Axis heavy armor needs nerf or Allied AT needs buffs

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.

Try to get 3 Jacks with some bared rifles. Like a wonder if you asking me...

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.

OKW Panher with blitz has 13 speed

You know how glass cannon works in games - no matter if it's diablo or coh - ?
Huge damage, very fragile.
Jackon is very fragile - chec
Jackon can do huge damage - check
Jackon can penetrate almost everything - uncheck .

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.

What makes unit more dangerous? 85% chance to infilct 160 or 55% to inflict 240?

Once I asked why not give IS2 240 damage and lower RoF.
The answer I recived was that it would make IS2 more RNG dependant and we have to minimaze that.
Ok so why Jackson has to be RNG dependant if we don't want so much RNG in game?
_____
So Panther, unit which is already faster than Jackson can have amazing blitzkrieg but Jackson can't have something similar?

Jackson is great unit. I don't deny that. Jacksons do about 50% of my whole damage in all games, no matterd if it's 2v2 or 4v4.

Point is game design.
Panther is design to flank as well as taking fire at front. That's why it has mobility and armor.
Jackson is designed only to flank but it can't flank.
Reversing Tiger with blitz is faster than Jackson!

Just explain me, how to flank vetted Tiger.
As a TD it should kill it because of range which is hard cause of low chance to penetrate and support of paks or by flanking which is also unlikely since all tanks with blitz are faster than Jackson.

And do you honestly want the Jackson to be faster than the panther?

Are you referring to game design, balance or history?

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.

Tell me where did I mention buffing the M36's pen or speed? I don't think I did...

About the double bar rifles beating vet 3 lmg grens, it should happen with the current prices but my statement has nothing to do with it.

If you reply to me, please reply to the points I made.

Tell me where did I mention buffing the M36's pen or speed? I don't think I did...

About the double bar rifles beating vet 3 lmg grens, it should happen with the current prices but my statement has nothing to do with it.

If you reply to me, please reply to the points I made.

Was agreeing with your comments about getting the rifles to engage the pak. And replying to Australian magic about the Jackson speed and penetration, sorry double quoting on my phone is like impossible.

OKW Panher with blitz has 13 speed

You know how glass cannon works in games - no matter if it's diablo or coh - ?
Huge damage, very fragile.
Jackon is very fragile - chec
Jackon can do huge damage - check
Jackon can penetrate almost everything - uncheck .

Thanks for the reply.
While I understand the point you are trying to make I fear your proposed Jackson changes (pen and speed buff - no cost adjustments or nerfs) would render all OST tanks (with the possible exception of a less effective tiger) kinda obsolete.
EDIT: Admittedly the Panther would also still be an option in 3v3s and 4v4s.


How is OST (mind you: OST not 'Axis') supposed to respond to this change?

I believe it was Sib (or possibly VonIvan) who commented in one of his recent streams that he could not go T3 now, after spotting a major (in a 1v1, playing OST). He stated the Jackson as the reason for this decision.

Hello everyone and thanks for replying! There were some good and interesting points made. I'll chip in with more of my own.

Jackson and Panther
I thin these two units are in an okay place. Any further buffs to Jackson will utterly destroy Ostheer T3. I think blitzkrieg should be removed from the Panther though. The Panther is already a great tank without it. In the future, costs adjustments should be made to Ostheer to make the Panther more accessible, but that is another story

Pop Cost
I agree with Honeynuts that the population costs are not done very well. Adding to Ciez's comment, having an equal amount of resources in medium tanks to a heavy tank would still probably give the player using the medium tanks at a disadvantage. Heavy tanks are more expensive, bu can do much more than an equal weight of mediums. It is also easier to micro. I think some tanks, especially the ALlied ones, like Honeynuts said, need some readjusting.

Flanking
Flanking is suppose to neutralize the advantages of heavier German armor by avoiding their powerful frontal armor. However, this is easier said than done. Unless the German player has no support for their heavy tanks, or if you have a huge amount of tanks, then flanking is not as easy as it sounds. Pak40s and schrecks, which can reliably penetrate most, if not all Allied vehicles, really destroy flanking tanks. Even destroying one ALlied tank during a flank attack is going to hurt the Allied player a lot.

Supporting AT
This can be discussed in another thread, as it is an entirely new issue. However, Axis supporting AT is really good, much better than the Allies. Schrecks and Pak40s can penetrate all Allied non-doctrinal vehicles. The only tanks that can withstand it are the IS2 and ISU152 (and maybe Ez8 but im not sure). Defending and attacking as Allies is difficult because you are constantly trying to protect your fragile tanks from schrecks.

I would like to reiterate what i think is the main issue at hand:


1. Axis tanks can consistently pentrate most Allied vehicles (with their own tanks and support)

2. Allied tanks cannot consistently penetrate heavier Axis vehicles

THis leads to wonky RNG situations where you either can win as Allies in tank fights or it ends in frustration for the Allied player

Jackson can't be buffed without lowering its damage,it 3 shost the pz 4s which is plain shit.
So t1 u are dominated by rifles.
T2 u are scrambling vs rifle and us light vehicle
t3 u somehow get to armor and jackson 3 shot -fuck this.

Jackson can't be buffed without lowering its damage,it 3 shost the pz 4s which is plain shit.
So t1 u are dominated by rifles.
T2 u are scrambling vs rifle and us light vehicle
t3 u somehow get to armor and jackson 3 shot -fuck this.

Lowering dmagae to 160 is obvious if it would have better pen and some speed ability.

The way I see it, the Jackson could go two ways:

Increased Penetration, Decreased Reload Speed
Increased Penetration, Decreased Damage (120)


I'd be fine with either of those, though the second option would be good because it would make Wehr T3 useful against USF again, whereas currently the Jackson and any other AT unit hard-counter is into uselessness.

Lowering dmagae to 160 is obvious if it would have better pen and some speed ability.

So whats the point again to invest into 700+ mp and 200+ fuel to get a heavy tank out that will simply get shot to pieces by 300+ mp 125 fuel jackson. Heavy tanks work on the concept they are durable.goes for both the tiger and the is2 allies have problems penetrating the tiger and axis have the same issue. safe perhaps for the panther but considering the cost and overall dps its balanced.

The way I see it, the Jackson could go two ways:

Increased Penetration, Decreased Reload
Increased Penetration, Decreased Damage


I'd be fine with either of those, though the second option would be good because it would make Wehr T3 useful against USF again, whereas currently the Jackson and any other AT unit hard-counter is into uselessness.

^^^

Please. Jackson makes Ost T3 a joke. Stugs havent been built for nearly a year - now panzer IV's are questionable choices.. Higher damage than 160 is NOT good against medium tanks and is a terrible trait.

Maybe Jackson timing can be pushed back a bit? Can always edit build times. It could get a buff after that

So whats the point again to invest into 700+ mp and 200+ fuel to get a heavy tank out that will simply get shot to pieces by 300+ mp 125 fuel jackson. Heavy tanks work on the concept they are durable.goes for both the tiger and the is2 allies have problems penetrating the tiger and axis have the same issue. safe perhaps for the panther but considering the cost and overall dps its balanced.

Tank destoryer should be able to kill tank. Right now "tanks" are better than allied "tank destroyers" at killing tanks.

Jackson would need 7 penetrating shots (160dmg) to kill Tiger and I think 7/11 would be fair ratio for penetrate. Tiger needs only 3 so what's the problem?

Tank destroyer -> Heavy Tank -> Infantry (other tanks as well but without such efficiency like TD) -> Tank destroyer. And the circle is closed.

In coh2 it's like:

Axis TD -> Heavy Tank -> Everything.

When was this?

in the massive post she made in the long distance relationship thread.

Tank destoryer should be able to kill tank. Right now "tanks" are better than allied "tank destroyers" at killing tanks.

Jackson would need 7 penetrating shots (160dmg) to kill Tiger and I think 7/11 would be fair ratio for penetrate. Tiger needs only 3 so what's the problem?

Tank destroyer -> Heavy Tank -> Infantry (other tanks as well but without such efficiency like TD) -> Tank destroyer. And the circle is closed.

In coh2 it's like:

Axis TD -> Heavy Tank -> Everything.

you have to take account on how these tank destroyers were conceived and meant to be deployed. The Axis TDs in COH are heavily armored and armed. They can withstand shots from Allied tanks. The Allied TDs such as the SU85, Jackson, and M10 are more suited for ambush roles and hit and run style attacks. They aren't meany to duel other tanks due to their weaker armor values. However, due to the RNG, these vehicles aren't particularly affective at fighting tanks heavier than a Tiger.

you have to take account on how these tank destroyers were conceived and meant to be deployed. The Axis TDs in COH are heavily armored and armed. They can withstand shots from Allied tanks. The Allied TDs such as the SU85, Jackson, and M10 are more suited for ambush roles and hit and run style attacks. They aren't meany to duel other tanks due to their weaker armor values. However, due to the RNG, these vehicles aren't particularly affective at fighting tanks heavier than a Tiger.

It's not like they should win duel.
They should use range or mobility to flank.
Point is that at range they are useless and blitzkrieg makes flanking also impossible, not to mention schreck support even if flank is successful. M10 or M36 will die before third shot.

Tank destoryer should be able to kill tank. Right now "tanks" are better than allied "tank destroyers" at killing tanks.

Jackson would need 7 penetrating shots (160dmg) to kill Tiger and I think 7/11 would be fair ratio for penetrate. Tiger needs only 3 so what's the problem?

Tank destroyer -> Heavy Tank -> Infantry (other tanks as well but without such efficiency like TD) -> Tank destroyer. And the circle is closed.

In coh2 it's like:

Axis TD -> Heavy Tank -> Everything.

Ok we are getting to this. fine double the penetration rate of the jp4 and puma as well then and double the dps of the panther because its a td as well and should and should not lose to tanks like the is2. does this sound stupid? it does doesnt and it is just as stupid as your suggestion. A TD should be effective at killing tanks true. but it should not get a free pass period.

out ranging is not flanking; flanking is moving in order to have los to a non-front side. both the su-85 and jackson suck at flanking, but for different reasons. the only flanking soviet tanks are the 76 and 85, the former is just a bad tank and the later is pretty good.

jacksons/su-85s shouldn't duel either, they should sit at the rear and shoot at the enemy without getting hit.

Ok we are getting to this. fine double the penetration rate of the jp4 and puma as well then and double the dps of the panther because its a td as well and should and should not lose to tanks like the is2. does this sound stupid? it does doesnt and it is just as stupid as your suggestion. A TD should be effective at killing tanks true. but it should not get a free pass period.

Oh god....

Does JP4 have problems with penetration? No. The worst situation is vs E8 at max range. JP4 has only 79% chance to penetrate
Against other USF vehicles it's 100% most of the time.

Puma has already better pen than medium tanks and it's good at kitting them.

Panther has about 40% chance to win 1v1 with IS2. It's all about RNG but second use for TD is FLANKING.
Panther is a way faster, IS2 turret is very slow, zookr or PTRS are not the problem for Panther, amazing blitzkrieg and smoke. It's already great tank destroyer.


"free pass period." I don't know what you mean by this but if Im thinikg right, what about blitzing Panther behind ISU/IS, killing them and then use smoke for safe retreat? Isnt it free pass?

I feel like repeating these statistics is getting old but here we go... some math for those of you that are crying about the penetration value of the Jackson:

Jackson v the front armor of a Tiger at max range (20 higher than Tiger):

160 penetration / 300 armor = 53.3%

Jackson reload time: 5.8 at max range
Jackson damage: 240
Jackson penetrating hits to kill Tiger = 1040 / 240 = 4.33 which means we round up to 5.

Panther vs front armor of Is-2 at max range (10 higher than Is-2 *completely negated at vet 2 of Is-2):

220 penetration / 375 frontal armor: 58.67%
Panther reload time: 6.7 for Ost, 6.4 for OKW at max range
Panther damage: 160
Panther penetrating shots to kill Is-2: 6.5 so round up to 7.

Based on this data you can clearly see that the Jackson has pretty much the EXACT same chance to penetrate the front armor of a Tiger (without vet 1 popped) as the Panther has to penetrate the front of an Is-2. Furthermore it will take considerably longer for the Panther to kill the Is-2 because it reloads slower AND takes a full two more penetrating shots to actually score a kill. On top of this, the Jackson can operate outside the range of an AT gun unless the Tiger is right next to a PaK40 while a Panther is much more likely to be inside the range of a ZiS gun - although this is somewhat of a meta-argument.

One could argue that "oh the Panther can just flank the IS-2 to shoot rear armor of the Is-2", except doing so will almost always expose your own rear armor to the Is-2, or the fact that you want nothing to do with the whopping 250 close range penetration of the Is-2 (which is probably way too high in the first place given the absolutely absurd 375 frontal armor - for comparison the freaking elefant has 400 frontal armor and the KT 425... the IS-2 has a garden load of armor.)

Interestingly enough it is possible to hit rear armor of tanks from the side via manual attack ground, which is easier to do with the 60 range of the Jackson, albeit this method isn't exactly reliable.

And as I've stated before, none of this accounts for the significantly cheaper price of the Jackson, or itss ability to capture territory/repair itself/swap crews. Of course the Panther is minorly better against infantry because of having MGs, but USF hardly struggles against infantry.

Both the Panther and Jackson are strong tanks and they're extremely good at what they do. If you're having trouble using the Jackson try focusing more on keeping it at max range/out of harm's way. It is just a more micro-intensive unit, but has incredible potential. And maybe take a step back to realize that Is-2s are just as much, if not more, of a nightmare for Axis to deal with than Tigers are for allies - the ZiS actually has a higher chance to penetrate the front of a Tiger and Panther than the PaK 40 has to penetrate the front of an Is-2. I think the ZiS and PaK 40 are both in a good spot, not trying to argue for a buff/nerf to either of these units - just demonstrate that Allies DO have extremely heavily armored units that Axis has trouble "reliably" penetrating as you guys like to say.

@Australian Magic:

The Is-2 gun's damage per shot was changed because of how often it could 1-shot infantry when operating with 240 damage plus the AoE profile of an HE shell. AoE profiles and damage done per shot are directly related, the simple explanation being that as a unit's damage increases do does the area in which infantry *will* die if hit. 240 damage means a higher chance to erase infantry/AT guns. 160 damage means a lower chance. This does not apply to the Jackson because it shoots AP shells.