit forces a retreat.


As I've heard this now twice in this thread:

I'm fairly sure that the Puma has 400 HP and can therefore take 3 shots (or 2 plus snare) from a Jackson.

I also think that the most likely scenario is that the Jackson already gets hit once by a ATG or other tank and that you dive and sacrifice a Puma for it. Then it would be 3 shots for the Jackson and 4 for the Puma.
I'm not 100% sure on exact reloading times since the Jackson also has wind up etc, will do a short test and report back.
20 Jan 2020, 20:08 PM
#64
avatar of Fire and Terror

Posts: 306

whats gonna counter 60 range stugs supported by command p4? whats the egde allies gonna have? when stug is faster and has faster rate of fire then su85?

axis already has a very strong early game in team games becouse of mg42... or just okw things...

please keep the topic on the Jackson and espacially the proposed change in Jackson puma interaction in order to make p4 pen Jackson 100%
20 Jan 2020, 20:10 PM
#65
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

60 range StuGG would lead to it being 120-130 fuel. No thanks. I'd rather see all TDs nerfed, with snares always giving engine crit being the best route in my view.
20 Jan 2020, 20:21 PM
#66
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

EDIT2:
First version said Jackson had ö sec reload due to miscalculation it's actually ~7
This lower TTK for Puma to 14 and for Tiger to 28/21.

Okay so short test:

First off: Yes, Puma needs 3 shots.

Puma fires 10 shots in about 39 seconds at approximately 2/3 of it's max range (so 30-35 m, forgot to test on the range map). This means it has an effective reload speed of 4,33 seconds.

Jackson fires 10 shots in ~63 seconds at the same range, giving a reload of 9 seconds.



So in the scenario described above (Jackson got 1 hit, Puma dives) Jackson would need 3 shots = 14 seconds to kill the Puma, Puma needs 4 shots = 13 seconds to kill the Jackson assuming all shots hit (which is actually hard to calculate on the move). If the Jackson is still on reload at the beginning of the dive, it obviously takes a bit longer for the Jackson.

[EDIT2 although the argument is not as strong anymore, I still think the core is valid] This is what I was talking about in the beginning. The Puma seems to have a decent chance against a low armor Jackson. Combined with the smoke to break the auto targeting of the Jackson and potentially evade a snare during the dive this could become too common.

Comparing this to the similar setup I mentioned before (Jackson vs Tiger, also about double the fuel price):

Let's say the Tiger was already damaged by 2 shots, so it's down to 70% health which is about the same as if Jackson eats 1 shot. Jackson still needs 5 shots to kill the Tiger (4 if the Tiger got additionally snared), which would take 28(/21) seconds. Tiger would need 4 shots to kill the Jackson (don't know the time here). [EDIT2: argument also less string but the core is still valid] But the 28/21 secs alone give plenty of time to react for the Axis player. There's no smoke or something else to avoid a snare. In this scenario, your Tiger must have overextended heavily.

In the Jackson/Puma scenario? Honestly not that much. 13 seconds can be over quickly if your riflemen are not instantly in the perfect position to snare or your ATG is already on the target. Plus a good smoke could avoid a whole shot worth of damage.

Side note:
Timings obviously change with veterancy, although Jackson has an official reload time of 4,675 seconds while the wind up/down does not get affected by the vet. Puma has 3,85 reload time and thereby the majority of the time between shots will be affected by vet.


EDIT:

Tiger fires 10 shots in 48 seconds; reload = 5,33 seconds; time to kill full health Jackson = 16 seconds.
20 Jan 2020, 20:50 PM
#67
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

Another thing to not Hannibal is Puma vet. When it gets the reload bonus it’s extremely potent at chasing down armour once you learn how to stop shoot move rapidly.
20 Jan 2020, 21:35 PM
#68
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4

Everyone please be aware of the stats you're posting. I've seen multiple people say it takes 2 shots to kill a puma. The puma has 400 HP and the jackson now deals 160 damage per shot making it a 3 shot kill. HVAP, the jackson vet 1 ability can raise the damage to 200 which can make it a 2 shot kill. Hannibal I know you corrected this a previous post, thank you.



So in the scenario described above (Jackson got 1 hit, Puma dives) Jackson would need 3 shots = 18 seconds to kill the Puma, Puma needs 4 shots = 13 seconds to kill the Jackson assuming all shots hit (which is actually hard to calculate on the move). If the Jackson is still on reload at the beginning of the dive, it obviously takes a bit longer for the Jackson.


As someone previously posted, it takes 6 penetrating hits to kill a jackson, not 4. 4 would've been from the old jackson HP value of 480. The jackson now has 640 HP.
20 Jan 2020, 21:53 PM
#69
avatar of Raxzero

Posts: 55

As someone previously posted, it takes 6 penetrating hits to kill a jackson, not 4. 4 would've been from the old jackson HP value of 480. The jackson now has 640 HP.


He might've been talking with the Vet3 bonus of Puma in mind. In which case, Puma has 160 damage and can kill Jackson with 4 shots. Considering the difference between Jackson and Puma timings, it's realistic to assume Puma will be Vet3 before Jackson comes.
20 Jan 2020, 22:08 PM
#70
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

Everyone please be aware of the stats you're posting. I've seen multiple people say it takes 2 shots to kill a puma. The puma has 400 HP and the jackson now deals 160 damage per shot making it a 3 shot kill. HVAP, the jackson vet 1 ability can raise the damage to 200 which can make it a 2 shot kill. Hannibal I know you corrected this a previous post, thank you.



As someone previously posted, it takes 6 penetrating hits to kill a jackson, not 4. 4 would've been from the old jackson HP value of 480. The jackson now has 640 HP.

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Jan 2020, 21:53 PMRaxzero


He might've been talking with the Vet3 bonus of Puma in mind. In which case, Puma has 160 damage and can kill Jackson with 4 shots. Considering the difference between Jackson and Puma timings, it's realistic to assume Puma will be Vet3 before Jackson comes.


The scenario I was describing is that the Jackson got hit once during a fight, which happens very frequently, and then OKW dives a Puma to kill it. I see that the second time I wrote "Jackson got one hit", which was meant as "received one hit" and is a bit ambiguously phrased.

20 Jan 2020, 22:14 PM
#71
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392

To be fair, Puma hits sh*t on the move and Jackson has more range. What is that scenario? If Puma killes Jackson the OKw pöayer was simply the better player using hotkeys for acc. and timing/tactic for the hunt while path-finding sucks.


Back to StuG. My version could also be nerfed, the factor is simply the 60 range mark you need to balance everything over 1vs1, because micro-investing is simply larger for Ostheer, smalled squads, no non-doc long-range units, most vehicles have no turret, worse grenades. Needed skill for fractions should be balanced to become fair again.
20 Jan 2020, 22:18 PM
#72
avatar of Fire and Terror

Posts: 306

nerf Jackson armor => 60 range stug pls?

back to the topic, would a lot change if the Jackson would receive a slight armor nerf? Hannibal so basically p4 bouncing shots < puma to strong vs Jackson?

and if your fighting pumas sherman pak and bazookas arent valid options? (once heavy meta is fixed once and for all)
20 Jan 2020, 22:24 PM
#73
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392

nerf Jackson armor => 60 range stug pls?

back to the topic, would a lot change if the Jackson would receive a slight armor nerf? Hannibal so basically p4 bouncing shots < puma to strong vs Jackson?


Whats the point of armor nerf?

That thread is again on part of bad balancing... one bad building-brick of many before.

Jackson is OP because it is a trolling-machine. More range, more speed, more acc. While Rangers are spamed.

The game became a stupid lucky-fuk no-brainer.
20 Jan 2020, 22:24 PM
#74
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

To be fair, Puma hits sh*t on the move and Jackson has more range. What is that scenario? If Puma killes Jackson the OKw pöayer was simply the better player using hotkeys for acc. and timing/tactic for the hunt.


Back to StuG. My version could also be nerfed, the factor is simply the 60 range mark you need to balance everything over 1vs1, because micro-investing is simply way worse for Ostheer than e.g. Alliis. So needed skill for fractions become fair.

Don't know about the moving accuracy of the Jackson. Is it 0,75 like the Sherman?

Apart from that, Puma could miss one shot and even then killing times are equal. If the Jackson misses a hit, it would probably be a dead Jackson since the Puma gets two shots in between.
I also just calculated that the Puma has a decent chance against a Jackson that got hit only once which happens frequently in a battle. Also the range difference is 10, and since during an assault there might be valuable targets than a Puma and given Pumas top speed of 7,2 this should take only 2 seconds to bridge if you assault a standing Jackson.

I'm not saying that a Puma can solo a Jackson, but it could solo a Jackson that got hit only once, especially since it profits more from it's vet in this setup. And I this could lead to an unfair advantage.

Puma already has a role. Rather make JP4 great again.
20 Jan 2020, 22:29 PM
#75
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392

I know Puma can do that, but normally path-finding and the mass of AT-inf will make that scenario not that easy like you write/think.

Ostheer can only waist tanks in many sitautions. So often I saw PaK40 oneshotted by Scott or simply get doomes by grenades. Allii with sight will allways dominate multiplayer if players have same skill. They have the better line-up and tools.

Edit: It is funny to see Alliis fight each other, it seems Alliis are better designed to fight each other than Germans.

Lol OP soviet fire-mortar-call in -> gg Brits
20 Jan 2020, 22:42 PM
#76
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 3423 | Subs: 1



Whats the point of armor nerf?

Try reading literally the first sentence of the OPs post:

please nerf Jacksons armor, i dont think they should be able to bounce p4 shots.


That thread is again on part of bad balancing... one bad building-brick of many before.

Jackson is OP because it is a trolling-machine. More range, more speed, more acc. While Rangers are spamed.

Then go make your own fucking thread about it? I agree the Jackson is too good, but changing it requires a lot of brainstorming

OP made a very specific thread about a very specific issue, which is actually how you're supposed to do it. And it shouldn't be too hard to fix if the community agrees it should


The game became a stupid lucky-fuk no-brainer.


Then stop playing it if you think that? That sounds like no fun

20 Jan 2020, 22:43 PM
#77
avatar of Fire and Terror

Posts: 306



Try reading literally the first sentence of the OPs post:





Then go make your own fucking thread about it? I agree the Jackson is too good, but changing it requires a lot of brainstorming

OP made a very specific thread about a very specific issue, which is actually how you're supposed to do it. And it shouldn't be too hard to fix if the community agrees it should



Then stop playing it if you think that? That sounds like no fun



+1
20 Jan 2020, 22:44 PM
#78
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 960

As I've heard this now twice in this thread:

I'm fairly sure that the Puma has 400 HP and can therefore take 3 shots (or 2 plus snare) from a Jackson.


Yea, my mistake. Had the HVAP numbers instead of normal for some reason.

60 range Stug would be WAY too op. Please stop with this.

How so, especially compared to the M36?
It's slower, doesn't have a turret, doesn't have HVAP, and doesn't have a crew (and all the bonuses/gimmicks associated with that). A 60-range stug would come as either a more expensive unit, or as an expensive (i.e. not just ammo) upgrade to the normal stug.

whats gonna counter 60 range stugs supported by command p4? whats the egde allies gonna have? when stug is faster and has faster rate of fire then su85?

axis already has a very strong early game in team games becouse of mg42... or just okw things...

please keep the topic on the Jackson and espacially the proposed change in Jackson puma interaction in order to make p4 pen Jackson 100%


1. Flanking, smoke, ambushes... just like Axis has to do now against SU85s and M36s when properly supported.

2. Axis early game is no stronger than Allied early game. Look at the current state of Sov early game and their scaling, as well as the performance of USF rifles, then also look at the power of Allied LVs compared to axis. Each side/faction has its strengths and weaknesses at most points in the game.

3. This is generally focused on the M36 - it's just that the armor nerf wouldn't change anything, as its been pointed out.

Another thing to not Hannibal is Puma vet. When it gets the reload bonus it’s extremely potent at chasing down armour once you learn how to stop shoot move rapidly.


Why does axis need the extra micro tax on top of having to use a much squishier unit that also lacks a crew (and related gimmicks)?

I know Puma can do that, but normally path-finding and the mass of AT-inf will make that scenario not that easy like you write/think.

Ostheer can only waist tanks in many sitautions. So often I saw PaK40 oneshotted by Scott or simply get doomes by grenades. Allii with sight will allways dominate multiplayer if players have same skill. They have the better line-up and tools.


Pretty much; against a decent team, OST is in a really tricky position. It's pretty common for late-game USF teams (2v2+) to have 4+ M36s, which makes Panthers basically useless. The only solution to that kind of match-up is a Pak40, but its incredibly vulnerable to any kind of indirect fire or just infantry.

A buffed Puma is an interesting idea, but it doesn't help OST, which is arguably in a much worse situation, since OKW also has the non-doc JP4.
20 Jan 2020, 22:45 PM
#79
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2



back to the topic, would a lot change if the Jackson would receive a slight armor nerf? Hannibal so basically p4 bouncing shots < puma to strong vs Jackson?


Not sure what you want to say with that. But keep in mind that we are still talking about reliable penetration. P4 has a 84-96% pen chance against the Jackson, so bouncing a shot is more bad luck once in a while. That still a 50% chance to pen 4/4 shots at max range and a 65% chance to pen 4/4 at mid range. We are talking about the same pen chances which people use to argue that the Panther were shite and needs an armor buff because a dedicated tank destroyer will pen with 85-90% chance (at vet 0).

Just to put this into perspective. Shadow posted the values, but apparently no one thought much about what they actually mean.


and if your fighting pumas sherman pak and bazookas arent valid options? (once heavy meta is fixed once and for all)

Of course they are valid. But as I said, Puma needs 13 secs if it's lucky. That's the only issue I see. That's why my point so far is that the best approach is to probably get ~10 armor off the Jackson. That gives P4 more than enough chance to pen next to every shot while Puma will probably not cause much issues.
20 Jan 2020, 22:47 PM
#80
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1392



Then stop playing it if you think that? That sounds like no fun



In fact it is no fun, most mates deleted the game because it gets worse and worse. I know how the game was and know how it can be better, like many before and many here on forum.

But that thread is a bad jocke, pointing on something with interest, while knowing the problem is something else.
PAGES (19)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 22
Germany 858
unknown 44
unknown 21

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

688 users are online: 688 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49095
Welcome our newest member, Coh2AmateurPlayer
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM