Login

russian armor

Jakson and M10

11 Nov 2014, 11:29 AM
#1
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

Hi COH2 gamers and fanboys :).

I know a big part of you feels that USF has little answer to Axis heavy armor in late game, mainly because not a strong enough AT solution, so I wanna put my 2 cents in. Please state your opinions and tell me how you think these 2 AT-dedicated units should be changed (if you think they should be changes at all). I think that a health increase is necesary or their AT capabilities need to be buffed somehow.
11 Nov 2014, 11:41 AM
#2
avatar of Stonethecrow01

Posts: 379

The only change I think regarding these two is a slight buff to the damage and penetration of the M10.

The M10 comes at 7cps and so isn't meant to be a heavy tank counter. I feel like the Tank Commander call-ons are there so you can go tier 3 heavy and still get reasonably solid tanks -> M10 + Bulldozer without teching to tier 4.

The Jackson is extremely good vs other armour, its guns already as powerful as I feel you can make it so the only options to buff it vs other armour would be to increase the armour of the Jackson itself which goes against the design of the unit.

I feel USF play similar to CoH USA, your late game involves getting a greater variety of units rather than "better" units like the axis game involves.
11 Nov 2014, 12:55 PM
#3
avatar of negativg

Posts: 24

I think acceleration increase for M36 so its more responsive (what Cruzz already did for his mod I think), and MAYBE a very SLIGHT RoF or reload speed increase.

Alternatively HP increase would be welcomed, but then it could easily become OP, as its not intended to slug it out with heavies. But now if you want to go in aggresively you may lose 1-2 then Axis heavy lolblitzes to safety with sliver of health and you are f#$%ked. And you are kind of forced into P-47s, at least in team games.
Just my opinion, maybe I am wrong :)
11 Nov 2014, 13:20 PM
#4
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1605 | Subs: 1

Uh...

Buff Jackson pen to the point when +pen ability is needed only against really heavy armored vehicles: Panther, KT, JT.

Lower M10 CP requirement by 1.
11 Nov 2014, 13:48 PM
#5
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

M10 should arrive earlier. It should have the same HP as the Jackson.

The Jackson will remain a hard* unit to use (besides 1on1) and you can't really buff** it without changing the damage per shell.

I remember certain unit which dealt the same damage per shell, but it got a reload buff and damage nerf to make it more consistent.

*It's easier to lose since you have a minor margin of error.
**A buff on pen, when using AP, is not out of mind.
11 Nov 2014, 13:48 PM
#6
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

M10 should arrive earlier. It should have the same HP as the Jackson.

The Jackson will remain a hard* unit to use (besides 1on1) and you can't really buff** it without changing the damage per shell.

I remember certain unit which dealt the same damage per shell, but it got a reload buff and damage nerf to make it more consistent.

*It's easier to lose since you have a minor margin of error.
**A buff on pen, when using AP, is not out of mind.
11 Nov 2014, 14:14 PM
#7
avatar of Lokust22

Posts: 79

You can buff these units as much as you like, but the US still won't be able to fight anyone who is around a corner.

Personally, I think the Jackson is fine (I don't use the M10, so can't comment). I think it would be more sensible if its penetration was higher and its damage was lower. The logic of a high damage low penetration shot eludes me.
11 Nov 2014, 14:26 PM
#8
avatar of Interloper

Posts: 93

If the M10 had smoke it would make it a better flanker which is what it is designed to do. Get the flank in, get those rear shots while using flanking speed and pop smoke to get out without getting killed off by supporting AT.
11 Nov 2014, 14:29 PM
#9
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1

As I said, being a dedicated AT tools, it wouldn't be wrong to buff their AP capabilities. I mean, ok, they are thin cans, but at least they need to do their job properly. This way, they are still dying fast, but they achieve their purpose. OR they need to survive longer to do their job, which means not an armor buff, but rather a health buf.
11 Nov 2014, 14:46 PM
#10
avatar of emil_fh

Posts: 28

Dont think they shoulld recieve a health buff, because IMO they ar not supposed to slug it out tank versus heavy tank. For balance I think the m10 could use some higher penetration, so it is able to consistently penetrate if flanking tanks. For m36 it seems quite good to me, wouldnt mind some better acceleration like people mention, to keep it responsive. A bit higher pen or maybe even range to make it a good sniper could be fun to try out.
11 Nov 2014, 14:49 PM
#11
avatar of sneakking

Posts: 655

Permanently Banned
Jackson, for the most part, works as intended. Maybe a slight penetration buff to it's vet 1 ability. But the M10 could use some work, I'd like to see it a little more agile/mobile to serve it's purpose better. It's not much faster than a Jackson but it preforms far less effectively. This makes it very unappealing - why get a doctrinal unit that does the job worse when you could get a non-doc unit that does the same thing better? It's role as a basic long-range TD is already fulfilled. So perhaps giving it a deceleration/acceleration buff, it would be more viable as a fast flanking unit, like the Puma. Also, maybe more line of sight, to reflect the tank's open-topped design.
11 Nov 2014, 15:17 PM
#12
avatar of Romeo
Honorary Member Badge
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1970 | Subs: 5

Jackson could use more acceleration and a buff to its AP rounds ability.

M10 needs more health and accuracy.
11 Nov 2014, 15:20 PM
#13
avatar of sneakking

Posts: 655

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post11 Nov 2014, 15:17 PMRomeo
Jackson could use more acceleration and a buff to its AP rounds ability


Why increase the Jackson's acceleration? It doesn't need to be fast if it's a TD. It just needs to be good at being a TD.
11 Nov 2014, 15:22 PM
#14
avatar of pugzii

Posts: 513

The jacksons a great tank, the issue is it dies to the volks shreck hordes to easily.
11 Nov 2014, 15:30 PM
#15
avatar of Ace of Swords

Posts: 219

Id like to see a small nerf in the jackson damage, but make it reliabily penetrate all heavy tanks, it's ridicolous to see tigers sometime getting almost oneshotted by 3 jacksons, sometimes not even a single shot penetrates.
11 Nov 2014, 15:50 PM
#16
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3602 | Subs: 1

I think the M36 deserves

Or a better penetration at any range
Or a faster reload so it shot faster.

Right know, it problems is its windows of opportunity to shot is too small, and with that shitty pen, it is kind of useless.
So or you make sure when it shots, it damages something, or you give him 2x more try to pen anything.
11 Nov 2014, 15:52 PM
#17
avatar of Romeo
Honorary Member Badge
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1970 | Subs: 5

Why increase the Jackson's acceleration? It doesn't need to be fast if it's a TD. It just needs to be good at being a TD.


To improve its ability to kite.
11 Nov 2014, 15:58 PM
#18
avatar of Spanky
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1820 | Subs: 2

Jackson is fine, i wouldn't change anything with it. M10 is fine aswell, it's an awesome tank but the downside is the crazy slow turret rotation. Vet1 gives the m10 a AP round that lasts for a few seconds, if you are lucky you can manage two shots with it and it inflicts alot of damage. Vet 2 unlocks Nitros. :D

But really, both tanks are performing as they should in my opinion.
11 Nov 2014, 16:04 PM
#19
avatar of Romeo
Honorary Member Badge
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1970 | Subs: 5

jump backJump back to quoted post11 Nov 2014, 15:58 PMSpanky
Jackson is fine, i wouldn't change anything with it. M10 is fine aswell, it's an awesome tank but the downside is the crazy slow turret rotation. Vet1 gives the m10 a AP round that lasts for a few seconds, if you are lucky you can manage two shots with it and it inflicts alot of damage. Vet 2 unlocks Nitros. :D

But really, both tanks are performing as they should in my opinion.


In 1v1. In 2v2 I really struggle to make any use of M10s. In anything higher they're completely worthless. I think increasing their survivability and reliability is the best way to round out their performance in other modes without making them too good in 1v1s.
11 Nov 2014, 16:13 PM
#20
avatar of Spanky
Senior Strategist Badge

Posts: 1820 | Subs: 2

You are right, they are fantastic in 1v1. I had a game yesterday, where me and my mate were facing 3 tigers and 1 jagdtiger. Guess what, i flanked the jagd with 6 m10's and then made toast of the 3 tigers aswell at the cost of 1 M10. :banana:
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

Germany 27
unknown 18
unknown 17
unknown 7
Canada 3

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

787 users are online: 1 member and 786 guests
aerafield
1 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49081
Welcome our newest member, kavyashide
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM