m36-Jackson is over performing
25 Apr 2015, 21:17 PM
#61
Posts: 380
Jackson is the only good counter to enemy tanks. Bazookas are bullshit, at guns are okay but it's not a perfect way, p47 are only in doctrine and very expensive. Nerfing Jackson, means that you kill late game of USF, that already is not good as it must be. Jack have a very weak armor and costs like half of a tiger. Also, one teller mine can take more than a half of Jackson's health. So, no nerf pls.
25 Apr 2015, 23:15 PM
#62
Posts: 770
The jacksons are without a doubt the best and cost effective AT in the game. But considering the much weaker AT gun and lack of a good heavy tanks its something thats absolutely needed
25 Apr 2015, 23:57 PM
#63
Posts: 879
I will be the first to admit I suck at late-game US, but honestly how does one use a Jackson in a 2v2 vs heavies or panthers supported by lots of shreks?
There is very little I can ever do with a Jackson except wait for him to make a mistake, and if they need a VP they will support the tanks and there's nothing Jacksons can do about it...I've seen 3 Scotts + Jacksons work but that's really only gonna work on open maps with clear fields of fire...
There is very little I can ever do with a Jackson except wait for him to make a mistake, and if they need a VP they will support the tanks and there's nothing Jacksons can do about it...I've seen 3 Scotts + Jacksons work but that's really only gonna work on open maps with clear fields of fire...
26 Apr 2015, 00:11 AM
#64
Posts: 2561
I will be the first to admit I suck at late-game US, but honestly how does one use a Jackson in a 2v2 vs heavies or panthers supported by lots of shreks?There really isn't much you can do. The lack of mines and the low pen and long activation time of at-rifles makes it very hard to disable heavier tanks in the same way as the soviets can. You either destroy enough of the infantry support early on that you can give chase and finish off the armor or hope they make a big mistake. Otherwise the armor will continually attack and pull back and you start bleeding mp until you can no longer effectively fight.
There is very little I can ever do with a Jackson except wait for him to make a mistake, and if they need a VP they will support the tanks and there's nothing Jacksons can do about it...I've seen 3 Scotts + Jacksons work but that's really only gonna work on open maps with clear fields of fire...
26 Apr 2015, 04:04 AM
#65
Posts: 270
Early game advantage succeeded by late game advantage, USF design is based on that concept.
Dominating the game at all stages.
Dominating the game at all stages.
I'll try again.
The source of my frustrations that should be removed
26 Apr 2015, 06:42 AM
#66
Posts: 41
Permanently BannedAll dem tears of axis fanboys, because Jackson FINALLY can counter panther/king tiger 
PS. From what I noticed Jackson still barely penetrates panther from long range.
PS. From what I noticed Jackson still barely penetrates panther from long range.
26 Apr 2015, 07:57 AM
#67
Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1
All dem tears of axis fanboys, because Jackson FINALLY can counter panther/king tiger
PS. From what I noticed Jackson still barely penetrates panther from long range.
USF is still broken in regards of AT capabilities. You have Jackson and... yea that's it, Jackson. IMO their ATGs needs huge pen buff, high ROF and reduced damage to deal consistent amount of damage to heavies while being potent versus medium armor. If they buff Bazooka and ATG this way, your hands are not tied with Jacksons.
26 Apr 2015, 08:01 AM
#68
Posts: 1705
What us needs is no free lieutenant to outnumber by default and push back m20 2 mins from current 5 min bullshit.
26 Apr 2015, 08:16 AM
#69
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
IMO their ATGs needs huge pen buff, high ROF and reduced damage to deal consistent amount of damage to heavies while being potent versus medium armor. If they buff Bazooka and ATG this way, your hands are not tied with Jacksons.
I'd say the 57mm just needs a cost reduction on its mandatory-against-actual-tanks AP shells to be fine, which put its pen at very slightly under average (-8 at max range to the ZiS-3's). The fire-rate's already the best by a bit if I recall correctly and the vet ability is definitely excellent.
26 Apr 2015, 08:18 AM
#70
Posts: 1702
The USF at gun is fine. 70 range with vet 1, sights for itself, best rate of fire in the game, low pen but with AP rounds has almost the same pen as zis-3.
Bazookas do not need a buff. If zooks got better then we would have the same horrible bloberino we see with volks.
They just need to be 45 munis
Bazookas do not need a buff. If zooks got better then we would have the same horrible bloberino we see with volks.
They just need to be 45 munis
26 Apr 2015, 08:23 AM
#71
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
Bazookas do not need a buff. If zooks got better then we would have the same horrible bloberino we see with volks.
They just need to be 45 munis
Great point. Far better to fix the heavies themselves that Zookas are useless against than the actual Zookas (which hopefully would fix mediums a lot too).
26 Apr 2015, 08:29 AM
#72
Posts: 1802 | Subs: 1
The USF at gun is fine. 70 range with vet 1, sights for itself, best rate of fire in the game, low pen but with AP rounds has almost the same pen as zis-3.
Bazookas do not need a buff. If zooks got better then we would have the same horrible bloberino we see with volks.
They just need to be 45 munis
About the ATG you might be right, but when Axis big guns hit the field, even with AP rounds they are not gonna do that much in a real combat scenario, and with the current meta (spam till tiger) they are not gonna vet that fast.
About Bazookas I have to disagree, because Rifles lose both DPS and slot for BARs. Since Axis armor generally have both more HP and armor, they are not gonna be as effective as a Schrek blob. This has to be tested though, but even if the research price and weapon price is reduced, I still would not use Bazookas because of the DPS loss. Unless they are actually powerful, not just cheap, so you can counter the infantry with M2 HMG and shermans, and you can rely on your Bazookas not to suck.
Great point. Far better to fix the heavies themselves that Zookas are useless against than the actual Zookas (which hopefully would fix mediums a lot too).
Zooks also suck versus PZIV and StuGs, big time.
26 Apr 2015, 08:50 AM
#73
Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2
Zooks are not that bad.
Yesterday I dropped Paras and I got one squad with zooks. 5k dmg vs vehicles in 13min. Not bad I guess.
Problem is different.
Tiger, King Tiger or even Panther provide better or worse AI power so in fact you can upgrade as many Volks as you want, and pick up everykind of AT because you still have AI power provided by your big, fatty steel.
USF must have 2 Jacksons which means pure AT, so any other unit you make, must be AI.
This leads us to the place when you don't want AT infantry, cause you need to counter infantry and Jacksons cannot do that.
Just in theory, if USF have Pershing tank with quite good AI abilities, we could see Pershings with support of Rifles with zooks.
Yesterday I dropped Paras and I got one squad with zooks. 5k dmg vs vehicles in 13min. Not bad I guess.
Problem is different.
Tiger, King Tiger or even Panther provide better or worse AI power so in fact you can upgrade as many Volks as you want, and pick up everykind of AT because you still have AI power provided by your big, fatty steel.
USF must have 2 Jacksons which means pure AT, so any other unit you make, must be AI.
This leads us to the place when you don't want AT infantry, cause you need to counter infantry and Jacksons cannot do that.
Just in theory, if USF have Pershing tank with quite good AI abilities, we could see Pershings with support of Rifles with zooks.
26 Apr 2015, 09:15 AM
#74
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
The issue isn't in the Jackson. Grab two ATG's like the Wehrmacht are invariably forced to do and I suspect they would perform pretty damn admirably. Cookies nearly 1on'd Stormless' tiger with a single 57 yesterday in the SCC3. The USF "lack anti-armour options" because they aren't a very good defensive faction. You don't see the USF dig in or utilize defensive units; because that hurts the efficiency of your rifles, effectively gimping your army. Thus the Jackson becomes your only mobile anti-armour option capable of keeping up with your army and actually supporting it. Therefore I think the issue interestingly enough is with rifles and the invariable extremity of the USF that comes with them.
In addition, making vehicles slightly beefier and rifles weaker, could potentially iron things out a little.
In addition, making vehicles slightly beefier and rifles weaker, could potentially iron things out a little.
26 Apr 2015, 09:35 AM
#75
Posts: 31
http://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561198040750202
Not played even 200 games, makes OP balance claims.
Not played even 200 games, makes OP balance claims.
26 Apr 2015, 09:44 AM
#76
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
http://www.coh2.org/ladders/playercard/steamid/76561198040750202
Not played even 200 games, makes OP balance claims.
it doesn't invalidate an opinion.
26 Apr 2015, 09:57 AM
#77
Posts: 31
it doesn't invalidate an opinion.
That does discredit his opinions by default. I can claim that Moon is made of cheese but without any arguments, experience or proof to back up my claims, it's by default discredited. Using your logic, anyone who played 0 games can make valid balance claims.
26 Apr 2015, 10:58 AM
#78
Posts: 1283 | Subs: 4
That does discredit his opinions by default. I can claim that Moon is made of cheese but without any arguments, experience or proof to back up my claims, it's by default discredited. Using your logic, anyone who played 0 games can make valid balance claims.
Not at all. Citing time played is nothing more than ad hominem player card shaming. You can attack the premises and conclusions of his argument and evidence provided, but it's still valid whether or not we agree or disagree.
And I'd hope my arguments wouldn't follow such a slippery slope.
26 Apr 2015, 15:04 PM
#79
Posts: 1439
[...]On topic: The issue with the Jackson is that OKW doesn't have an infantry based counter to it since the Rackten only has 50 range. When making armor pushes you HAVE to have JPIV support or else his Jacksons will just kite you all day. [...]
This is gardening gold! How about Volks with Shreks? Jackson do sheep to infantry. Volks squad will just sit in front of it shooting shrecks left and right. If he goes for crash, then you hit him with raketen and other stuff from the second line.
26 Apr 2015, 17:41 PM
#80
Posts: 3103 | Subs: 1
Zooks also suck versus PZIV and StuGs, big time.
Well, I'd definitely take a Schreck any day, but they don't feel a noobtrap against those things at least.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
45 | ||
 |
|
|
7 | ||
 |
|
|
31 | ||
 |
|
|
22 | ||
|
|
|
|
20 | ||
|
|
|
|
9 | ||
 |
|
|
4 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.35057.860+15
- 3.1110614.644+11
- 4.624225.735+2
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.919405.694+3
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1236
Board Info
659 users are online:
659 guests
0 post in the last 24h
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
5 posts in the last week
33 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49152
Welcome our newest member, Cummings
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, Cummings
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM