Login

russian armor

Axis heavy armor needs nerf or Allied AT needs buffs

PAGES (13)down
25 Dec 2014, 13:18 PM
#41
avatar of JHeartless

Posts: 1637



What is funny about that? Jpz4 is designed to ambush and destroy enemy tank, When the pjz4 aim at you, he will be harder to hit than m3 or t70, height is only(!!) 1.85 m, it is wider and longer than m3 and t70, still worth to compensate on that if u can reduce height of a tank that is going to ambush enemy tanks.


Realism vs Balance. A Jackson should be an upgrade for an M10. So I would say 80 Fuel plus 100 Muni would be fair. Since almost all Jacksons were just turrets shipped to Europe and mounted on an M10.

Having Brit Arty emplacements were realistic too. No smoke and the ability to erase squads. US actually were the leaders in Artillery at the time. Realism isnt fun...
25 Dec 2014, 13:24 PM
#42
avatar of BrutusHR

Posts: 262



Realism vs Balance. A Jackson should be an upgrade for an M10. So I would say 80 Fuel plus 100 Muni would be fair. Since almost all Jacksons were just turrets shipped to Europe and mounted on an M10.

Having Brit Arty emplacements were realistic too. No smoke and the ability to erase squads. US actually were the leaders in Artillery at the time. Realism isnt fun...


K.

But what that has anything to do with me saying that it is normal for jpz4 to have small target size?

Realism vs balance, there should be a clear line on that in this game, i agree!
But! Jpz4 isn't OP, it is good where it is. So why do u need to comment "Realism vs balance" on something that is perfectly fine to keep? (Target size in this case). I don't follow logic on commenting. I would appreciate if you could explain it a little better :)
25 Dec 2014, 14:26 PM
#43
avatar of Porygon

Posts: 2779

Tiger I is a joke.
25 Dec 2014, 14:36 PM
#44
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

T70 is smaller everywhere (just 20cm higher).
Its about balance. Powerful gun, very good front armor, sneak mode, small target size.
Im not saying its OP but Im saying thats is little unbalance to give unit so many profits.
______
What's wrong with Tiger?
25 Dec 2014, 15:39 PM
#45
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1617

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Dec 2014, 14:26 PMPorygon
Tiger I is a joke.


1-2 Tigers can be killed, np...

Tiger spam is a joke with vet grens and double PAKs ^^
25 Dec 2014, 15:52 PM
#46
avatar of BrutusHR

Posts: 262

T70 is smaller everywhere (just 20cm higher).
Its about balance. Powerful gun, very good front armor, sneak mode, small target size.
Im not saying its OP but Im saying thats is little unbalance to give unit so many profits.

Like i said, smaller target size makes sense, because m3 is alot and t70 something less higher than jpz4, Very simple, just imagine that any of these 3 tanks facing u. Who will be the hardest target to hit?

It is a OK unit, if it isn't OP then it isn't unbalanced, it is still pricey and i will rather go for panther. It can't see in reverse and that is a huge minus. It can have every possible feature in game, if it isn't OP or UP then don't change it. There is alot of other things to fix than units that don't need fixing, like 60% of the current game.

Still, i dont see it often on battlefield. Because there are better things to invest fuel, and if this unit need any change, i dare to say that it will sooner need a buff than a nerf. My 2 cents.
25 Dec 2014, 16:02 PM
#47
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

Oh boy yet another one of these threads, boy they sure are fun...

Here's the way I see it. The panther, jackson and jp4 are all in a good spot. The su85 just sucks, literally the worst tank in the game. Contrary to popular belief, and the ignorance in this thread, the Jackson has basically the same chance to penetrate the front of a tiger, without vet ability popped, as the panther has to penetrate the front of an is2. The Jackson has a twenty range advantage over the tiger, the panther only a 10 range advantage. At vet 2 is2s just dominate Panthers because they have the same range as Panthers. Jacksons never suffer from this.


For those that are saying that Jacksons are slow, go look at the stats. If Jacksons are slow, then so are Panthers, which no one ever complains about... Both these tanks have amazing mobility.

The reality is that all mediums suffer from a major disparity in power level when compared to heavies, which is one of the main reasons I think we see so many heavies, and this applies to both sides of the coin. P4s are just as helpless and terrible against is2 as t34 76 are against tigers.

But yeah, there are a lot of misinformed myths being perpetuated in this thread, and honestly I much prefer allied armor because of the insane rate at which it can wipe squads, but maybe that's a problem with smaller axis squad sizes. But properly managed allied armor is extremely potent, except su85 that crap sucks.
25 Dec 2014, 16:08 PM
#48
avatar of wandererraven

Posts: 353

for now
M36 jackson pen value 200/180/160 (Near/mid/far)
and Su-85 pen value 200/190/180
fragile tank fight is close range no way
----
I miss M18 Recoilless Rifle (low dmg but good pen)
25 Dec 2014, 16:16 PM
#49
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Dec 2014, 16:02 PMCieZ
Oh boy yet another one of these threads, boy they sure are fun...

Here's the way I see it. The panther, jackson and jp4 are all in a good spot. The su85 just sucks, literally the worst tank in the game. Contrary to popular belief, and the ignorance in this thread, the Jackson has basically the same chance to penetrate the front of a tiger, without vet ability popped, as the panther has to penetrate the front of an is2. The Jackson has a twenty range advantage over the tiger, the panther only a 10 range advantage. At vet 2 is2s just dominate Panthers because they have the same range as Panthers. Jacksons never suffer from this.


For those that are saying that Jacksons are slow, go look at the stats. If Jacksons are slow, then so are Panthers, which no one ever complains about... Both these tanks have amazing mobility.

The reality is that all mediums suffer from a major disparity in power level when compared to heavies, which is one of the main reasons I think we see so many heavies, and this applies to both sides of the coin. P4s are just as helpless and terrible against is2 as t34 76 are against tigers.

But yeah, there are a lot of misinformed myths being perpetuated in this thread, and honestly I much prefer allied armor because of the insane rate at which it can wipe squads, but maybe that's a problem with smaller axis squad sizes. But properly managed allied armor is extremely potent, except su85 that crap sucks.


It seems that you forget about few things.

1. About chance to penetrate, yes you are right but Panther is a way more durable than Jackon. Of course its cheaper but I would love to pay more, have more HP and armor around 280.
2. No one is saying that Jackson is slow. From design it should be unit that flank so it must be fast. Point is Tiger or Panther are unflankable.
No one ever complains about Panther because of HP,huge armor,penetration, smoke and insane blitzkrieg ability.
Give jackson ability to increase speed to 14 and Im good.
3. Right know axis heavies wipe more often than allies or at least at the same level.
25 Dec 2014, 16:23 PM
#50
avatar of BrutusHR

Posts: 262



2.Point is Tiger or Panther are unflankable.

No one ever complains about Panther

3. Right know axis heavies wipe more often than allies


Bulls*it
25 Dec 2014, 16:36 PM
#51
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2



Bulls*it


Try to flank reversing Tiger with blitz. Good luck.

King Tiger is wiping better than any allied unit.

And dont cut my sentence in the middle, especially if it's not my state - repeating after someone for some reasons.
25 Dec 2014, 16:37 PM
#52
avatar of Kronosaur0s

Posts: 1701

In conclusion, Nerf KT.
25 Dec 2014, 16:40 PM
#53
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

In conclusion, Nerf KT.


Leave KT alone. Buff Jackson penetration and speed.
25 Dec 2014, 17:02 PM
#54
avatar of BrutusHR

Posts: 262



2. No one is saying that Jackson is slow. From design it should be unit that flank so it must be fast. Point is Tiger or Panther are unflankable.
No one ever complains about Panther because of HP,huge armor,penetration, smoke and insane blitzkrieg ability.
3. Right know axis heavies wipe more often than allies or at least at the same level.


Bulls*it... Happy? It was more cleaner last time, but hey.

King tiger is a unit in a weird place. That doesn't means that axis heavy wipe more often. That sentences is easy to manipulate, overall only tiger and KT can reliably deal with infantry, axis medium's aren't that great against inf. Like u would trade jackson for panther because of bigger Hp pool and armor, i would trade JT for isu, and pz4 for sherman. Even tiger for IS2.
But it doesn't work like that in this game.
25 Dec 2014, 17:12 PM
#55
avatar of Madok

Posts: 101

Leave KT alone. Buff Jackson penetration and speed.


You would like the Jackson to be faster and reliably penetrate the heaviest vehicles - right?
Any other adjustments? Perhaps armor, HP, damage or pricing?


I'd like to know your take on the changes of this 'new' Jackson will bring for the OST 1v1 (and possibly 2v2) metagame.
25 Dec 2014, 17:14 PM
#56
avatar of Thunderhun

Posts: 1617

I agree with Ciez, but the problem is the allied armor is limited...in terms of use. We have some broken ability/imbalances here and there.

Allies cannot utilise their armor as much as the axis due to the strong axis AT on the field (which can be only dominated by arty or/and spam --> not reliable in 1v1). This has a huge impact on late-game, but mostly the USF suffers from it because of their fragile tanks while the soviets can compensate this with call-in units (Is-2, 85s, marked target).

Ever tried to kill a Tiger (don't forget blitz) with M36s when it has double PAKs and vet 3 lmg gren support behind it?? Even P-47s do shit against it.

Or PAK-43 or AT + german armor in late-game? It's not the panzers that counter your tanks, it's the AT protecting the axis tanks from your tanks...which is way too effective against the allies :P

I'd go for fixing the call-ins first and fixing the axis AT so it wouldn't deny allied armor.
25 Dec 2014, 17:28 PM
#57
avatar of CieZ

Posts: 1468 | Subs: 4

I agree with Ciez, but the problem is the allied armor is limited...in terms of use. We have some broken ability/imbalances here and there.

Allies cannot utilise their armor as much as the axis due to the strong axis AT on the field (which can be only dominated by arty or/and spam --> not reliable in 1v1). This has a huge impact on late-game, but mostly the USF suffers from it because of their fragile tanks while the soviets can compensate this with call-in units (Is-2, 85s, marked target).

Ever tried to kill a Tiger (don't forget blitz) with M36s when it has double PAKs and vet 3 lmg gren support behind it?? Even P-47s do shit against it.

I'd go for fixing the call-ins first and fixing the axis AT so it wouldn't deny the allied armor usage.


Fun fact, double bar rifles at vet 3 completely dominate vet 3 lmg grens. Like you can actually have vet 3 lmg grens standing still in green cover, have the vet 3 double bar rifles cross open terrain, close in and they'll ultimately win. It's pretty silly... grens are so bad it's silly. Then again cons aren't much better overall. Vet 3 lmg paras.are actually the most batshit op infantry though, they can beat vet 5 obers with ease as long as obers.aren't in green cover.

And also....buffing jackson penetration and speed is literally the stupidest thing I've heard in a while. The only way you can buff penetration is if you nerf the damage to 160, which gets really complicated with regard to keeping time to kill roughly the same for jackson vs tigers, and destroys the defining characteristic of the Jackson in the first place. And do you honestly want the Jackson to be faster than the panther? Give me a break... just learn to properly micro the jackson, it's an absolutely incredible tank.
25 Dec 2014, 17:38 PM
#58
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post25 Dec 2014, 17:28 PMCieZ


Fun fact, double bar rifles at vet 3 completely dominate vet 3 lmg grens. Like you can actually have vet 3 lmg grens standing still in green cover, have the vet 3 double bar rifles cross open terrain, close in and they'll ultimately win. It's pretty silly... grens are so bad it's silly. Then again cons aren't much better overall. Vet 3 lmg paras.are actually the most batshit op infantry though, they can beat vet 5 obers with ease as long as obers.aren't in green cover.

And also....buffing jackson penetration and speed is literally the stupidest thing I've heard in a while. The only way you can buff penetration is if you nerf the damage to 160, which gets really complicated with regard to keeping time to kill roughly the same for jackson vs tigers, and destroys the defining characteristic of the Jackson in the first place. And do you honestly want the Jackson to be faster than the panther? Give me a break... just learn to properly micro the jackson, it's an absolutely incredible tank.


paras will win if u get lmg or Thomson. on top of that u have to use ur abilities.

rifles with double bars should best lmg grens. they cost more in mp and muni.

don't forget about pgrens. but, I agree wher needs a buff

Jackson needs something. I cant rely on it when fighting heavies. and I cant use p47's cus I had to upgrade all my paras and spam their abilities to beat the obers.

not to mention I have to spam AP abilities on both my jacksons and 57mm's

57mm needs a buff bad, its almost as bad as the m42 atg

I thinks usf late game is in a bad place
25 Dec 2014, 17:39 PM
#59
avatar of carloff

Posts: 301

...And here we come to bleeding problem where US Forec are bleeding all the time with vehicles while OKW does not...

Allies must suffer, Axis must roflstomp them. Gosh.

All you german fanboys - don't you even understand one thing about USF and SOV? They don't have PROPER TOOLS to deal with you favorite cat's zoo. This is the main problem in this game - LACK of COUNTER UNITS for Allies side.

The l2p messages must flow.
25 Dec 2014, 17:40 PM
#60
avatar of gman1211

Posts: 133

My biggest complaint isn't how bad allied armour is vs german armour.
Its how good german hand held AT is vs allied armour. Jacksons never get to properly engage german tanks, simply do to swarms of shreks running around.
PAGES (13)down
2 users are browsing this thread: 2 guests

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

795 users are online: 795 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49107
Welcome our newest member, Falac851
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM