What is the weakness from Jackson?

Jump back to quoted post15 Jan 2018, 19:54 PMMr.Flush

It is not very dumb argument. Usf does well in open maps where their at guns and jaksons excel, but they do worse in maps with plenty of shot blockers. Okw p4s and reketans prove superior in these maps.

So the big question is how would you change each faction to combat the other in these maps?

Jump back to quoted post15 Jan 2018, 20:29 PMMr.Flush

The jakson was buffed because usfs late game was non-existent. You are pushing your point to make usf seem like they can't be beaten. The Weakness to jakson is heavy td destroyers, or you can use shot blockers to your advantage. Usf does not have any other options to deal with heavies. The game would be better balanced if the jakson was a little worse, but usf would need better mediums tank in return. You have to consider the faction in which the jakson belongs to.

Jump back to quoted post15 Jan 2018, 20:58 PMStug life

just make the range 55(so at gun can out range it while still outraging all the heavy and medium bar the jadg panzer) or lower the mobility and turret traverse time (so 2 medium might be able to flank and kill it)

Jump back to quoted post11 Jan 2018, 11:15 AMullumulu

M-36 has the highest mobility of 60 range TD, has a turret, one of the highest moving modifier, a high penetration and 360 sight radius bonus.



wekaness from:

Jagdpz4: can only see to in a little part on front, is slow, no turrent, flankable, not usefull in urban maps
su76: no armor, no hp, no turrent, flankable
su85: can only see to in a little part on front, no turrent, flankable, not usefull in urban
firefly: flankable, less armor and HP
Jackson: ....

what is the wekaness from jackson?

Jump back to quoted post15 Jan 2018, 21:44 PMHighfiveeeee

Answering the real topic:

M36 Jackson, weaknesses: AT infantry and AT guns, where it both can't do a single shit against. Case closed.

Against the inf you get an MG or two, case closed again.

It seems like you have a problem fighting combined arms, which is the way the game should be played. And in addition you seem to like whining.

Jump back to quoted post15 Jan 2018, 21:22 PMMr.Flush

Thank you for an actual suggestion! My suggestion would be to nerf the rate of fire and speed on the jakson, but increase its pen so the dps remains the same against heavy armor. A p4 will be able to 1v1 a jakson with its slower rof. Also, I would add a tier 4 to usf. Tier 4 would require extra fuel and mp and include access to easy 8s. Easy 8s are able to fight versus okw p4's where normal Sherman tanks cannot take on okw p4s.

Jump back to quoted post15 Jan 2018, 21:22 PMMr.Flush

Thank you for an actual suggestion! My suggestion would be to nerf the rate of fire and speed on the jakson, but increase its pen so the dps remains the same against heavy armor. A p4 will be able to 1v1 a jakson with its slower rof. Also, I would add a tier 4 to usf. Tier 4 would require extra fuel and mp and include access to easy 8s. Easy 8s are able to fight versus okw p4's where normal Sherman tanks cannot take on okw p4s.

Jump back to quoted post15 Jan 2018, 22:36 PMStug life

to me we could make the m 10 stock too if medium tank are a problem , with a price increase of course (i'm always in to adding more units to factions)

Jump back to quoted post15 Jan 2018, 22:39 PMKharn

This is actually one of the main problems. When you duke it out tank vs tank, the jacksons really the only viable solution you can come up with non-doctrinally. The Sherman really can't fight off other mediums reliably at all, so everyone is just dumping into the jackson.

Even the m10 isn't great, and it shouldn't be considering its so cheap, it's like a beefy Su76, that seems.. worse?

Nobody makes shermans...

Jump back to quoted post15 Jan 2018, 21:44 PMHighfiveeeee

Answering the real topic:

M36 Jackson, weaknesses: AT infantry and AT guns, where it both can't do a single shit against. Case closed.

Against the inf you get an MG or two, case closed again.

It seems like you have a problem fighting combined arms, which is the way the game should be played. And in addition you seem to like whining.

Jump back to quoted post15 Jan 2018, 22:36 PMKharn

Use combined arms to fight, everyones yelled that at allied players for ages, and when axis has to use combined arms to counter a threat its basically impossible even if they have some of the best tools for the job.

Jump back to quoted post16 Jan 2018, 09:14 AMzarok47

You see, when this exact argument was brought up to defend the elephant, it was screamed at that the elephant was not alone.

It was supported by the rest of the army. And so is the jackson.

Any argument you guys make in favor of the jackson is one that has been made for the elephant/JT in the past.

Neither is/was okay.

If you still think jackson is ok, we should bring back 85 range JT which ignores shotblockers but remove the AI barrage.

Since it won't do jack shit vs infantry.............

Jump back to quoted post16 Jan 2018, 10:02 AMHighfiveeeee

Additionally the large range of Jackson is almost twice as big as its view range (afaik 35 to 60). So without a proper spotter it is useless.

Jump back to quoted post16 Jan 2018, 10:02 AMHighfiveeeee

...
Additionally the large range of Jackson is almost twice as big as its view range (afaik 35 to 60). So without a proper spotter it is useless.

Jump back to quoted post16 Jan 2018, 10:02 AMHighfiveeeee

I don't think that anyone here besides the hardest Axis fanboys will deny that Elefant and JT where OP in team games. The Jackson still has a paper armor though. I had a game yesterday where a dug up Ostwind beat up a Jackson so badly that it had to retreat with a destroyed gun.

Additionally the large range of Jackson is almost twice as big as its view range (afaik 35 to 60). So without a proper spotter it is useless.