Login

russian armor

What if the Jackson was the US heavy unit?

18 Nov 2014, 02:53 AM
#1
avatar of Lucas Troy

Posts: 508

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).



18 Nov 2014, 03:05 AM
#2
avatar of chipwreckt

Posts: 732

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.
18 Nov 2014, 03:07 AM
#3
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

:/

As much as i hate to say it, it would be a bad idea... Jackson DPS is scary sometimes.
18 Nov 2014, 03:23 AM
#4
avatar of JHeartless

Posts: 1637

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.
18 Nov 2014, 11:10 AM
#5
avatar of ThoseDeafMutes

Posts: 1026

What if Pershing tho
and
18 Nov 2014, 11:20 AM
#6
avatar of and

Posts: 140

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.
and
18 Nov 2014, 11:24 AM
#7
18 Nov 2014, 15:47 PM
#8
avatar of mistermaa

Posts: 31

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...
18 Nov 2014, 16:18 PM
#9
avatar of dasheepeh

Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1

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
18 Nov 2014, 16:30 PM
#10
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



problem is that a su85 doesnt pen anything


And yet it has better penetration than Jackson :lol:
18 Nov 2014, 16:32 PM
#11
avatar of Burts

Posts: 1702

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)
18 Nov 2014, 17:47 PM
#12
avatar of Butcher

Posts: 1217

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2014, 16:32 PMBurts
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.
18 Nov 2014, 17:54 PM
#13
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

What would be the point of shermans if super Jacksons and the riflemen blob rolled over everything?
18 Nov 2014, 18:54 PM
#14
avatar of The_rEd_bEar

Posts: 760

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.
18 Nov 2014, 19:11 PM
#15
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

Axis blob > Allies blob. Sherman HE for wiping squads.
18 Nov 2014, 19:47 PM
#16
avatar of Blackart

Posts: 344

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Nov 2014, 16:32 PMBurts
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.



:facepalm:

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
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

Germany 27
Germany 888

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

984 users are online: 984 guests
3 posts in the last 24h
3 posts in the last week
23 posts in the last month
Registered members: 48727
Welcome our newest member, sunwinctcom
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM