M36- badly underpowered?

Uh no...i simply wrote that i'd rather have M10's than jacksons nondoctrinally.....which is assuming they'd be used together with shermans as stated by my "Get 2-3 shermans first" comment..

And when i was talking about critical mass i was referring to the fact that 3-4 shermans can simply do more than 3-4 jacksons. Since the jacksons are only decent at one job...unlike shermans which are decent/good at many jobs....since it is a workhorse medium tank after all....


...are you trolling or what?

Jaigen trolling? No

Read stats. Again not best TD. Most mobile TD yes. Best at destroying tanks? No. Again go read the long post with the Stats.

Edit:

mate piss of with your stats. stats can explain why things happen in the game they cannot 100 % predict how an unit is going to behave. the combination of speed , penetration and dps topped of with the hvap rounds makes the jackson the best TD currently in the game, the only unit that can beat this unit by " stats " are jp4 and su85.

Uh no...i simply wrote that i'd rather have M10's than jacksons nondoctrinally.....which is assuming they'd be used together with shermans as stated by my "Get 2-3 shermans first" comment..

And when i was talking about critical mass i was referring to the fact that 3-4 shermans can simply do more than 3-4 jacksons. Since the jacksons are only decent at one job...unlike shermans which are decent/good at many jobs....since it is a workhorse medium tank after all....

And my opinion of your skills and thus the worth of your input has even lowered further, an the tragic part is you dont even know why.

mate piss of with your stats. stats can explain why things happen in the game they cannot 100 % predict how an unit is going to behave. the combination of speed , penetration and dps topped of with the hvap rounds makes the jackson the best TD currently in the game, the only unit that can beat this unit by " stats " are jp4 and su85.

Piss off with your quantitative argument!!! My opinion trumps that11!!!! The only thing that trumps it are the only other two non doctrinal tank destroyers when there are only three in the game!!! Just lol at how fail that response was...

Piss off with your quantitative argument!!! My opinion trumps that11!!!! The only thing that trumps it are the only other two non doctrinal tank destroyers when there are only three in the game!!! Just lol at how fail that response was...

I don't necessarily agree with what Jaigen wrote but your stats argument is extremely flawed because of the way you're trying to twist things, and cherry picking the stats that you want to use to try and make your, completely ignorant and invalid, point.

If we're to compare the Jackson to the Panther as you seem so apt to do you have to factor in the Jackson's significant range advantage over the Panther (60 vs 50). Combine this with the speed of the Jackson and with proper micro it isn't all that hard to beat Panthers with Jacksons, especially considering the much higher cost of the Panther. This becomes even easier in a proper team game (since as I've already admitted, TDs in general seem to underperform in 1v1s [except the OKW panther] because you're spending so many resources on strict AT capabilities) when you combine the Jackson with the power of Soviet/M20 mines, Mark Target, AT nades, ZiS/USF AT guns etc etc.

Statistically the Jackson is an extremely powerful TD, it only lacks in armor and HP - but it more than makes up for that with the punch it brings to the field - and in practice the Jackson is the most powerful TD in the game (barring Elefant/JT) by a wide margin. The only thing it need fear are AT guns, as it should, because they're the natural and necessary counter to a TD like the Jackson.

The SU85 is actually awful. Honestly it is probably the worst/most useless tank in the game. It struggles to kill properly micro'd P4s and completely flops over against anything heavier. Its lack of mobility and turret are a huge liability. It is woefully vulnerable to flanks and doesn't have any of the utility that a Jackson can provide with vehicle crew swapping (free vet 3 Scott anyone? those things are disgusting), repairing of itself/allied tanks or simply pop-cap abusing.

Sure the Jackson isn't great on all maps (ettlebruck I'm looking at you) - but any map it performs poorly on the other TDs (Su85/Jp4) will perform worse on.

I think it should be pretty obvious by this point that the Jackson is light-years ahead of the SU85 and a lot of the same arguments could be made about the Jackson vs the Jp4, although I rate the Jp4 as considerably better than the Su85 (but still not good given the current price/alternatives). The Jp4 has an amazingly low model size and actually wonderful frontal armor - plus it can stealth. Clearly better than the Su85 already, and if given enough tender love and care to get to high levels of vet it could begin to out-perform the Jackson. The only true downfall of the Jp4 is how much manpower/fuel it costs and the consideration that you can get a Panther without spending too much more. Sure the Panther isn't great against infantry, but at least it has a couple of MGs available that will do decent enough.

Anyways, I think this post is long enough at this point, and I need some sleep. But please, you simply cannot just try and cite a specific assortment of stats (of which you actually haven't provided specific numbers/comparisons) to try and make an argument. Stats in CoH 2 are more of a guideline/correlation of how fights should go or how units should be used. In almost all cases actual in-game experience and the reality of the ways in which units interact is significantly more important than a bunch of numbers in a spreadsheet. Yes the data is great to have so that you can understand and learn the underlying mechanics of the game but being a spreadsheet warrior will always lose when compared with in-game expertise.

None of the stats I posted are cherry picked as you claim. In my comparison post I included the JP4s target size advantage. Also the high damage is not higher due to reload. Again clearly indicated in my previous post. Please illustrate in that post where the stats I posted are incorrect. I do not agree with your opinion. And you can ad hominem all you want. Clearly you didn't read that post and probably don't care to because the most important trait to you seems to be its mobility.

Just because Ciez says so top player or not isn't going to change that given the right circumstances an SU85 especially with mark can kill a tank faster than a Jackson. Saying something is best is merely subjective. Ciez thinks with his play style that the Jackson is best because it's mobile. Many other players think it's not because it's fragile. I simply showed that at destroying tanks through a higher penetration and sustained DPS the Jackson is not the best. Again please show me a fact the disputes that.

None of the stats I posted are cherry picked as you claim. In my comparison post I included the JP4s target size advantage. Also the high damage is not higher due to reload. Again clearly indicated in my previous post. Please illustrate in that post where the stats I posted are incorrect. I do not agree with your opinion. And you can ad hominem all you want. Clearly you didn't read that post and probably don't care to because the most important trait to you seems to be its mobility.

Just because Ciez says so top player or not isn't going to change that given the right circumstances an SU85 especially with mark can kill a tank faster than a Jackson. Saying something is best is merely subjective. Ciez thinks with his play style that the Jackson is best because it's mobile. Many other players think it's not because it's fragile. I simply showed that at destroying tanks through a higher penetration and sustained DPS the Jackson is not the best. Again please show me a fact the disputes that.

Considering both players have equal micro at a reasonable playing field,

2 Panzer IVs will beat 2 Su-85s but will not beat 2 jacksons.

Given that a SU-85 and a Jackson will always want to fight on max range, i dont understand why you think the SU-85 with 19 dps at 60 range has more dps than the jackson with 23? Even at 50 range the Jackson has more dps than the SU-85. Only if you let them come near to 35 range the SU-85 will have more DPS than the Jackson. Only with 160 pen at max range to 180 pen the Jackson is 20 pen worse than the SU-85. But you can spend some Munition. Given the fact you can get very good AI units in the same tier and the turret of the Jackson i would say Jackson > SU-85.

I think it should be pretty obvious by this point that the Jackson is light-years ahead of the SU85...

AT nade/Button and SU85 will shine. Only advantage Jackson has over SU is mobility. Vet 3 SU85 has just insane RoF, can spot, has better penetration and does not die in 2 shots, yet it's still UP a bit.
________________________
US Forces have one huge issue. Chasing units. How the hell USF should finish 1/10hp retreating KT/Tiger?
Chances to penetrate at max range are none. 90% cases, tank will retreat, get repairs and get vet.

On the other hand SU, OST and OKW dont have such problem. Panther with blitz, front armor, pen can easily finish any unit. Same thing about JT, KT, Tiger, IS2, ISU.

What's more, if you won't pick up P47 it's probably GG. Imagine situation where OST players has to take JU doctrine because if they won't, they will struggle with Shermans and won't kill them.

If we're to compare the Jackson to the Panther as you seem so apt to do you have to factor in the Jackson's significant range advantage over the Panther (60 vs 50). Combine this with the speed of the Jackson and with proper micro it isn't all that hard to beat Panthers with Jacksons, especially considering the much higher cost of the Panther. This becomes even easier in a proper team game (since as I've already admitted, TDs in general seem to underperform in 1v1s [except the OKW panther] because you're spending so many resources on strict AT capabilities) when you combine the Jackson with the power of Soviet/M20 mines, Mark Target, AT nades, ZiS/USF AT guns etc etc.

Statistically the Jackson is an extremely powerful TD, it only lacks in armor and HP - but it more than makes up for that with the punch it brings to the field - and in practice the Jackson is the most powerful TD in the game (barring Elefant/JT) by a wide margin. The only thing it need fear are AT guns, as it should, because they're the natural and necessary counter to a TD like the Jackson.

Comparing a Jackson capabilities with a Jackson capabilities when supported by XX AI and AT is a flaw. Or you have to compare it with a Panther supported by an equal force.

But the main gap in your expose is that High level players can pretty well handle the all around the Jackson, what is usually called microing your army. For the common players - this is not the same thing, blobbing is more an issue and blobbing + heavy tanks make you feel the Jackson underpowered.
The second point where I would tone down your argument is about the capability of the Jackson.
- Yes it has the best DPS in the game, but only if it pen.
- Yes it has the best offensiveness vet in the game, but only available if it pen

I can have incredible games with the Jackson, if it pen. If it doesn't it is just a rubbish thing incredibly expensive.

I'm agreeing with you, the Jackson doesn't really need a buff. It needs a redesign, being less RNG dependent for pen and vet, something like less dps but more pen at vet0. And probably like for any other tanks and TD in the game, a way to escape if you micro well a close combat.
All other tanks and TD in the game have a escape capability, or a ability like smoke, or a good armor that give you enough time to retreat and secure.

I like how Ciez came in here arguing stats and only providing 1 number set to back up claims. That's cherry picking too. Ciez, the Jackson doesn't have a speed advantage over the panther. I don't know if you bothered to actually look or not, but these two have almost he exact same movement characteristics. The panther has a higher top speed by .1 and the m36 has higher acceleration by .1. The panther can stop a bit faster too, for those oh shit moments ( difference of .2).

In my personal experience with the Jackson it has a pretty decent range to it, long range it can sometimes be inaccurate but medium to close range it usually does the job right. Dbl Jacksons at range, and even a single jackson at range can inflict pretty good dmg vs a jadgpanzer, p4s, and panthers, however once panthers gain vet 3 or above it's a lot harder to kill them off. I honestly feel the Jackson has the right amount of DPS for a tank destroyer as the USF, in fact that's the best thing going for it right now. Dbl Jacksons + P47s usually causes a shuffle of your enemy's Armor. My only problem with the Jackson is it's lightweight armor, which is understandable to a certain degree given it's range and DPS capabilities. However, I still feel the Jackson needs a tiny, and I mean tiny armor buff, so that way it can't get 3 shot'd by a blitzing Panther/taken out in 2 shots by a JadgTiger/Elefant.

Flame post #112 invised. Please do not bait each other

The 240 dmg is imo too much. I´m with others here saying that the M36 doesn´t need more offensive power. It can three shot Panzer IVs, totally negates Ostheers T3 and even scares away heavies.

As others have stated: Less dmg for more penetration could be an option.


Watch until 35:28
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRZ_rejgC18&list=UUyUcNdOxXcVt3o9eZKdza9w#t=34m30s

The 240 dmg is imo too much. I´m with others here saying that the M36 doesn´t need more offensive power. It can three shot Panzer IVs, totally negates Ostheers T3 and even scares away heavies.

As others have stated: Less dmg for more penetration could be an option.


Watch until 35:28
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRZ_rejgC18&list=UUyUcNdOxXcVt3o9eZKdza9w#t=34m30s

The Penetration is the biggest problem. I dont care if the DPS of the unit goes down. As long as its consistant DPS. Its a Tank Destroyer. It has one single job. It can do nothing else and its an Apex unit. It should almost always do SOME damage to tanks. Otherwise how is it going to get to Vet to begin with? There is no damage on deflect after all. Hell even if they added damage on deflect to it...

The Penetration is the biggest problem. I dont care if the DPS of the unit goes down. As long as its consistant DPS. Its a Tank Destroyer. It has one single job. It can do nothing else and its an Apex unit. It should almost always do SOME damage to tanks. Otherwise how is it going to get to Vet to begin with? There is no damage on deflect after all. Hell even if they added damage on deflect to it...

dont forget the shock value. Its often better to just make one shot and reverse. Than shoot all the time. You often can scare away german tanks if you hit them with 240 dmg. The jakson is more a poke units than a fighter. It can repair itself and makes big dmg in a short time. I think verfing its dmg and buffing its pen would nerf the unit not buff it.

And my opinion of your skills and thus the worth of your input has even lowered further, an the tragic part is you dont even know why.

Except no one really cares about your opinion of my skills.

This thread(just incase you're under the influence or just stupid)is about the M36 and how its not trash at its role of supporting tank destroyer if you can support it/micro it properly. Which is what I wrote. Which is what others have written.(including top 10 players...)
I also wrote that it could use a buff as well.