JagdTiger and Elephant need counters

No

Allies should not be able to counter axis units because krupp steel

Haha

It is completely counter intuitive and frankly bad design that heavy Tank Destroyers can not be countered. Not to mistake uncounterable with unbeatable. But you certainly can't kill them with Bazookas/PTRS and AT Guns because they simply don't have enough penetration. The only way to kill Heavy Tank Destroyers is by swarming with medium tanks, units that the Tank Destroyers are also capable of completely wrecking. Whilst it's certainly possible it's just bad for gameplay because it creates a situation that's far too all-in. Killing unsupported heavies is easy, but realistically there's always going to be Pak Walls, Shrek Blobs and even mines. If you throw away the 2-4 Mediums but the JT/Ele barely gets away then the game is basically over. And the only way of actually killing supported TD's is ccommiting to a really deep push that will most likely result in losing half of your mediums.

It also means there's little unit variation and strategy, you are just spamming mediums every single game as Allies. If the Pen on Bazookas and PTRS was buffed it would create a lot more of a reactionary counter system and make the game more active. With Infantry based AT getting buffed, it would incentivize Close Quarters Infantry to counter them which are also pretty worthless in the current meta.

For Comparison Allied tank Destroyers can be properly countered with Panzer Shreks.

Very well written argument. I +1 this completely.
RELIC READ THIS GUY HIS REPLY, SOAK IT UP AND CHANGE IT

No, just no!

Excuse me? Didn´t the Elefant just get nerfed this patch by getting rid of focused sight?

Both units are super slow... annoying to use and can guard 1/3rd of the map. The JT gets stunned by a fart.

Use infantry... hell, even one AT gun works, because they don´t do shit versus infantry. Even enough medium tanks can finish them because of a shit rof. Even Churchills can easily retreat from that. Or switch the attack. One time on the left side another time on the right side of the map, neither JT nor Elefant can come after you. Or kill the support and one medium tank can finish them. Or be lucky and have a map like "Trois ponts" where both units are effectively worthless.

But yeah, people are lazy and want to just charge their armor in. Play some games with those units and see how slow and cumbersome, super expensive and ineffective versus infantry they are.

Very well written argument. I +1 this completely.
RELIC READ THIS GUY HIS REPLY, SOAK IT UP AND CHANGE IT

It's hard indeed to counter the units, but their manouvrability is just shit. When he has to change it's target or have to move his ass so it doesn't get hit on the ass it will get lots of problems. I agree with TheMachine but I got more feeling for the argument of Looney. The maps are probably 70% of the win for these units. The only urban map the JT and Elefant was good on was Sittard and the only position to use it was the middle VP since it could only hit there. It just need open spaces. Luckely the JT doesn't have shoot through buildings anymore.

It's hard indeed to counter the units, but their manouvrability is just shit. When he has to change it's target or have to move his ass so it doesn't get hit on the ass it will get lots of problems. I agree with TheMachine but I got more feeling for the argument of Looney. The maps are probably 70% of the win for these units. The only urban map the JT and Elefant was good on was Sittard and the only position to use it was the middle VP since it could only hit there. It just need open spaces. Luckely the JT doesn't have shoot through buildings anymore.

It's definitely a combo of the two arguments, but the fact alone that a certain unit bounces more than 50% of all anti-AT stuff the allies can throw at such a tank (in particular the JT) is not a great thing. With the recent change of adding different tables for different units, they can easily make medium tanks not penetrate that much while infantry AT as Zook's and PTRS penetrate more consistent so there is an actual counter to these units rather than going all in.

I agree that maps are an issue, but I think we all know that the map pool is not likely to change drastically in such a way that the JT won't be dominating half of the map pool.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that JT OP but it's the game design that's bothering me. I'm not a native speaker so I can't really express myself as good as Machine, but II really think he makes perfect sense.

I'd rather wait and see what change the rifle + zook buffs will have than drastic changes to AT pen against heavy TDs. The very maps they are strong on leave them more open to flanking, especially as your enemy is then forced to group around the TD to support it. Being useless against infantry and team weapons, you need only to wheel an ATG into range to force a TD back. Good use of sight blockers will let you keep your own armour on the field.

Making these units more vulnerable to AT kinda defeats the point of their defenses. Allied TDs (bar the ISU) is considerably cheaper and a lot more mobile, which offsets their vulnerability as they can get away faster and are lot less costly to replace.

If you feel you must kill a heavy TD, there are plenty of options besides a risky swarm of med tanks. The best way is otfen a combination of methods. Indirect fire and off maps can be used against the TD directly or soften up the supporting units, or even force them off. 2 priests will make short work of an elefant. AT fire is most effective when hitting perpendicularly, as it forces the TD to waste time turning before it can withdraw. It also gives you a much bigger target and opens up the possibility of rear armour hits. Ability combos work wonders, somebody has already mentioned button+mark target+il-2 bombing run. Brit sniper stun+tulips is also quite potent, and if you catch the TD from the side with your firefly and a six pounder, it won't stand much chance.

If any changes had to be made, I'd much rather see an armour reduction to the JT, bring it it down to the 375-450 range. 525 is as ludicrous as the Churchill health bars!

It's definitely a combo of the two arguments, but the fact alone that a certain unit bounces more than 50% of all anti-AT stuff the allies can throw at such a tank (in particular the JT) is not a great thing. With the recent change of adding different tables for different units, they can easily make medium tanks not penetrate that much while infantry AT as Zook's and PTRS penetrate more consistent so there is an actual counter to these units rather than going all in.

I agree that maps are an issue, but I think we all know that the map pool is not likely to change drastically in such a way that the JT won't be dominating half of the map pool.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that JT OP but it's the game design that's bothering me. I'm not a native speaker so I can't really express myself as good as Machine, but II really think he makes perfect sense.

The Jagdtiger has the same problem as the Churchills have atm too much armour and too much health. (Churchills are even worse)

The Jagdtiger has the same problem as the Churchills have atm too much armour and too much health. (Churchills are even worse)

I agree.

With every change one must ask : is this needed? Would this change enrich the gameplay or not? In my opinion one of the suggestions stands out in this regard: artillery buff to TDs specifically.

There is nothing the game would lose by having Elefant and Jagdtiger (and ISU, just to be fair) receive a massive increases in damage received from howitzers. There is a lot to gain by it.

It gives the ability to break a stalemate. It gives a soft counter to something that is otherwise top of the food chain, which is good. For all the people who hate howitzers, this will be a WELCOME change for you, because a howie shooting at the Elefant is one less howie shooting at your MG position / medic truck.

Obviously this is not B4, so the only way say, an Elefant will get outright destroyed by a howitzer is if it receives 4-5 pinpoint hits, which will never happen given the scatter of the damn things unless you literally sit an elefant in the same spot all match and don't repair it between barrages.

Another thing that pops to mind is to guarantee stuns from artillery hits. near these beasts. That way an elefant or Jagdtiger can lose precious rotation and aim time and rushing mediums stand more chance against it, provided the allies use combined arms. In my opinion a concerted effort of artillery and tanks should be able to swing that particular matchup. Just the same as mortar + 2 infantry squads are already able to successfully rush an MG position even if there is no flank path available.

Problem with Ele and Jadg is obvious.
Flank with mediums is really dumb advice but on the other hand it's the only way.
But problem lies just here.
Many, many times witch such assault you can bring down Ele/Jadg to almost no health while loosing everything.

Huge bleed - no bleed at all, just repair.

I had countless games on Minsk where we tried to assault Jadgtiger with P-47 + Mark Target + Suicide mission for 2 Jacksons AT Guns and other stuff.
In other words - big push from all sides and the result was quite the same most of them time.

JT survives with almost no health while ammo is gone for P47 and MT, Jacksons are dead, AT guns are decrewed.

Huge bleed in MP, ammo and fuel for nothing to trade.

Big, fatty, pure AT vehicles ELE and JT should be heavy countered by AT infantry but they are not, for example heavy enginge damage if AT nades goes from rear or something like that.

AT infantry should be obvious counter for such monters.

Problem with Ele and Jadg is obvious.
Flank with mediums is really dumb advice but on the other hand it's the only way.
But problem lies just here.
Many, many times witch such assault you can bring down Ele/Jadg to almost no health while loosing everything.

Huge bleed - no bleed at all, just repair.

I had countless games on Minsk where we tried to assault Jadgtiger with P-47 + Mark Target + Suicide mission for 2 Jacksons AT Guns and other stuff.
In other words - big push from all sides and the result was quite the same most of them time.

JT survives with almost no health while ammo is gone for P47 and MT, Jacksons are dead, AT guns are decrewed.

Huge bleed in MP, ammo and fuel for nothing to trade.

Is mainly a problem of the map, not of the unit itself

Is mainly a problem of the map, not of the unit itself

You don't use Ele on Trois Ponts, right? So you won't find any trobules on that map because it won't be there or ot won't be effective.

By saying that the maps are problematic, ale open maps should be removed.
No minsk, no rails, no kharkov, nothing.

It is used only on open maps to squeeze best of them, but on the other hand you can't remove 50% of the maps.

They already have counters!

ISU, IS2, Firefly, Air Surpreme etc., Spitfire. B4,


Dont you agree?

You don't use Ele on Trois Ponts, right? So you won't find any trobules on that map because it won't be there or ot won't be effective.

By saying that the maps are problematic, ale open maps should be removed.
No minsk, no rails, no kharkov, nothing.

It is used only on open maps to squeeze best of them, but on the other hand you can't remove 50% of the maps.

Kappa, You know exactly what I mean mate Don't have to explain it I hope

By the way guys SU-85 still has far sight, so this unit would seem useful to help beat these long range heavies that can't self spot anymore.

In my opinion, the best way to beat a pure AT vehicle is to just ignore it.
Go heavy on infantry, cap points and laugh as the Elefant looks on wishing it could do anything to infantry.

I don't think the Elefant needs nerfs as it is a really good unit to help fight off churchills and brit superweapons though. (can't comment on Jagd because I have never seen one used in all my 2v2 games, although I reckon it will become more common with the buffs)

They already have counters!

ISU, IS2, Firefly, Air Surpreme etc., Spitfire. B4,


Dont you agree?

And this is where the thread should end. Allies have counters.

Actually, it isn't.

What you do if you don't have that specific counter doctrine?

No unit should require doctrine to counter it, doctrine might make it easier, but it shouldn't be requirement.

I disagree, good play involves seeing what your enemy goes for then chosing a doc to counter your enemy's doc.

They already have counters!

ISU, IS2, Firefly, Air Surpreme etc., Spitfire. B4,


Dont you agree?

But it is Elephnt and Jadg which are counter to ISU, IS and FF

They already have counters!

ISU, IS2, Firefly, Air Surpreme etc., Spitfire. B4,


Dont you agree?

ISU and IS-2 are as much of a counter to ele and JT as PTRS is a counter for tanks

ISU and IS-2 are as much of a counter to ele and JT as PTRS is a counter for tanks

Overstatement much? ISU vs Ele is pretty close, depending who fires first. Though it usually goes in favour of the TD, (being a TANK DESTROYER, rather than multi-purpose assault gun) a well timed button, mark target or ZiS shot will turn it in favour of the ISU.

Or should I just agree by way of a hyperbole and insist that Germans get removed from the game?