m36-Jackson is over performing

Jump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 19:31 PMCieZ

Funny that last patch I was telling everyone that the Jackson was an amazing tank. Everyone said it was too squishy.

Now, with absolutely zero changes to its survivability, and a nerf against medium armor, with a slight buff against heavy armor everyone is saying how good the Jackson is...

Seems legit.

I guess kind of like five months ago when I was telling everyone how OP the is2 was and everyone was telling me I was stupid and that the tiger was way stronger. Yeah, we see how that turned out.

Jump back to quoted post24 Apr 2015, 18:37 PMRollo

Not to mention the turret and great moving accuracy that makes trying to counter with PIV's almost impossible (unlike how you can against an SU-85).

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:04 AMAirborne

It is logic that it is impossible to counter a jackson with a panzer IV, a jackson is a hard counter to tanks.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:25 AMKatitof

Congrats alex, comparing 50 range, extended sight, turboblitz, 2500hp, 320 dmg anti all free unit to a 480hp, 200 dmg, 60 range AT exclusive 350/125 tank destroyer.

I believe we can now officially crown you as a new lolcake as you have reached the low needed for that.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:35 AMAlexzandvar

If a unit is overpreforming, it's overpreforming. When analyzing the why and how one must act logically and considering arguments for and against a buff or nerf.

"lol" is not an argument, "oh but you see I made up a scenario in my head were it's fine" is not an argument.

TLDR: I agree with everyone USF has shitty AT, give USF better AT in general and tone the Jackson down to be more reasonable.

The old Tiger Ace was far more retarded than the Jackson is now, but plenty of people were defending it for the same reasons people defend the Jacksons current state.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:36 AMSpecialka

The thing is you still have not proved that the M36 is overperforming for its cost.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:40 AMAlexzandvar

Each TD has a weakness or two.

The JPIV: High cost, low mobility, no gun traverse.

The SU-85: Thin armor, low mobility

The Jackson: Thin armor/low health

Previously the Jackson had two, the thin armor combined with low pen. Now one of those weakness's is gone and it has little reason to be as good as it is while your paying so little for it. On top of this is the fact you can pop cap abuse it and get instant repair crits allowing you to negate smart mine play.

Now this being said: I think the Jackson is justified in it's current state because USF has basically nothing else. USF should get more AT options and the Jackson should be toned down a tiny bit.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 09:48 AMSpecialka

If an USF player is able to popcap trick, you have already lost.

And, for instance, the JP4 has good range, good rof, good pen, can stealth with vet, is tiny, etc... It should be nerf!

That is more or less what you are saying about M36. And after that, you are surprised no one is taking you seriously.

Jump back to quoted post25 Apr 2015, 18:44 PMAlexzandvar

The JPIV has about as many weakness's as it has strengths, same for the SU-85. This means they are balanced. The Jackson just has to many strengths an not enough weakness's for it's cost.

This doesn't mean I think it needs to be nerfed, USF is to desperate for reliable AT and a Jackson change would need to come with a buff to the rest of USF's AT options.