jackson armor nerf

[...]
3-4 Shrek shots are enough to take down a Jackson. The problem is that the games I play are a blob shitshow from both sides. Enemy brings armor, I respond with Jacksons, he then brings AT equipped squads and I fall back while holding him with my infantry. Still not enough to stop them sometimes.

Schrecks do 120 damage, meaning it takes 6 Schrecks (or 5 plus snare) to take down a Jackson. This means 3 Panzergren squads fully equipped with Panzerschrecks and all need to hit. Usually you can drive away before they reload. But as I said, if a unit that should be used at range 60 will get overrun by a blob of slower units that have range ~30, you made a mistake. You left an important flank unguarded so they sneaked their units through and took you by surprise or you did not micro well enough and retreated your unit too late. This does not mean that the unit is bad, just that it does not fit your play style or skill level (don't get me wrong, I don't want to shit talk you, but some situations require heavier micro and obviously only frequent players can mitigate damage).

Yeah, the Jackson is fast, but if you have 1-2 and the enemy rushes you with 2-3 P4s and is focused on taking them down, he won't back down until he destroys the Jacksons. Plus, if you find it difficult to destroy a Jackson with a P4, you have alternatives. And if you don't, then use P4s and go up close and personal. If you can't take it down from far away, get close. Jackson is nothing more than a sniper. Good from afar, mediocre if you get close. This is how I see it.

To be honest I really think you have a problem with tank positioning or flank guarding. Jacksons get the first salvo and should make at least one tank snarable to take him out of the fight. With good micro and a bit of good RNG you can snare two vehicles early in the scenario described above. There should be Riflemen in front of your Jacksons to scout and snare if something like this happens. As every TD, the Jackson is indeed a sniper, but it should win a 1v1 if another unit provides the sight range for a long range shot. If you see you get rushed, you should immediately pull back your Jacksons and get Riflemen close for snaring.

And a solution would be to make the M10 Wolverine non doctrinal. Seriously, I wouldn't mind having it as a stock unit instead of the Jackson. It costs nothing, you can spam it and it's seriously perfect in every aspect. You don't even have to change it. Spam it, roll over the enemy, replace casualties. What's 80 fuel lost?

But then USF would have nothing to defend against heavy tanks. The M10 does not pen reliably. I don't have the pen values atm, but I think it even has some trouble against an OKW P4 (this is just gut feeling from the very few times I've used it, if someone can provide the numbers that would be great).

- - -USF- - -
M10 has 180/160/140
M10 with high pen 250/225/200
Jack has 260/240/220
Jack with high pen 300/280/250

Sher76 140/130/120
E8 200/165/155
Pershing 260/240/220

- - -Other TD- - -
FF has 260/240/220
Jadpz4 has 200/185/170
SU85 has 240/220/200

- - -Premium Med- - -
Comet 210/190/170
Panther 260/240/220
T34/85 160/140/120

As you said yourself, 15% at max range. I want to believe that the bounce rate is reduced as the P4 gets closer. As for the caliber statement, I replied to the other guy that said that vehicles lighter than P4 don't always penetrate the Jackson. It has some armor, not paper armor. Moving on.

3-4 Shrek shots are enough to take down a Jackson. The problem is that the games I play are a blob shitshow from both sides. Enemy brings armor, I respond with Jacksons, he then brings AT equipped squads and I fall back while holding him with my infantry. Still not enough to stop them sometimes.

Yeah, the Jackson is fast, but if you have 1-2 and the enemy rushes you with 2-3 P4s and is focused on taking them down, he won't back down until he destroys the Jacksons. Plus, if you find it difficult to destroy a Jackson with a P4, you have alternatives. And if you don't, then use P4s and go up close and personal. If you can't take it down from far away, get close. Jackson is nothing more than a sniper. Good from afar, mediocre if you get close. This is how I see it.

And a solution would be to make the M10 Wolverine non doctrinal. Seriously, I wouldn't mind having it as a stock unit instead of the Jackson. It costs nothing, you can spam it and it's seriously perfect in every aspect. You don't even have to change it. Spam it, roll over the enemy, replace casualties. What's 80 fuel lost?

It very much reads like your issues with the jacksons vulnerability lies entirely with micro issues. The Jackson has 60 range. Meaning if a p4 is hitting, let alone with less than a max range snap shot you fucked up. Similarly if 35 range infantry are getting into a range nearly half that of your jacksons operating range you fucked up.
If the enemy is pushing with multiple p4s and all you have to stop then is a single Jackson and no even the micro to get it out you fucked up.
The only scenario where your Jackson should actually be a threat of dying is if you fuck up HARD since even a single p4 punching through is more likley than the to dies itself than kill a single Jackson. The same is not true of course for a single medium breaking through against a *insert quite LITERALLY any single other TD in the entire game here* because the Jackson is over buffed and poorly designed.

It very much reads like your issues with the jacksons vulnerability lies entirely with micro issues. The Jackson has 60 range. Meaning if a p4 is hitting, let alone with less than a max range snap shot you fucked up. Similarly if 35 range infantry are getting into a range nearly half that of your jacksons operating range you fucked up.
If the enemy is pushing with multiple p4s and all you have to stop then is a single Jackson and no even the micro to get it out you fucked up.
The only scenario where your Jackson should actually be a threat of dying is if you fuck up HARD since even a single p4 punching through is more likley than the to dies itself than kill a single Jackson. The same is not true of course for a single medium breaking through against a *insert quite LITERALLY any single other TD in the entire game here* because the Jackson is over buffed and poorly designed.

Losing a P4 to a Jackson is also about mistake. Diving with a P4 is about using the environment and shot blockers, using their Vet1 blitz and potential smoke pot if you have the doctrine. Now if you like to play on redball express that's for sure going to be a problem but any 1vs1 and 2vs2 maps give ways to close the distance on long range TDs.

But there is also something important to notice, Pz4 aren't meant to counter Jackson first hand. They can for sure but they are not counter.

...
The Jackson should absolutely dominate a p4. 4 shots 100% penetration. There is no reason why it shouldn't, it's singular purpose is that alone.
...

That is simply incorrect. The purpose of the unit is to counter Super heavies, not "absolutely dominate" mediums.

(edited since to make it more clear since some people like to repeat the same argument.)

Losing a P4 to a Jackson is also about mistake. Diving with a P4 is about using the environment and shot blockers, using their Vet1 blitz and potential smoke pot if you have the doctrine. Now if you like to play on redball express that's for sure going to be a problem but any 1vs1 and 2vs2 maps give ways to close the distance on long range TDs.

But there is also something important to notice, Pz4 aren't meant to counter Jackson first hand. They can for sure but they are not counter.

Losing a p4to the equally fast but 50% higher ranged guaranteed to pen TD is much more reasonable.

Why is the Jackson supposed to guaranteed counter the p4 even on defense, even if caught out of position, even if flanked but EVERY SINGLE other TD in the game isn't supposed to survive let alone possibly win getting caught out? The answer is because the Jackson is over performing and poorly designed.

That is simply incorrect. The purpose of the unit is to counter Super heavies not mediums.

This is simply incorrect. The purpose of the unit is to counter heavies and meds, because faction lacks intermediate medium AT vehicle which all other factions except UKF got.

Losing a p4to the equally fast but 50% higher ranged guaranteed to pen TD is much more reasonable.

Why is the Jackson supposed to guaranteed counter the p4 even on defense, even if caught out of position, even if flanked but EVERY SINGLE other TD in the game isn't supposed to survive let alone possibly win getting caught out? The answer is because the Jackson is over performing and poorly designed.

I don't think anyone reasonable even denies the Jackson being OP. It's just the most diehard USF fanboys that claim the Jackson is fine as it is. The more complicated question is how to nerf it without crippling USF.

Whatever is done the Jackson really needs to get some sort of weakness because as of right now it just feels like a completely brainless unit. Almost all units in COH2 have some sort of strength and weakness but this concept somehow doesn't apply to the Jackson.

Nerfing its armour as was suggested by the OP seems reasonable because then at least P4s and Pumas penetrate it. It's simply crazy that even if you manage to dive a wounded Jackson with a P4 you might still bounce shots and be denied the kill. Meanwhile every P4 diving wounded Fireflys or SU85s has an easy time finishing them off.

This is simply incorrect. The purpose of the unit is to counter heavies and meds, because faction lacks intermediate medium AT vehicle which all other factions except UKF got.

I suggest opening a dictionary and find the difference between "absolutely dominate" and counter.

I also suggest that drop your little crusade of trying to prove everything I post as wrong, it is not going well for you.

Losing a p4to the equally fast but 50% higher ranged guaranteed to pen TD is much more reasonable.

Why is the Jackson supposed to guaranteed counter the p4 even on defense, even if caught out of position, even if flanked but EVERY SINGLE other TD in the game isn't supposed to survive let alone possibly win getting caught out? The answer is because the Jackson is over performing and poorly designed.

Try to dive an equivalently wounded Panther with a sherman and let me know. Pz4 are also doing just fine overextending once vet1 and blitz activated, even get a second panic button with doctrine if required.

I'm not saying Jackson isn't OP, but what you expose here isn't really what makes it OP. What makes it OP is the need to fulfill 2 roles, countering medium tanks and countering heavy tanks.
We'd all love to have a solution to make it more dedicated to one or the other role but that's not possible until Relic move on and bring a solution on USF roaster.

...
I'm not saying Jackson isn't OP, but what you expose here isn't really what makes it OP. What makes it OP is the need to fulfill 2 roles, countering medium tanks and countering heavy tanks.
We'd all love to have a solution to make it more dedicated to one or the other role but that's not possible until Relic move on and bring a solution on USF roaster.

No what makes it OP is that it is OP in both roles. It is OP vs mediums (being able to hit and penetrate with very high chance even at 60 range and moving) and it is OP vs super heavies. Part of the reason why super heavies where buffed was that TDs where OP against them in large, while one could start by nerfing these TDs.

And thing become even worse with veterancy.

The "theory" the USF roaster is the issue hold no water. There many solution of nerfing the M36 that would probably cause little issues. Reverting the gun changes could be an "safe" solution making the M36 less effective vs mediums.

Try to dive an equivalently wounded Panther with a sherman and let me know. Pz4 are also doing just fine overextending once vet1 and blitz activated, even get a second panic button with doctrine if required.

I'm not saying Jackson isn't OP, but what you expose here isn't really what makes it OP. What makes it OP is the need to fulfill 2 roles, countering medium tanks and countering heavy tanks.
We'd all love to have a solution to make it more dedicated to one or the other role but that's not possible until Relic move on and bring a solution on USF roaster.

The panther=/= the Jackson. Different roles, one of the roles of the panther is specifically not to be beat head on by medium tanks. Thats factored into its cost and reflected in its vet and performance.

The Jackson and usf as a whole would function absolutely fine if the Jackson was tuned to be a heavy TD and the medium tank counters were buffed slightly. What's more, the usf have what 2 commanders that don't have a medium AT option? You would have to go out of your way to struggle against medium armour as usf without the Jackson filling that role.

What's more, the Jackson fills that role AND heavy AT without even needing its HVAP which is just a huge bonus that further presses its over effeciency in its current state.

The m10 should be the unit to chase and dive. Jackson shouldn't be able to chase any better than a SU85 or firefly can.

IMO nerf the Jackson turret rotation, give it moving accuracy on par with other TDs and revert the price change to make it slightly cheaper.

You're listing what has been purposely balanced to be supportive to tanks in their battle, for each factions.
But if you're so much in the theory that ATgun and Infantry AT are enough to counter mediums, why don't you apply your own logic and use ATgun and pgshrek and mines vs Jackson. What the purpose of this thread in fact, If Pz4 bounce once every 8-9 shots, where were your atgun and pgshrek group to seal the deal? enlight us.

Because the Jackson has 60 range. Wtf dude that's like the first thing we've described and you've suddenly "forgotten" it again.

AT gun + Infantry AT does in fact counter medium battle tanks, as it should. But the Jackson isn't a medium battles tank. It's a 60 range high pen tank destroyer which somehow has the speed, acceleration, and rotation of a medium tank. That's the whole issue that all the competent players are screaming at you about and you're pretending not to get it. Medium tanks have 35?/40? range, which allows an AT gun to sit comfortably out of danger when shooting the medium tank.


The Jackson simply can't be countered - Jackson hits p4 from 60 range. P4 can't return fire. Raketen needs to be 5 range ahead of the frontline and PAK40 needs to be directly in the frontline to hit the Jackson. Good luck trying that against vetted double BAR riflemen who decrew the rak before it even manages to set up and aim. Panzershrecks being a counter to Jacksons only applies in Stalingrad or at CODGUY ranks. 30 range, 4-man team needs to waltz in 30 distance past enemy infantry, HMGs, and mainline battle tanks like T34s and Shermans (assuming that the Jackson somehow doesn't move), just to scratch the Jackson? In your opinion that makes the Jackson totally counterable.

Actual medium tanks get countered by AT guns and AT infantry - P4 fires from 35?/40? range. Allied AT gun fires at it from 60 range away. P4 can't attack the AT gun without closing at least 20 distance, which leaves it vulnerable to snares, enemy tanks, infantry AT, and makes it super hard to escape from the situation because you have now moved forward 20 distance.

I don't understand why you keep insisting that the two situations are even remotely comparable.

The whole reason the Jackson is too OP right now is that it's a high pen tank destroyer with the mobility stats of a medium tank.

The counters to medium tanks (AT Guns, AT infantry) only counter the Jackson at rank 500+ where people only retreat their Jacksons after leaving it on the frontline for 30 seconds.

The counter to tank destroyers like SU85 and JP4 (basically flanking) doesn't work on the Jackson because it has the mobility of a medium tank. Again, the stand-still-for-30-seconds-rule doesn't apply at higher elo levels.

Escaping from SU85/JP4/Firefly is easy because all you need to do is reverse. Escaping from the Jackson is difficult because it moves like a medium tank and can keep chasing after you as long as it has vision.

^and that's without even taking into account the bonus moving accuracy meaning chasing a Jackson actually puts the Jackson at an even greater advantage. Being able to run and fight alone is a power only the Jackson has (in the realm of 60 range TDs) but doing so more effectively to boot is just the icing on the cake. Whoda thought designing a unit with every advantage needed to survive being squishy and then making it not with nearly no proper changes leaves a powerhouse that defies balance....

The Jackson and usf as a whole would function absolutely fine if the Jackson was tuned to be a heavy TD and the medium tank counters were buffed slightly. What's more, the usf have what 2 commanders that don't have a medium AT option? You would have to go out of your way to struggle against medium armour as usf without the Jackson filling that role.

Well that's exactly what I also want but this mean buffing Sherman AT pen basically, don't forget OKW Pz4 can bully hard the actual Sherman with its armor.

That is simply incorrect. The purpose of the unit is to counter Super heavies not mediums.

By your logic, a Panther is there to counter heavies.
So it ought to 100% lose vs a Stuart? As a Panther's purpose is not to counter scout vehicles

Well that's exactly what I also want but this mean buffing Sherman AT pen basically, don't forget OKW Pz4 can bully hard the actual Sherman with its armor.

I wonder how he explains Elefant

"Jackson is op, but Elefant isn't ?" they have almost the same pop.

By your logic, a Panther is there to counter heavies.
So it ought to 100% lose vs a Stuart? As a Panther's purpose is not to counter scout vehicles

It's a bit of a stretch the equate LVs to Mediums.

Mediums should have a decent chance against "Heavy TDs", but LVs just don't have the HP, Armor, Pen or damage to really deal with them.

As for the Panther being a counter to heavies and mediums; it's the only choice for OST. They don't have access to 60 range, high-pen TDs (excluding the Ele), so the 220-pen (at 45 range) panther is the best they have. The STuGs 170pen at 50-range just isn't going to work against the IS2's 375 (or 340 in the winter test patch) front armor.

The panther is supposed to be a medium counter, but its being forced to counter heavies as well. If we gave OST a JP4 (or similar), the panther could be nerfed a lot, since it wouldn't need to fill every roll at the same time.

I wonder how he explains Elefant

"Jackson is op, but Elefant isn't ?" they have almost the same pop.

There's more to consider than just pop, or even cost. The ele does have incredible range, front armor, HP, and even LOS (when using scopes), but it's also a slow, case-mate TD with a low rate of fire and nearly zero cannon traversal. Just about anything on tracks/wheels can flank the ele, since its turn rate is so slow, and two of just about anything can charge it head on, since the RoF is incredibly low (you might lose one tank, but the other will get behind it).

The only way to get the most out of the ele is by essentially having half of your units dedicated to defending it, which means your offense is going to be pretty weak.

If we copy+pasted the Ele's movement stats (ac/de-celleration, speed, rotation) onto the M36, it would be an awful unit; going from almost certainly over-powered (current) to probably the worst unit in the game.

By your logic, a Panther is there to counter heavies.

Yes the Panther is to counter Super heavies (but it not very good at it)

So it ought to 100% lose vs a Stuart? As a Panther's purpose is not to counter scout vehicles

That is simply a mental gymnastics. It has been argued that M36 should "absolutely dominate" PzIV and I simply pointed that the claim is false.