Pershing Madness

The jackson is fine.

The jackson is fine.

needs pen buff. thats all

Jacksons struggle vs Panthers in the first place but this is exacerbated when they are very vulnerbule to screening volks/Pak 40s, where as the Panther is hardly effected by 57 mm guns or bazookas

Jacksons are quite good vs everything other than Tank destroyers of a higher class though, but making too many will leave you vulnerable to infantry and if you don't make any tanks you will struggle with map control

3 reason why ppl believe that jackson is bad

1. blitzkrieg
2. panzershreck
3. pak 40

Its not that jackson does not matchup with OH/OKW tanks, is that OH/OKW support weapons are too good at performing AT, making it extremely risky to flank with jackson.

Honestly, blitzkrieg has no place in this game for German heavies. That's the main problem I have when playing against the Axis is that they have too many "oh shit!" buttons. I've had too many German tanks carelessly move into an AT trap to only pop smoke and blitz retreat out.

needs pen buff. thats all

If it needs something, it needs either more speed, either more health.

thats is very true and allow me to play devils advocate for a second do you think that a Persing and Jackson combination would proform the same as tiger P4 combo? in a 1v1

It would be better against armor, but unless the Pershing is OP it would be much worse against infantry. Which makes sense, P4 is a generalist tank, Jackson is a dedicated TD.

And anyway, it's not like the IS-2 and Jackson combination is breaking the 2v2 game at the moment. Don't see why it would in 1v1 at all, Jackson + Pershing would be a significant investment, and it's not like Axis lacks for powerful AT.

It would be better against armor, but unless the Pershing is OP it would be much worse against infantry. Which makes sense, P4 is a generalist tank, Jackson is a dedicated TD.

And anyway, it's not like the IS-2 and Jackson combination is breaking the 2v2 game at the moment. Don't see why it would in 1v1 at all, Jackson + Pershing would be a significant investment, and it's not like Axis lacks for powerful AT.

The 90mm gun actually had a perfectly capable HE round. If the Jackson is to be an AT gun on treads, the Puma should as well.

The 90mm gun actually had a perfectly capable HE round. If the Jackson is to be an AT gun on treads, the Puma should as well.

Can we stop talking about IRL? -___-

Can we stop talking about IRL? -___-

Nope. Relic claimed they wanted to make an "authentic" WW2 experience.

Nope. Relic claimed they wanted to make an "authentic" WW2 experience.

Authentic ≠ Realistic

Nope. Relic claimed they wanted to make an "authentic" WW2 experience.

We have Su-85s with more range than a Panther, because there´s a sticker on the vehicle that says "tank destroyer". I think we can screw realism.

Authentic ≠ Realistic

This.

Nope. Relic claimed they wanted to make an "authentic" WW2 experience.

Then keep dreaming about Jackson getting antiinfantry abilities XDDD

The Pershing will absolutely go a ways to making 2v2 viable with double Ameris. It won't change the situation in Sov/USF mixed team games because the Sov already has access to heavies to cover the Americans in the late game.

The Pershing will absolutely go a ways to making 2v2 viable with double Ameris. It won't change the situation in Sov/USF mixed team games because the Sov already has access to heavies to cover the Americans in the late game.

Having these super tanks as a whole is bad practice.


COH1 got it right when the Pershing was, out of the box, basically a Panther with better anti-infantry capability.


Relic really shot themselves in the foot when they insisted on vehicles like the ISU-152, the King Tiger and the Elephant.

Pershing isnt a "Super Tank"

People want the Pershing as a breakthrough tank. Americans don't have any. Jackson is a TD, and Sherman is a glorified infantry-muncher. USF doesn't have any meatshield tanks. The closest you get is a bulldozer Sherman hiding behind the heavy cover it builds.

Whereas we can say that most Axis tanks are brute force tanks that encourage A-moving, with EZ mode smoke + blitz to escape death, USF tanks are all finesse units. Shermans must use hit and run tactics to do damage and Jacksons have to carefully manage range at all times.

Compare this to A-moving Jagdtiger who can shoot at immense range through buildings and world terrain and take a hell of a beating.

So, yes, part of the problem is the lack of armor on both the Jackson and the Sherman. They both need armor slightly beefed up for better survivability in the absence of Allied War Machine or similar ability.

EDIT: I think it would be cool if the borderline-useless Rear Echelon squads could, with an upgrade, gain the ability to over-repair Allied armor, to maybe 130%. This would be reflected in-game visually with sandbags being welded on.

COH1 got it right when the Pershing was, out of the box, basically a Panther with better anti-infantry capability.

Which is what is what most people seem to want. Pershing wouldn't be a Super Heavy, it would be in the IS-2/Tiger mold.