What if the Jackson was the US heavy unit?

Maybe this idea has come up before, but I've never seen it. I suspect there's some reason this wouldn't work but either way, I'd like to know how it could work, or why it wouldn't.

Would it help out the US a lot if the Jackson got reworked into a well-protected, hard-hitting unit? Give it decent armor and higher penetration, and then adjusting the cost to compensate.

This would hopefully bring US late game micro more in line with the other factions as they would gain a unit that is effective without any special maneuvering (like Panthers for the Germans).

The M36 Jackson is tank destroyer. It hits really hard in its current state. It is also well protected when you support it with infantry and AT Guns. It is really heavy as it is! 29 tons to be exact.

:/

As much as i hate to say it, it would be a bad idea... Jackson DPS is scary sometimes.

But a jagdtiger is fine....

The DPS is lower then an SU85.....

I said the same thing OP its was called the Slugger which implies something similar to a boxer if your not familiar with the term. It was also the first to kill a Jagdtiger irl.

What if Pershing tho

A tank destroyer that only penetrates around half the time on the heavy tanks it is supposed to counter. When it actually hits.

It literally does not have any other job. You can't even mount a MG on it like other tank destroyers like the panther, even though it had a gunner IRL.

Then, as veterancy accumulates in the late game, heavy tanks get even a larger advantage over the jackson because they are easier to keep alive, such that they will keep their vet. If you have to replace your jackson when you're up against vet 2+ panthers, you're done.

The M36 Jackson is tank destroyer. It hits really hard in its current state. It is also well protected when you support it with infantry and AT Guns. It is really heavy as it is! 29 tons to be exact.

which AT Gun ? the 57mm does not penetrate a panthers front and heavier tanks. so easy put ON Blitzkrieg an destroy the jacksons...

But a jagdtiger is fine....

The DPS is lower then an SU85.....

I said the same thing OP its was called the Slugger which implies something similar to a boxer if your not familiar with the term. It was also the first to kill a Jagdtiger irl.

problem is that a su85 doesnt pen anything

problem is that a su85 doesnt pen anything

And yet it has better penetration than Jackson

I'f we are speaking about real life, then the jackson was fairly well armored for it's role.


It had a very strong 114mm worth of sloped armor on the lower glacis, granted, most shots did not hit there. It had 60mm worth of sloped armor on the upper glacis, more than the t-34 t-34/85 or PIV. I believe it was around the same effectivenness of the unsloped 100mm armor on the tiger, perhaps slightly less.

On the turret it had 75mm worth of spaced armor on the turret mantlet, which was fairly well armored.


It's 90mm gun with AP rounds was considerably inferior in terms of penetration to the panthers 75mm gun, however, if HVAP rounds were used, it's penetration would outclass the panther and be more on par with the IS-2s main gun in terms of penetration.

The jacksons open turret allowed it to have great vision compared to other tanks, which for some reason IS not reflected in the game, while it is somewhat of a disadvantage as the crew are very valnurable (sometimes).

Overall this is the exact reason why the US army did not really feel the pershing was needed. And when they did have the pershing, it faced the EXACT same problems as they thought it would have. It sruggled to keep up with the rest of the army, and generally just put a considerable strain on logistics while not accomplishing much else.


If you would want to reflect the jackson realistically in game it would probaly be something like this


180-200 penetration (vs 160-200 that is now)

640 hp and 200 armor (480 and 130 now)

160 damage on penetration ( vs 240 damage now)

(HVAP rounds at vet 0)

Sight range to 60 (effectivelly making it able to spot for itself)

The jacksons open turret allowed it to have great vision compared to other tanks, which for some reason IS not reflected in the game...

Yeah, like the 60 range SU-85 spotting for itself wasn´t enough. Let´s introduce that to a TD with a turret and better maneuverability. What could possibly go wrong considering balance?

I hate StuG and Jackson alike. Going down with three shots (sometimes two) is considerably reducing their attractiveness as mid to late-game options. Both need a health increase.

What would be the point of shermans if super Jacksons and the riflemen blob rolled over everything?

Then buff the shermans survivability and nerf it's ai abit so it can act as a meat shield, buffing the Jackson would make it op.

Axis blob > Allies blob. Sherman HE for wiping squads.

I'f we are speaking about real life, then the jackson was fairly well armored for it's role.


It had a very strong 114mm worth of sloped armor on the lower glacis, granted, most shots did not hit there. It had 60mm worth of sloped armor on the upper glacis, more than the t-34 t-34/85 or PIV. I believe it was around the same effectivenness of the unsloped 100mm armor on the tiger, perhaps slightly less.

http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/90mmgmcm36.html

Upper front 1.5"(3.8cm) 55°

Lower front 4.25" to 2.0" (10.8cm to 5.1cm) 0° to 56°

It had 38 mm sloped at 55 = 66 mm effective

PzIV 80 mm sloped at 9 = 81 mm effective

Sherman 51 mm sloped at 56 = 91,2 mm effective