The Jackson and Micro Fairness

SSWhiney at his best. You have to micro the shit out of you're fingers while the OKW or Ostheer player plays with one hand masturbating and if your lucky you come equal to him. You just need to stand still with Grens and they rape everything. Melee advantage? My ass. You come close, they rape you. Why do I need 2 x 240 MP troops to beat 1x 240 MP Grens? Bullshit.

If you're going to be completely wrong, at least be polite at the same time...

Honestly, I find Soviets/US a heck of a lot easier than Wehr (reserving judgment on OKW). Flank, stall around in buildings and as US bring out the halftrack, and you're gold- it just feels like a lot less thinking is involved.

And the Jackson will almost kill a Tiger with 4 penetrating shots, KovuTalli, not 5.

You can't "flank" something when your troops don't have the power to at least hold their ground. They get totally assraped by grens especially with lmg 42. And again, why do I need at least 2 x 240 MP units to counter a single 240 MP unit?

I have to agree with that...the Jagdpanzer IV for example has one of the most horribly pathing ever seen

Don't think so it's up to the quality of the player´s micro

I love the Jackson. In my opinion it is the best tank destroyer and borderline over powered.There should be units like the Jackson that require extra micro, if everything was easy to micro the game would get dull quickly and there'd be less room for good players to distinguish themselves. Basically... just learn to use the Jackson properly and you'll realize how strong USF late game is. Especially when combined with HE Shermans and M1919s

People just play Axis because their machinery, tanks, guns, etc. just look so awesome that you just want to play with it by looking at it and hearing the gun sound.

Don't think so it's up to the quality of the player´s micro

Yep, you tell the tank to go to a position and it goes through rare/strange ways, definetly player's micro

You can't "flank" something when your troops don't have the power to at least hold their ground. They get totally assraped by grens especially with lmg 42. And again, why do I need at least 2 x 240 MP units to counter a single 240 MP unit?

Conscripts are more than adequate until LMGs en masse start appearing, and they can most definitely stand their ground by using and abusing the German faction's difficulty in degarrisoning early on, oorah to reposition or rush houses, throwing molotovs with multiple squads in different engagements to reduce dodge chance, truesight round corners to trump Grenadiers, and sandbags to hold ground. They definitely don't need twice the numbers to stand up.

Later on when LMGs roll out, you can't tackle static grenadiers nearly so easily, but in the games I play tanks/demos/suppression/indirect fire take over the role of fighting the infantry blob. That's just the way the Soviets are designed- conscripts scale worse without PPsHs and it's not going to change, so work around this weakness.

I love the Jackson. In my opinion it is the best tank destroyer and borderline over powered.There should be units like the Jackson that require extra micro, if everything was easy to micro the game would get dull quickly and there'd be less room for good players to distinguish themselves. Basically... just learn to use the Jackson properly and you'll realize how strong USF late game is. Especially when combined with HE Shermans and M1919s

^^if it tickles your fancy you can have 2-3 jacksons with nice support and they will literally kill panthers and tigers in a volley and a half(Especially if you can get one or two of them to vet 1...)
..while having all that mobility and speed...LOL.
I agree with most ppl on this thread though it needs to not target inf at all,and THEN it would be considered Batshit overpowered™

Do you think they'll fix the Jackson, they never fixed the M10 missshot bug on COH after so many years
But anyway the Jackson is better than the M10 in COH so with experience it looks like the Jackson is really powerful

I would like to speak about Micro fairness on a separate topic cause, here again relic felt in his old balance weakness. A faction's units that can rape equal opponent units in couple of seconds, in many situation before you can even react.

You can't "flank" something when your troops don't have the power to at least hold their ground. They get totally assraped by grens especially with lmg 42. And again, why do I need at least 2 x 240 MP units to counter a single 240 MP unit?

You're bitching about Grens with one LMG/Squad when you can equip Riflemen with not 1 but "2" M1919s/BARS. LOL.

On topic though, Relic needs to fix unit priorities for Tank Destroyers, that will make it easier to micro Jacksons.

I love the Jackson. In my opinion it is the best tank destroyer and borderline over powered.There should be units like the Jackson that require extra micro, if everything was easy to micro the game would get dull quickly and there'd be less room for good players to distinguish themselves. Basically... just learn to use the Jackson properly and you'll realize how strong USF late game is. Especially when combined with HE Shermans and M1919s

I would agree if the Axis factions had similar high-skill/high-risk units they had to use for AT, but they don't.

Nothing is easier than trolling a puma around or a Panther.

I have to agree with CieZ there, I also find it borderline overpowered. In the hands of a good player I feel it's far too good for the price, but due to the high requirements in micro and skill it's probably almost useless for inexperienced players. That makes the unit pretty hard to balance.

sluzbenik - I wouldn't say the puma is really that different. It's cheaper, so it's not as extreme, but in the end it's also a high risk high reward unit.
Regarding the Panther - It's less risky to get flanked, but it's a far more expensive unit. That means it's at a much bigger risk regarding mines. You basically pay another 30% of the price of a Jackson for that lower risk. That makes it easier to handle, but also less cost-effective.

Jackson i so strong, high damage, high penetration, high range, turret, and the price it self it very good compared for example jadgp4 or SU85

Fix it's damn target priority. That's the one thing it requires. No tank destroyer has any business firing at infantry, and especially not one that's so incredibly vulnerable. Hold Fire is not enough, it just means you must micro the thing even more. That works for good players, but average ones have few solid AT options as US, while Axis have a whole bevy of easy to use ones.

Also, the OKW has a good counter to Jacksons; Pumas. No seriously, try it. It's fast as hell, kills the Jackson in 3-4 shots, is much cheaper so you can have 2, and is fast enough to dodge shots made against it, or so it seems to me. It's even good against Shermans to a lesser degree.

Yes. I think Ciez said in another thread it's a high-skill high reward unit, like the Kugel or snipers. However, we already have the veterancy system to reward high skill and good unit preservation. I think the Jackson should be more durable and do less damage to make it easier to use. Unlike early game manpower only units, losing one is just too punishing for the US because of their lack of reliable AT and the high fuel cost. OKW, on the other hand, can survive the loss of a Panther because of their shreks and pupchens. Sometimes Wehrmakt can even survive the loss of a Tiger.

The US has it's own fueless AT options between the 57mm and Bazookas. While the Bazooka is pretty much just plain worse than a Panzerschreck the 57mm is actually pretty solid with it's 70 range at Vet1. I love the US AT gun aside from the garbage penetration but you can boost it when it matters most.

I don't really like your suggestion because it basically dilutes what makes the Jackson unique. It is a glass cannon tank destroyer with a turret and superior damage. If you remove the bonus damage and buff the health then it's just an SU-85 with a turret.

I think players can adapt to it's fragility with a better front line and by learning the best spots in each map to deploy it. It will take time for players to get used to it.

If they don't want to get used to it then they can probably find some solace in the M10 Tank Destroyer. It's not actually more durable (less so actually!) but it is cheap.

I would be in favor of a "tank only targetting" mode for it.

The Americans imo has the best late game of any faction, they have versatile units and easily accessible tier's. Jackson's,bazookas, at guns, Sherman's, and at nades that always cause engine damage. Their late game strength comes from combined arms not one super unit.

The Americans imo has the best late game of any faction, they have versatile units and easily accessible tier's. Jackson's,bazookas, at guns, Sherman's, and at nades that always cause engine damage. Their late game strength comes from combined arms not one super unit.

The jackson has amazing range and should be able to easily set behind your main line and be relatively safe for even moderately skilled players with little micro. Keeping a Sherman near it for quick support and use it as the main spearhead should ensure the jackson's is not blitzed and killed. And if it is, most likely it will be a good trade since all german armor is pretty expensive. If you are constantly getting flanked from the FOW then you need a little more width in your defense or assault. vet 1 riflemen/stuart are great for the flanks at AT nading/stunning armor for your jackson to counter the blitz.

In lower elo's, if you want minimal micro on a jackson go airborne doc, drop in .50's go captain instead of LT, 57mm, stuart, sherman, jackson. You can hold down a fairly large area of the map with just a .50/57mm/jackson and a riflemen or airborne squad to support it while your Sherman stays relatively close to support assault around your main force and the stuart to harass everywhere else.

The Jackson is, for some wildly incomprehensible reason, looks like it's on the Wovlerine's chassis. It's one of the most expensive tanks in the game and goes down in three hits from an AT Gun and doesn't penetrate armour half the time.

If the maps were decently designed to allow for rapid maneuver of tanks and to allow them to flank and get behind other tanks easily before swiftly moving out of range(i.e. actual harassment) then this might not be a problem.

But the maps are not designed like that. They're designed with choke points and pathblockers which makes microing one of these things in a way that makes it work as it looks like it was meant to be designed, effectively impossible. This is already a big problem in 1v1 games to start with, it is dramatically exacerbated in team games where there is much more firepower on the field.

It needs an armour buff. It's paper thin, and while I hate to resort to the "realism" argument, the kind of fuck up Relic has done here is on par with making a Luchs as durable as a Tiger. The Jackson has much, much, much better armour - arguably on par with a Tiger I. So it's baffling to me that it's one of the weakest tanks in the game in that regard.