Login

russian armor

Tank Destroyer Poll

PAGES (9)down
5 Feb 2020, 16:47 PM
#101
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808



:ot: JLI are not in a sweet spot imo, they are still too strong in infantry battles. Its just nobody abuses them atm cause... tiger/ falls

i dont recommend nerfing usf main features, vehicle crews and good moving accuracy, there have to be other ways of dealing with it. As said, i think a toggle ability is the best idea ive heard so far.



as long as Jackson maintains its damage, range and penetration, it will be able to deal with heavy tanks, that's why by nerfing the other aspects that make this TD over the top should be looked at.


My take is the same as before: Give them pernament HVAP shells, meaning lower rate of fire and higher pen. Better at countering heavies and worse at countering mediums. Then make the USF M1 a copy paste of the UKF 6pdr so that it’s worse vs heavies but easier to use vs mediums.


I think this is the best and safest idea, but i bet the mod team wants to keep the uniqueness of the 57mm, as they did with the reketen
5 Feb 2020, 16:48 PM
#102
avatar of T.R. Stormjäger

Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Feb 2020, 16:45 PMLago


Tell me more about how you kill heavy tanks with smoke.


You don’t kill them with smoke, you use smoke to attack and get behind them and screen for AT infantry, AT guns and TDs.
5 Feb 2020, 16:53 PM
#103
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

You don’t kill them with smoke, you use smoke to attack and get behind them and screen for AT infantry, AT guns and TDs.


If this is a thing, why can't USF do it? They've got the most smoke in the game.
5 Feb 2020, 16:56 PM
#104
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 808



Because Jackson dives is the only stock USF option to fight heavy tanks.

Soviets have T34/76 rams.

UKF has Churchill with smoke and Comets/Cromwells with smoke shells.


jackson's dont need to dive in at heavy tanks, they easily out range them. If ur talking about elephant or jagdtiger, you can get a pair of Jackson and engage it from the front.
5 Feb 2020, 17:56 PM
#105
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 960

This discussion isn't going to be productive if previous posts are ignored. Most of these complaints/comments have been addressed pages ago.

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Feb 2020, 10:28 AMRiley
Exactly. Axis fans just want easy game. When they could crush the USF from panthers and tigers, trample on the enemy like an avalanche. But Jackson does not allow this, although it has very weak armor. They also want to remove accuracy in movement, although this is a feature of all USF tanks. Bad armor, Poor health, but good accuracy in movement.

There is not even a guarantee that in the battle Jackson vs Panzer 4, the M36 will win.


Also why do we need the P4 to perform well vs Jackson? P4 can also bleed man power vs infantry as well. Multi role tank vs hard counter TD?


What's wrong with Jackson's overwhelming P4?

Jackson is a TD and a more expensive unit than the P4


Honestly the best idea i have seen inside the dumbsterfires that are Allied TD forums. Make M36 less abusive against P4 but allow USF to survive against heavy Axis armour while giving USF reliable Anti-medium weapons that isnt the jackson.

This is a pretty good 'summary' of the problem; the M36 needs to not be the "anti-everything" solution, and instead specialize as the "anti-heavy" TD, with something else filling the roll of "anti-medium".

One idea I've been thinking of lately is swapping the M8A1 "Scott" with the M10 in the Armor Company, and then drastically increasing the price on the M36 (ex. 460mp/165f). This could fix the "overlap" between the Scott and Pak-Howie (and lower their ubiquity, at least a bit), give USF an Intermediate AT source similar to a StuG-G, and would make M36 spam less viable.

That's my suggestion.

My proposal would be to Add the M10 to the USF tech tree to fight medium spam
Nerf the Jackson’s range to 50, and give it a toggle ability to increase its range at the cost of movement speed, sort of like the SU85, maybe call it take aim?

This would allow the Jackson to focus on being a heavy killer as it won’t have to fight medium spam, as the M10 could fill that void
The toggle would allow the Jackson to remain mobile while reducing its ability kite at max range, which is the OP thing about it, and the toggle goes with the USF theme of versatility

This could also be an interesting implementation of a similar idea.



Once again, the problem isn't that the M36 can beat a P4 - that actually makes sense. The problem is that the M36 can counter literally everything efficiently. That means USF goes from no tanks to counter everything armored in one tech level and one unit. This is really, really bad design, as it means there's nothing to "spread out" USF resource invesetment.

OST for example, almost always goes T3 -> T4, which means a fair amount of resources and pop are tied up in StuG-Gs, P4s and Ostwinds; while these are good units, they're not that good against late-game heavies, like Comets, IS2s, ISU-152s, and so on. Even against late-game TDs like the SU85, they struggle.

This means that OST needs to transition to T4 (or call-ins), such as Panthers, Tigers and Eles - except they've all been delayed by the T3 investments (either due to resources or pop availability). The only way to 'avoid' this problem is by skipping T3, but that leaves OST extremely vulnerable - there's clearly an opportunity cost.

USF doesn't have this:
1. Get Major tech
2. Build M36s
3. Counter everything armored, scale infinitely

There's no opportunity cost, no trade-off; nothing.

This is why it's been suggested (Multiple times, in the above quotes) to make the M10 non-doc, and increase the M36 cost dramatically (or maybe even put it behind more tech). It means that a USF player is going to have to invest in M10s first, which don't scale infinitely into late-game. The player will need to decide between getting 'mobile AT' now, or waiting (and staying vulnerable) until M36s become available later.
5 Feb 2020, 18:11 PM
#106
avatar of Leo251

Posts: 311

This discussion isn't going to be productive if previous posts are ignored. Most of these complaints/comments have been addressed pages ago.










Once again, the problem isn't that the M36 can beat a P4 - that actually makes sense. The problem is that the M36 can counter literally everything efficiently. That means USF goes from no tanks to counter everything armored in one tech level and one unit. This is really, really bad design, as it means there's nothing to "spread out" USF resource invesetment.

OST for example, almost always goes T3 -> T4, which means a fair amount of resources and pop are tied up in StuG-Gs, P4s and Ostwinds; while these are good units, they're not that good against late-game heavies, like Comets, IS2s, ISU-152s, and so on. Even against late-game TDs like the SU85, they struggle.

This means that OST needs to transition to T4 (or call-ins), such as Panthers, Tigers and Eles - except they've all been delayed by the T3 investments (either due to resources or pop availability). The only way to 'avoid' this problem is by skipping T3, but that leaves OST extremely vulnerable - there's clearly an opportunity cost.

USF doesn't have this:
1. Get Major tech
2. Build M36s
3. Counter everything armored, scale infinitely

There's no opportunity cost, no trade-off; nothing.

This is why it's been suggested (Multiple times, in the above quotes) to make the M10 non-doc, and increase the M36 cost dramatically (or maybe even put it behind more tech). It means that a USF player is going to have to invest in M10s first, which don't scale infinitely into late-game. The player will need to decide between getting 'mobile AT' now, or waiting (and staying vulnerable) until M36s become available later.

+1
5 Feb 2020, 18:20 PM
#107
avatar of CreativeName

Posts: 281

Again, you just cant put the m10 without massive nerf or price increase into the tech tree... unless you want to completly kill ostheer in 1v1
5 Feb 2020, 18:24 PM
#108
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Feb 2020, 08:32 AMEsxile


Pls don't play the victim card. It's like you forget that USF was actually the best faction performing during the last tournament and that i already mentioned that if the Jackson hasn't been nerf yet is for the same reasons OH hasn't been buffed yet. Teamgames.

1- The damage went down, but the penetration and RoF got increased heavily. Would you rather be doing damage from 60 range reliable or having to flank tanks with 480 HP to do 240dmg per shot.
The 200dmg model didn't work because the platform it was used had 480HP. That kind of damage model require either heavier pen and/or a heavier platform (i was advocating 200dmg model for PV).

2- I never called anyone a fanboy, so don't bring it up. Anyone can make mistakes, if not we would have never seen Ostwind spam, 7 man conscripts dominating, JLI/Falls, teamgame rushing TA/Tigers requiring hotfix, etc.

3- Yeah, i'm comparing the unit to other TDs but it seems you also missed the part (might had been in another thread) where i said that the Jackson holds the faction in the lategame specially for teamgames.
Which is why i have already consider all the aspects that made the unit useless in the past.
If you start complaining about lacking features, the other 2 allied factions can easily complain as well about all the things USF already has.
Finally the big cats had been nerfed to acceptable levels, specially after losing the 2 shot capabilities and range. One of the reasons you left the Jackson OP.

Therefore the options are:

-You can't reduce HP below 640HP. Anyone who suggest this doesn't remember why it was set in that number in the beginning. It's meant to survive as other tanks 3 shots against super heavy TDs and anything below 560HP means it's not gonna be usable for teamgames.

-Cost. It's in a good spot. You can't realistically just keep increasing it.

-Moving accuracy. If possible i wouldn't touch as part of the whole "faction" feature but that's an option.

-Mobility. It's at the high end of max speed and acceleration. Acceleration was my 2nd option to touch (cause it's easier) with infinite resources and time been available and looking for ways to adjust the main gun my first but that requires more work.

-Turret rotation: i leave the slow traverse to the FF.

-Main gun. My take on this is making the HVAP vet 0 and a toggleable munition just like with the Sherman. Then make the main gun get 50 range reduce pen slightly higher RoF and the HVAP stays as slower RoF, 200 dmg and high Pen.
5 Feb 2020, 18:25 PM
#109
avatar of KiwiBirb

Posts: 789

Honestly most of armoured Company should be stock

Assault engineers for flamethrowers
M10 so that Jackson doesn’t have to counter everything
105 Sherman to counter blobs

Come to think of it,This would probably be great!
Replace armoured Company Assault engineers with Cav rifles, m10 with the Easy 8, and the bulldozer with the Scott.

Give USF m10, 105 bulldozer Sherman, and Assault engineers stock.
5 Feb 2020, 18:26 PM
#110
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 960

Again, you just cant put the m10 without massive nerf or price increase into the tech tree... unless you want to completly kill ostheer in 1v1


Ok, let's say we go with the M8 Scott <=> M10 swap, what changes would you want to see to the M10 to make it work? To me, the M10 seems comparable to the StuG-G in terms of stats. I can see how the price might be a little low, but that is adjustable.

5 Feb 2020, 18:34 PM
#111
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Ok, let's say we go with the M8 Scott <=> M10 swap, what changes would you want to see to the M10 to make it work? To me, the M10 seems comparable to the StuG-G in terms of stats. I can see how the price might be a little low, but that is adjustable.


It's a fast StuG with a turret, AP rounds and Vet 0 blitz. They buffed the shit out of it to make it doctrinally worth it.

I don't think USF needs a nondoctrinal M10. I think they just need their cheaper, 480 HP Jackson back.

That'd make it positionally counterable (fragile and so loses a close range fight like the Firefly), less dominating in builds (at 125 FU, it's cheaper to get as and when you need it), and give USF's doctrinal armour more room to breathe (the E8, M4C and M10 would then be better in close range battles).

Give the Firefly a similar fuel cut and you're golden. Stick the cut fuel back on the Tulip upgrade if Tulips are a problem.
5 Feb 2020, 18:42 PM
#112
avatar of CreativeName

Posts: 281



Ok, let's say we go with the M8 Scott <=> M10 swap, what changes would you want to see to the M10 to make it work? To me, the M10 seems comparable to the StuG-G in terms of stats. I can see how the price might be a little low, but that is adjustable.



I dont even know where to start tbh... the current m10 doc isnt played cause Pershing doc has more to offer, WC51 is still utterly broken, recon support destroys ostheer teamweapon play and despite what some people think, the usf at gun is actually decent vs ost t3 which is the most played tier in 1v1
Well and the rest of the m10 doc is kinda useless

Remove war speed or whatever its called
increase its price by atleast 20 fuel. Its currently 80 iirc?
the m10 has no problem to pen any ostheer t3 vehicle, is faster, can crush and is cheap enough to spam or trade up with evrything that isnt a 222.
You will never kill any decent played m10 with a stug that doesnt hit a mine, it gets outclassed in pretty much every way possible

I highly doubt that youd be able to adjust the m10 for the standart usf tech tree, there are endless combinations with several usf commanders that i dont even want to think about.
Pershing with m10 spam would be my first thought
5 Feb 2020, 18:44 PM
#113
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



Pls don't play the victim card. It's like you forget that USF was actually the best faction performing during the last tournament and that i already mentioned that if the Jackson hasn't been nerf yet is for the same reasons OH hasn't been buffed yet. Teamgames.

1- The damage went down, but the penetration and RoF got increased heavily. Would you rather be doing damage from 60 range reliable or having to flank tanks with 480 HP to do 240dmg per shot.
The 200dmg model didn't work because the platform it was used had 480HP. That kind of damage model require either heavier pen and/or a heavier platform (i was advocating 200dmg model for PV).

2- I never called anyone a fanboy, so don't bring it up. Anyone can make mistakes, if not we would have never seen Ostwind spam, 7 man conscripts dominating, JLI/Falls, teamgame rushing TA/Tigers requiring hotfix, etc.

3- Yeah, i'm comparing the unit to other TDs but it seems you also missed the part (might had been in another thread) where i said that the Jackson holds the faction in the lategame specially for teamgames.
Which is why i have already consider all the aspects that made the unit useless in the past.
If you start complaining about lacking features, the other 2 allied factions can easily complain as well about all the things USF already has.
Finally the big cats had been nerfed to acceptable levels, specially after losing the 2 shot capabilities and range. One of the reasons you left the Jackson OP.

Therefore the options are:

-You can't reduce HP below 640HP. Anyone who suggest this doesn't remember why it was set in that number in the beginning. It's meant to survive as other tanks 3 shots against super heavy TDs and anything below 560HP means it's not gonna be usable for teamgames.

-Cost. It's in a good spot. You can't realistically just keep increasing it.

-Moving accuracy. If possible i wouldn't touch as part of the whole "faction" feature but that's an option.

-Mobility. It's at the high end of max speed and acceleration. Acceleration was my 2nd option to touch (cause it's easier) with infinite resources and time been available and looking for ways to adjust the main gun my first but that requires more work.

-Turret rotation: i leave the slow traverse to the FF.

-Main gun. My take on this is making the HVAP vet 0 and a toggleable munition just like with the Sherman. Then make the main gun get 50 range reduce pen slightly higher RoF and the HVAP stays as slower RoF, 200 dmg and high Pen.


Did I play the victim card? M36 has been modified to be less of a flip coin unit. Neither buff nor nerfed. Actually I also liked the old version.

-Mobility change is a nerf that will impact the M36 / panther matchup.

-Main gun is just a plain buff. I don't understand how you can see it as a valid change.
5 Feb 2020, 18:56 PM
#114
avatar of Doomlord52

Posts: 960



jump backJump back to quoted post5 Feb 2020, 18:34 PMLago
It's a fast StuG with a turret, AP rounds and Vet 0 blitz. They buffed the shit out of it to make it doctrinally worth it.

I don't think USF needs a nondoctrinal M10. I think they just need their cheaper, 480 HP Jackson back.

That'd make it positionally counterable (fragile and so loses a close range fight like the Firefly), less dominating in builds (at 125 FU, it's cheaper to get as and when you need it), and give USF's doctrinal armour more room to breathe (the E8, M4C and M10 would then be better in close range battles).

Give the Firefly a similar fuel cut and you're golden. Stick the cut fuel back on the Tulip upgrade if Tulips are a problem.


I wasn't aware of the stats on those two abilities - that could cause some problems. However, they are adjustable.

As for the "480hp M36", as Elchino7 pointed out before, this is basically impossible due to team-games. At 480hp, they can be '3-shot' by heavy TDs which are common in team games, making the unit almost unusable. It also doesn't address the issue of USF going from "zero" to "Counter everything" in a single unit, or force them to diversify their resources/pop; the M36 would still need to be the counter to everything.

Remove war speed or whatever its called
increase its price by atleast 20 fuel. Its currently 80 iirc?
the m10 has no problem to pen any ostheer t3 vehicle, is faster, can crush and is cheap enough to spam or trade up with evrything that isnt a 222.
You will never kill any decent played m10 with a stug that doesnt hit a mine, it gets outclassed in pretty much every way possible

I highly doubt that youd be able to adjust the m10 for the standart usf tech tree, there are endless combinations with several usf commanders that i dont even want to think about.
Pershing with m10 spam would be my first thought


These are all good points, so supposed we made the following adjustments:

Abilities: 'Flanking Speed' removed, AP Reload from 4-4.5 to 4.5-5
Cost: 300mp/80f -> 300mp/100f (The guide on here incorrectly lists the price as 270mp/90f instead of 300mp/80f.)
Movement Speed: 7 to 6.2
Movement Accel: 3.2 to 2.2

Those changes should address the mobility issue, with it now being comparable to a P4, while also addressing the investment/trade issue.
5 Feb 2020, 19:10 PM
#115
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

As for the "480hp M36", as Elchino7 pointed out before, this is basically impossible due to team-games. At 480hp, they can be '3-shot' by heavy TDs which are common in team games, making the unit almost unusable. It also doesn't address the issue of USF going from "zero" to "Counter everything" in a single unit, or force them to diversify their resources/pop; the M36 would still need to be the counter to everything.


I don't believe USF is more dependent on its tank destroyer than any other faction. The big difference is it has one TD instead of two, so it can't have a vehicular hard counter. It needs to be able to beat everything, but it doesn't need to be able to beat everything at every range.


The teamgame slugfest problem is a very real one though. Perhaps some sort of Forward Assault timed ability that gives it 0.75 received damage but reduces its speed and locks its turret?
5 Feb 2020, 19:10 PM
#116
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Feb 2020, 18:44 PMEsxile


Did I play the victim card? M36 has been modified to be less of a flip coin unit. Neither buff nor nerfed. Actually I also liked the old version.

-Mobility change is a nerf that will impact the M36 / panther matchup.

-Main gun is just a plain buff. I don't understand how you can see it as a valid change.


-It was a buff once you understand how damage model works in the game. 240dmg and no penetration was useless because a single deflection meant you had a dead tank.
200dmg with slightly more pen didn't cut it because you need a platform like the PV to make it work, if not you get owned by medium tanks. The FF get's away with it by having Tulips to "scare" or lock down vehicles.

-I think you overblow this match up cause SU85 and FF exist already in the game.

-Because it would not be a copy paste from the current values. Let me further explain:
Normal shell: 50 range, normal accuracy, lower pen, medium RoF for a TD
AP shell: 60 range, lower accuracy (increase size on PV and other heavies), higher pen, slower RoF, 200dmg.

Right now, due to how good the main gun is, there's little reason to ever use HVAP after it forces a reload and having slower ROF.

The problem with this approach is the amount of work require to make it work.


Let me ask you some question:
-Do you think USF is fine in 1v1?
-Do you think the Jackson can be considered OP by any metric (EITHER by the unit in the faction or compared to other similar units)? Note: don't value if the unit needs to remain OP for the whole faction to be relevant.
5 Feb 2020, 19:35 PM
#117
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1484




Therefore the options are:

-You can't reduce HP below 640HP. Anyone who suggest this doesn't remember why it was set in that number in the beginning. It's meant to survive as other tanks 3 shots against super heavy TDs and anything below 560HP means it's not gonna be usable for teamgames.





Thank you!
5 Feb 2020, 20:17 PM
#118
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1



-It was a buff once you understand how damage model works in the game. 240dmg and no penetration was useless because a single deflection meant you had a dead tank.
200dmg with slightly more pen didn't cut it because you need a platform like the PV to make it work, if not you get owned by medium tanks. The FF get's away with it by having Tulips to "scare" or lock down vehicles.

-I think you overblow this match up cause SU85 and FF exist already in the game.

-Because it would not be a copy paste from the current values. Let me further explain:
Normal shell: 50 range, normal accuracy, lower pen, medium RoF for a TD
AP shell: 60 range, lower accuracy (increase size on PV and other heavies), higher pen, slower RoF, 200dmg.

Right now, due to how good the main gun is, there's little reason to ever use HVAP after it forces a reload and having slower ROF.

The problem with this approach is the amount of work require to make it work.


Let me ask you some question:
-Do you think USF is fine in 1v1?
-Do you think the Jackson can be considered OP by any metric (EITHER by the unit in the faction or compared to other similar units)? Note: don't value if the unit needs to remain OP for the whole faction to be relevant.


USF is overperforming in 1vs1 but that's not a Jackson issue. A year ago USF was performing poorly on 1vs1 and still the Jackson was there, even costing 5 fuel less.

Jackson is OP by necessity of being able to counter mediums and heavies. But Panther is exactly in the same position and both units need to be matched in that matter.
5 Feb 2020, 20:36 PM
#119
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8

What's wrong with Jackson's overwhelming P4?

Jackson is a TD and a more expensive unit than the P4

It's just absurd to compare p4 to jackson without any AI.

If your opponent's TD is strong, you can push your opponent out of infantry fights and smash your opponent's TD with anti-tank guns and grenades Panzerfaust.

Jackson's slaughter of the PZ4 is no problem at all.
It's the fault of the ost user who didn't check Jackson through the infantry to prevent that from happening.

Do you not know the Grenadier + PAK combination?
Do you have a Pz4 and can you lose it in an infantry battle?

This stupid whining, the more the article is written, the more the balance will collapse and the strategy of the game will fade.


yes, L2P issue not TD



Sorry, if its not Panther, then argument "it costs more and specializes in killing vehicles thereofre it should stomp cheaper generalist" doesn't work because reasons.
5 Feb 2020, 21:05 PM
#120
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post5 Feb 2020, 20:17 PMEsxile


USF is overperforming in 1vs1 but that's not a Jackson issue. A year ago USF was performing poorly on 1vs1 and still the Jackson was there, even costing 5 fuel less.

Jackson is OP by necessity of being able to counter mediums and heavies. But Panther is exactly in the same position and both units need to be matched in that matter.


Poorly?

https://www.coh2.org/news/92866/automatch-stats-factions-teams-and-maps
PAGES (9)down
0 user is browsing this thread:

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

989 users are online: 989 guests
1 post in the last 24h
11 posts in the last week
27 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50002
Welcome our newest member, rwintoday1
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM