Jackson a discussion and compariosn

It is RNG yes, but my point was the penetration needs a serious buff.

lol it needs definitely no buff
jacksons are deadly with some micro. If you see jacksons, stop building stugs, panzer IV and ostwinds.

Still isn't it the reason people rush the M36 into enemy tanks is to get maximum penetration power? Buffing penetration would make it so that people will start attacking from long range right? The penetration for the M#6 should be 200/180/160 short-long. At long range it can even bounce off a panzer IV.... It should penetrate all those mediums except panther perfectly.

HVAP does just fine and at Vet 3 with HVAP it has 0 problems. In fact if it was more mobile it could get behind the heavies where they have weaker armor.

I use dual M10s and since it costs little more and they only have slightly worse penetration and are cheaper i.e. vet faster you can survive this

2 M10s means they can survive 6 hits as a pair. 3 hits each. The Jackson can survive 3 hits. It will get blitzed on. Extra Penetration will not save you from a Puma or Blitzing P4/Panther.

Really with lackluster HPs and Mobility it might as well be a casemate tank like the SU85. There is no room to maneuver the thing and escaping is a challenge.

It has no AI either like brought up in another post with no AI no armor and no HPs unlike an Elephant/JagdTiger/JP4 its range doesnt amount to much because it WILL get chased down and destroyed quite easily.

Its a high value target. Its both expensive and the easiest dedicated Tank Destroyer in game to kill.

It either needs to be able to easily escape situations (mobility) or its needs more HPs to survive so it can for it to be an asset and not a liability.

Raise the cost 10 fuel and give it 640 HPs for all I care. It requires more surviability more then anything else right now.

lol it needs definitely no buff
jacksons are deadly with some micro. If you see jacksons, stop building stugs, panzer IV and ostwinds.

Smoke Plus Blitz P4 will destroy a Jackson easily.

Conversly if there are Pgrens or Paks stop building Jacksons it goes both ways.

Half of the Jackson's problem is the lack of open maps in the 1v1 pool. Very hard to take advantage of its range when everything is buildings and corners...

Half of the Jackson's problem is the lack of open maps in the 1v1 pool. Very hard to take advantage of its range when everything is buildings and corners...

this

plus the fact that 80% of your attention is forced on babysitting this one unit, the rest of your neglected army is eating grenades and getting flanked

When you consider the cost and what you get for it Jackson is in good spot where it is right now. It's a glass cannon by definition and definately one needs to learn how to use it.

When you consider the cost and what you get for it Jackson is in good spot where it is right now. It's a glass cannon by definition and definately one needs to learn how to use it.

Not really. I don't think one US player would complain if the Jackson was replaced by a plain vanilla heavy tank instead. The Jackson simply have too few advantages compared to how hard it is to use effectively.

HVAP does just fine and at Vet 3 with HVAP it has 0 problems. In fact if it was more mobile it could get behind the heavies where they have weaker armor.

I use dual M10s and since it costs little more and they only have slightly worse penetration and are cheaper i.e. vet faster you can survive this

2 M10s means they can survive 6 hits as a pair. 3 hits each. The Jackson can survive 3 hits. It will get blitzed on. Extra Penetration will not save you from a Puma or Blitzing P4/Panther.

Really with lackluster HPs and Mobility it might as well be a casemate tank like the SU85. There is no room to maneuver the thing and escaping is a challenge.

It has no AI either like brought up in another post with no AI no armor and no HPs unlike an Elephant/JagdTiger/JP4 its range doesnt amount to much because it WILL get chased down and destroyed quite easily.

Its a high value target. Its both expensive and the easiest dedicated Tank Destroyer in game to kill.

It either needs to be able to easily escape situations (mobility) or its needs more HPs to survive so it can for it to be an asset and not a liability.

Raise the cost 10 fuel and give it 640 HPs for all I care. It requires more surviability more then anything else right now.

Then the mobility should be the one to buff. I just tried it and felt that slow acceleration mentioned. Acceleration buff is needed. That thing is like a KT upon moving.

I don't play USF, but as an OKW player who has lost plenty of Panthers while trying to hunt down a Sherman, only to be surprised by a Jackson supporting from the rear, I agree with some of the earlier posts that recommend this strategy. Keep your Sherman(s) alive until you have a Jackson on the field. Don't let him see the Jackson until its too late.

I used to lose too many Jacksons because I didn't use them properly. I found that If I hold fire with them and I use them as tank snipers covering the Shermans and other units spotting for them they are really good at killing tanks without receving damage. You have to shoot tanks with them, don't let them shoot infantry or you're wasting fire power.

You have to be very careful though because they're really weak to enemy AI squads and heavy Axis tanks. They need spotters to make their best and shermans serve this role. I even use PathFinders to spot for them sometimes.

I used to lose too many Jacksons because I didn't use them properly. I found that If I hold fire with them and I use them as tank snipers covering the Shermans and other units spotting for them they are really good at killing tanks without receving damage. You have to shoot tanks with them, don't let them shoot infantry or you're wasting fire power.

You have to be very careful though because they're really weak to enemy AI squads and heavy Axis tanks. They need spotters to make their best and shermans serve this role. I even use PathFinders to spot for them sometimes.

That's why this game desperately need an "infantry/vehicles only" button!

HVAP does just fine and at Vet 3 with HVAP it has 0 problems. In fact if it was more mobile it could get behind the heavies where they have weaker armor.

I use dual M10s and since it costs little more and they only have slightly worse penetration and are cheaper i.e. vet faster you can survive this

2 M10s means they can survive 6 hits as a pair. 3 hits each. The Jackson can survive 3 hits. It will get blitzed on. Extra Penetration will not save you from a Puma or Blitzing P4/Panther.

Really with lackluster HPs and Mobility it might as well be a casemate tank like the SU85. There is no room to maneuver the thing and escaping is a challenge.

It has no AI either like brought up in another post with no AI no armor and no HPs unlike an Elephant/JagdTiger/JP4 its range doesnt amount to much because it WILL get chased down and destroyed quite easily.

Its a high value target. Its both expensive and the easiest dedicated Tank Destroyer in game to kill.

It either needs to be able to easily escape situations (mobility) or its needs more HPs to survive so it can for it to be an asset and not a liability.

Raise the cost 10 fuel and give it 640 HPs for all I care. It requires more surviability more then anything else right now.

I think, with 640 hp, you get a unit, with SU 85 hp, SU 85 range, WITH turret - faster rotation, good speed, acceleration/dec, very good penetration with HVAP and vet, and 240 (1,5x) damage. I dont think, on hand a player with good micro, would be balanced vs axis tank, maybe, a smoke addition, for 30-45 muni price, if really need something.

Tbh, the jackson is a very good tank destroyer when microed properly and plus it has a turret and plus it comes in a tier that also has M4 shermans and scotts, making it good combined arms.

Compared to the su-85, which has less speed, no turret, less damage and comes in a tier that is completely inflexible.

The thing that really needs some fixing, is wehrmacht and soviet T4, both are pretty bad.

WM t4 is with current Panther price/power ratio with a lots doctrine with better allround Tiger/ better AT dedicated Elephant, need buff or cheaper Panther, yes. I feel SU t4 not bad at all, maybe SU 85 need a bit more frontal armor, but with cheap, spammable SU 76, Area punisher Katyusha, and SU 85 is seems to me a good package.

I think, with 640 hp, you get a unit, with SU 85 hp, SU 85 range, WITH turret - faster rotation, good speed, acceleration/dec, very good penetration with HVAP and vet, and 240 (1,5x) damage. I dont think, on hand a player with good micro, would be balanced vs axis tank, maybe, a smoke addition, for 30-45 muni price, if really need something.

This may be true. Which is why it should have the mobility of the M10. Remember the M10 isnt as mobile as the Puma. And people still lose Pumas. All the arguments of the greatness of the M36 seem to be its range/mobility.

But the range of the Panther could be used to argue how great the Panther is right (after all the Jackson only has 10 more) ? And everybody thinks the Panther is lack luster. But it gets over 800HPs has great armor, range is slightly less, has Blitz can get smoke etc etc etc etc etc and the Panther isnt considered good.

Make the Jackson cost as much as a Panther I dont care. If they want to buff it up to 640HPs. It still wont have an MG upgrade. It still wont have Blitz, Smoke, High armor (even higher with Vet). It would still be worse off then the Panther.

If TD doctrine was what made USF armor special and gave them the edge then shouldnt they have the VERY best unquestionably the best TD? Because I can do better with Panthers. Simple tank a few hits retreat repair do this enough times until you get Vet then go on a rampage. This doesnt work for a Jackson.

The Panther after all can bounce Bazookas, Snare attempts and AT gun rounds. The Jackson cannot and should not.

All this can be done with a Panther AND they can access heavies to boot. Playing USF right now is like saying THE BEST YOU CAN GET is an unarmored half dead Panther. Imagine if that was all Ost had to use.

Jackson's turret do not have "roof", right? So why some guy can not stand up and use binoculars to increase sight? Just an idea.

Not really. I don't think one US player would complain if the Jackson was replaced by a plain vanilla heavy tank instead. The Jackson simply have too few advantages compared to how hard it is to use effectively.

If you want Jackson replaced than beg Relic so they implement this into the game but I wouldn't keep my hopes high as the idea of Pershing soaking the damage, followed by Jackson doing the damage from the second line gives me the nightmares.

If you want Jackson replaced than beg Relic so they implement this into the game but I wouldn't keep my hopes high as the idea of Pershing soaking the damage, followed by Jackson doing the damage from the second line gives me the nightmares.

Yes and thats the rub. Look at this logically though Oz.

A jackson as GREAT as the DPS is isnt as good as a Pak40s.

A Pak 40 can follow a Tiger. It would have even a better effect. Sure it doesnt have the front loaded damage and isnt as fast but the DPS is better.

Jacksons are a HUGE economical risk to follow a Tank but a Pak really isnt.

Yes and thats the rub. Look at this logically though Oz.

A jackson as GREAT as the DPS is isnt as good as a Pak40s.

A Pak 40 can follow a Tiger. It would have even a better effect. Sure it doesnt have the front loaded damage and isnt as fast but the DPS is better.

Jacksons are a HUGE economical risk to follow a Tank but a Pak really isnt.

This is not logical at all. You employ strategies that more are suited to the heavy tank destroyers . m36 are reactionary units behind a wall of rifleman. every time an enemy tank shows up jacksons push them back or destroy them if overextended. you do not ever pursue with a jackson.

The jackson is one of the best TD's in the game. after having plenty of practice with the puma who work along the same line you really need to understand what the jackson can and cannot due because fuck ups are not tolerated.

If you want Jackson replaced than beg Relic so they implement this into the game but I wouldn't keep my hopes high as the idea of Pershing soaking the damage, followed by Jackson doing the damage from the second line gives me the nightmares.

I don't want the Jackson replaced. I just want it in a state where it is as usable as the heavy tanks other factions have. At the moment it just plain isn't. Maybe it is on paper, but in reality it is way, way too hard to use effectively compared to the heavy tanks other factions have.

I don't want the Jackson replaced. I just want it in a state where it is as usable as the heavy tanks other factions have. At the moment it just plain isn't. Maybe it is on paper, but in reality it is way, way too hard to use effectively compared to the heavy tanks other factions have.

I think I've pinpointed your problem.

You think it should be on pair with heavy tanks.
Its not and never will be, because its not a heavy tank, its 'heavy tank' destroyer.

Spot for it and use its range and it will scare away Tigers and KTs away.