How to reducing USF's reliance on Jackson

News flash.
This all had been discussed 256 times before. With our without insulting, with our without stats. The only arising pattern is that one side is stubborn and the other illogical.

The only difference this time is that an allied player brought it this time.

The simplest solution might just be to have M4A3 Sherman get a Vet 2 or 3 HVAP ability similar to Jackson but with less penetration? So it would fire slower but have a higher Penetration chance - this would allow Shermans to scale and take on OKW P4s and medium-high armor units more reliably but not as capably as Jackson. Of course this opens a can of worms on what to do with Easy 8 and 76MM due to overlap even though they have either own perks but such is the state of USF.

The simplest solution might just be to have M4A3 Sherman get a Vet 2 or 3 HVAP ability similar to Jackson but with less penetration? So it would fire slower but have a higher Penetration chance - this would allow Shermans to scale and take on OKW P4s and medium-high armor units more reliably but not as capably as Jackson. Of course this opens a can of worms on what to do with Easy 8 and 76MM due to overlap even though they have either own perks but such is the state of USF.

There is nothing simply in making the Sherman a better versions of Ostwind and PzIV once they hit vet 2 while being being cheaper than PzIV.

The USF Sherman really doesn't need better AT. It's already the best medium tank in the game.

The reason the Jackson struggles to coexist with the premium AT Shermans (M4C and Easy Eight) is because the Jackson is good at close range: it's got maneuverability, moving accuracy, a decent rate of fire and a turret. You can use it as a sniper and a brawler, so it occupies a lot of design space.

If you want it to be a sniper tank like the Firefly and SU-85 (therefore making more design space for the E8 and M4C) you need to somehow cripple it at close range.

The hard part is how.

» If you put it back down to 480 health, then it gets two-tapped by the Elefant.
» If you take away its maneuverability, then it's not really the Jackson any more.
» If you cut its rate of fire, you make it vulnerable to being out DPSed at close range but also make it worse in a long range fight.

...
If you want it to be a sniper tank like the Firefly and SU-85 (therefore making more design space for the E8 and M4C) you need to somehow cripple it at close range.

The hard part is how.
...

You can not simply NOT make a sniper tank and lower its long range performance so that is does not get a chance to hit and penetrate everything at at range 60 with a nearly 100% chance.

You can not simply NOT make a sniper tank and lower its long range performance so that is does not get a chance to hit and penetrate everything at at range 60 with a nearly 100% chance.

Making the Jackson a sniper tank is easy. You just have to change it such that it has to use its range advantage to win battles. See the Firefly and SU-85 for good examples of how to do that.

The hard part is doing that in a way that doesn't have far reaching and unpredictable consequen

It's a keystone unit for USF and any changes to it will have huge repercussions. It's understandable why the balance team is so hesitant to change it when each patch might be the last.

Making the Jackson a sniper tank is easy. You just have to change it such that it has to use its range advantage to win battles. See the Firefly and SU-85 for good examples of how to do that.

The hard part is doing that in a way that doesn't have far reaching and unpredictable consequen

It's a keystone unit for USF and any changes to it will have huge repercussions. It's understandable why the balance team is so hesitant to change it when each patch might be the last.

1) M36 is being OP for 3 years now (and I was pointing out even during the preview)...

2) If one want to stick with a "sniper" design why has to simply apply similar logic with "sniper":
Reduce mobility since a sniper is not faster than infatry
Use an inverted DPS profile similar to sniper DPS profile reducing ROF (or even accuracy and penetration) so that unit is an disadvantage when in close range

3) But there is little reason to use a "sniper" design since the part of the problem is that in the current implementation the unit has the mobility to stay at max range and little reason to move closer since its DPS is very high at max range and improves very little at closer range.

4) Having a units with the mobility of the M36, the accuracy of the M36 even on the move, the penetration of M36 at even at max range and DPS of the M36 is simply bad design. Something has to change.

1) M36 is being OP for 3 years now...

2) If one want to stick with a "sniper" design why has to simply apply similar logic with "sniper":
Reduce mobility since a sniper is not faster than infatry
Use an inverted DPS profile similar to sniper DPS profile reducing ROF (or even accuracy and penetration) so that unit is an disadvantage when in close range

3) But there is little reason to use a "sniper" design since the part of the problem is that in the current implementation the unit has the mobility to stay at max range and little reason to move closer since its DPS is very high at max range and improves very little at closer range.

The Jackson performs like I'd expect a dedicated tank destroyer to at long range. I've got no complaints there.

The problem is the Jackson also has solid performance close up, which constitutes a big increase to its 1v1 power. Fireflies and SU-85s need to play much more defensively because even a Panzer IV can kill them if it gets a good angle on them.

The Jackson's fast rotation and solid rate of fire let it brawl with mediums on even terms, allowing it to play much more aggressively. You can dive into a base to secure a kill with a Jackson. That'd be madness with an SU-85 or Firefly.

AT-options for USF:

Bazooka, RE stun mine, Stuart,

with that logic even rifleman granade is AT, IT CAN KiLl KuBel !

The Jackson performs like I'd expect a dedicated tank destroyer to at long range. I've got no complaints there.

At vet 3 autofire
338/312/286
0.065/0.059/0.046
and 5 sec ROF
(Although someone did suggest a 375 far penetration on the M36 at vet 3 with 7 ROF...)

and HAVP
200
390/364/325
0.078/0.065/0.052
and 5.5 sec ROF

it performing superior to most AT weapons

The problem is the Jackson also has solid performance close up, which constitutes a big increase to its 1v1 power. Fireflies and SU-85s need to play much more defensively because even a Panzer IV can kill them if it gets a good angle on them.

The Jackson's fast rotation and solid rate of fire let it brawl with mediums on even terms, allowing it to play much more aggressively. You can dive into a base to secure a kill with a Jackson. That'd be madness with an SU-85 or Firefly.

This is only part of the problem. The M36 perform great at max range and has even little trouble even if caught out of position while performing equally good.

It has the accuracy to hit even small vehicles and the penetration to penetrate heavily armored vehicles.

The design is basically flawed and on top of that it has some great AI vehicles to support like M4A3 and the Scott.

As I have pointed out the M4A3+M36 combo is simply too good leaving little room for other versions of the Sherman and little reason for one opponent to even built PzIVs.

No. The solution is not to replace the Jackson with something as good or better, why? Because it is not that the faction units are bad, the Jackson simply has a higher performance than all other TDs, said in vulgar terms it is simply OP.

Could just make the 76mm Sherman non-doc. Nobody uses it in Mechanized anyways.

You can not simply NOT make a sniper tank and lower its long range performance so that is does not get a chance to hit and penetrate everything at at range 60 with a nearly 100% chance.

+1 on simply reducing the jackson long range (not medium nor close) range performance. It could use a range reduction also because it can now receive a pounding. It is no longer the glass cannon it was

Could just make the 76mm Sherman non-doc. Nobody uses it in Mechanized anyways.

vipper suggested this along a few adjustments in another recent thread

vipper suggested this along a few adjustments in another recent thread

Vipper suggested replacing the M4A3 with the 76mm, as well as heavily nerfing the 76mm to the point where I believe it would be entirely useless*.

I think certain things like changing the MG upgrade to the standard USF one would be nice, and that the ROF for the main shells should be looked at, but overall his idea was terrible IMO.



*(Having an AT tank singularly capable of dealing with a vet 0 Ostheer Panzer IV solves exactly 0 issues in the USF AT roster considering a supported M4A3 can mostly do the same thing while not being completely useless versus infantry. USF would have been gaining 20 penetration on their medium tanks at max range for the cost of HE shells, -5 close range penetration, and 10 extra fuel a pop, leaving the player with a more expensive but less useful tank that still can't deal with OKW/vet 2 Ost P4s, Panthers, or etc, and that is also now inferior to every other medium tank in terms of AI ability.)

Due to sparse time, I could not follow the complete discussion, but I'd like to chime in with an idea that at least recently has not been made:

Why not just nerf the Jacksons mobility? I actually don't see much reason why the Jackson has to be as mobile as it is. High pen, yes, very good reasons for that. High ROF, also reasonable. But high mobility? USF ATG is as mobile as every other ATG in the game, then they have highly mobile Bazooka squads. The only reason why the Jackson "should" be able to scoot around the battlefield like it does today is to fit everything to the mobile design of USF.

Now I don't want to make it as slow as a Churchill or something, but what about SU85/Firefly level (from 6,5 to approx 5,5) and also a bit slower rotation?

It would bring it quite close to the Firefly then design wise, but that would make the Jackson more susceptible to dives and flanks while keeping the very much needed offensive capabilities. At the moment it can drive away from a P4 (P4 speed is 6,3 for OST and 6,0 for OKW version), at least that should not be possible.

I think the simplest way to lessen the need for the Jackson is to adjust the M1's AP Rounds ability.

1.8x Penetration instead of 1.5x.
Reload speed x.8 (1.25x as long)
Cost to 20mu

This doesn't affect its performance vs anything lighter than an OKW Pz4, but makes it more able to fight off heavily-armored enemies. Having a downside (slowing rate of fire) gives it a new option to be counterplayed.
Decreased cost makes it more reliable, and makes up for the ability giving enemy lights and mediums an opportunity.

Some Stats:
Far range at vet 3, penetration is 304 with 1.8x, 253 at 1.5x, 169 by default. Pak40 is 247. Tiger armor is 300, Panther is 260-286
Ability lowers M1 reload speed close to the Pak40's.

Where does this idea come from that USF has no at-options outside of the M36 when they have virtually the same AT-capabilities as all other factions?

It comes from people who are only comparing vehicles. Stuart is the next best stock AT vehicle after Jackson

Imo the Comet should be on your list. Yes it can fight infantry but it absolutely spanks anything lesser than a Panther

Jackson would be better if it still had 480hp and 200 damage (without hvap) and longer reload, keeping it as anti-heavy tank. Then take one of the many suggestions involving a 76mm upgrade for Sherman and go from there

At the moment there is no point is building anything but a jackson first as, in team games, pantehrs and tigers are what you are going to be facing a lot of the time. Why have to use massed Shermans that have to flank behind a panther and risk being insta killed by Pzgrens and AT behind it.