About Jacksons
28 Feb 2018, 16:45 PM
#41
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
Or we could name the thread "The sherman"
28 Feb 2018, 17:11 PM
#42
Posts: 366
due to its low health the jakson has received several buffs over the last few patches like increased vision range and high mobliity and now finally got the health buff too. now it is clearly over performing. I do like the 640 health so the mobility needs to be toned down a bit. Like a 60 range TD shouldent be able to out range every tank and then chase down other lighter faster tanks. Speed is good on comet and panther, jakson need a mobility nerf imo.
We choose our joys and sorrows long before we experience them
28 Feb 2018, 17:18 PM
#43
Posts: 862
due to its low health the jakson has received several buffs over the last few patches like increased vision range and high mobliity and now finally got the health buff too. now it is clearly over performing. I do like the 640 health so the mobility needs to be toned down a bit. Like a 60 range TD shouldent be able to out range every tank and then chase down other lighter faster tanks. Speed is good on comet and panther, jakson need a mobility nerf imo.
I am far from an expert on this game, so the question is one of genuine curiosity. Doesn't the Jackson already suffer from poor acceleration and pathing?
28 Feb 2018, 18:45 PM
#45
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
due to its low health the jakson has received several buffs over the last few patches like increased vision range and high mobliity and now finally got the health buff too. now it is clearly over performing. I do like the 640 health so the mobility needs to be toned down a bit. Like a 60 range TD shouldent be able to out range every tank and then chase down other lighter faster tanks. Speed is good on comet and panther, jakson need a mobility nerf imo.
Totally agree.
28 Feb 2018, 18:50 PM
#46
14 
Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9
Off topic post # 44 invised
Back to topic.
Back to topic.
28 Feb 2018, 18:54 PM
#47
Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1
I am far from an expert on this game, so the question is one of genuine curiosity. Doesn't the Jackson already suffer from poor acceleration and pathing?
The jackson had pretty good acceleration, especially when compared to its counterparts.
Pathing is more of a map or game issue then an jackson issue
bg /l
28 Feb 2018, 19:05 PM
#48
Posts: 862
The jackson had pretty good acceleration, especially when compared to its counterparts.
Pathing is more of a map or game issue then an jackson issue
I know it is a game design issue, but I also thought it affected vehicles with larger designations and slower turn radii more.
28 Feb 2018, 19:47 PM
#49
14 Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9
Added this, in case any of you want to defend the Sherman design in RL
https://www.coh2.org/topic/68189/the-sherman-in-wwii
https://www.coh2.org/topic/68189/the-sherman-in-wwii
28 Feb 2018, 20:36 PM
#50
Posts: 1044 | Subs: 1
I know it is a game design issue, but I also thought it affected vehicles with larger designations and slower turn radii more.
I cant give exact details for sure but I do believe the jackson has a relatively larger model size then most mediums
Im sure someone will come correct me if Im wrong of course
bg /l
28 Feb 2018, 21:11 PM
#51
Posts: 170 | Subs: 1
I cant give exact details for sure but I do believe the jackson has a relatively larger model size then most mediums
Im sure someone will come correct me if Im wrong of course
Assuming coh.hu stats are still up-to-date it has a target size of 24, same as the Panther, in comparison regular Sherman seems to have a target size of 23 so not that big of a difference.
Then again I don't feel it matters too much because most of the time you can kite your opponents AT with your 60 range (good spot tradememark) besides occasional pak shots, JP4s or heavy TDs. (+ the gimmick raketen predator squads assuming they don't get instagibbed)
28 Feb 2018, 21:52 PM
#52
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
...
Assuming coh.hu stats are still up-to-date it has a target size of 24, same as the Panther, in comparison regular Sherman seems to have a target size of 23 so not that big of a difference.
...
Think he is talking about the hitbox model not target size.
28 Feb 2018, 22:26 PM
#53
Posts: 170 | Subs: 1
Think he is talking about the hitbox model not target size.
My mistake, didn't connect model size to actual hitbox size since it rarely comes up in the discussions.
At least from my own experience I can say that I haven't noticed any noticeable difference between Jackson and other medium tanks regarding pathing issues. Probably greatest threats being random trees, shrubbery and strategic points like with any other vehicles.
(My assessment is based on feeling alone and not stats obviously.)
28 Feb 2018, 23:51 PM
#54
Posts: 911
I am far from an expert on this game, so the question is one of genuine curiosity. Doesn't the Jackson already suffer from poor acceleration and pathing?
It has a similar speed (6.5 vs 6.6) and better acceleration (3 vs 2.4) when compared to the panther.
And if i recall correctly (or i could just be crazy) it used to lack heavy crush meaning it would have to path around rock walls.
Imagine my playercard is here
1 Mar 2018, 03:04 AM
#55
Posts: 1930
The jackson had pretty good acceleration, especially when compared to its counterparts.
Pathing is more of a map or game issue then an jackson issue
the jackson's rotation is only 30 despite its high acceleration.
the maximum "safe" rotation is still 32 before a tank start turning into a lawn mower. Sherman have 34 rotation.
in addition, the jackson is hurt by its rather huge target size of 24. It shouldn't be that high.
The open top turret were meant to minimize target profile. They they say "open top", the turret is actually missing about 1/4-2/3 of the turret.
due to its low health the jakson has received several buffs over the last few patches like increased vision range and high mobliity and now finally got the health buff too. now it is clearly over performing. I do like the 640 health so the mobility needs to be toned down a bit. Like a 60 range TD shouldent be able to out range every tank and then chase down other lighter faster tanks. Speed is good on comet and panther, jakson need a mobility nerf imo.
the current jackson sight is 40 + 5 at vet 2. Puma have 50 +5(okw)/15(wehr) and the Firely have 45 with upgrade.
Again, the open top turret is also meant to increase visibility.
and giving the jackson a mobility nerf just turn it into a better Firefly.
1 Mar 2018, 08:43 AM
#56
Posts: 366
the current jackson sight is 40 + 5 at vet 2. Puma have 50 +5(okw)/15(wehr) and the Firely have 45 with upgrade.
Again, the open top turret is also meant to increase visibility.
and giving the jackson a mobility nerf just turn it into a better Firefly.
the firefly is good tank destroyer and well balanced imo. Jakson starts with better penetration (210 vs 220)
MOAR penetration with vet and better moblity then a panther (lol?), acceleration and speed and better vision which means it can get the first shot off, and hence gain the uppper hand in the engagement. Its also cheaper then the firefly (140 vs 155) and the list keeps going.
now, I am in favor of keeping the 640 health as it makes sense but the mobility needs to be brought down to su85 and firefly levels.
Self spotting on TDs is another discussion so i wont get much into it. Coh is combined arms game and i personally think there should be other units spotting for TDs rather then elefant with full vision(its doctrinal so debatable but still) and su85 can use full range without any support or jakson or firefly or command panther.
We choose our joys and sorrows long before we experience them
1 Mar 2018, 09:53 AM
#57
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
in addition, the jackson is hurt by its rather huge target size of 24. It shouldn't be that high.
The open top turret were meant to minimize target profile. They they say "open top", the turret is actually missing about 1/4-2/3 of the turret.
Open turret does not have a significant effect on vehicles silhouette. Historically it also proved not effective and m36 where actually refitted with folded armored roof after WWII.
But all that is rather irrelevant in game. Even with target size of 24 a PzIV has 60% chance of scoring a natural hit at range 40 or a 30% is moving. There is really no need to lower that chance.
the current jackson sight is 40 + 5 at vet 2. Puma have 50 +5(okw)/15(wehr) and the Firely have 45 with upgrade.
Puma is a reconnaissance vehicle comparing it with a TD is rather misleading especially since the stug has the normal SR of 35.
In the end of the day historic accuracy is a good thing and there should be an effort to be achieved but not if that effect balance in a negative way.
1 Mar 2018, 12:26 PM
#58
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
Puma is a reconnaissance vehicle comparing it with a TD is rather misleading especially since the stug has the normal SR of 35.
In the end of the day historic accuracy is a good thing and there should be an effort to be achieved but not if that effect balance in a negative way.
Historical accuracy is not applicable to 95% of units in the game for any other purpose then lore fluff. If historical accuracy was in any way respected in CoH2, Luchs would be a reconnaissance vehicle as that is exactly what it was in late war.
In CoH2 Puma is a tank destroyer designed to murder all light armor and contest all med armor, especiallz at higher vet, when it gets regular 160dmg.
Arguing that Puma is anything else then light TD with 50 sight range is arguing historical semantics.
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
1 Mar 2018, 12:45 PM
#59
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Historical accuracy is not applicable to 95% of units in the game for any other purpose then lore fluff. If historical accuracy was in any way respected in CoH2, Luchs would be a reconnaissance vehicle as that is exactly what it was in late war.
In CoH2 Puma is a tank destroyer designed to murder all light armor and contest all med armor, especiallz at higher vet, when it gets regular 160dmg.
Arguing that Puma is anything else then light TD with 50 sight range is arguing historical semantics.
Another nice theory with flaws.
Luch is reconnaissance vehicle in game and that is why it gets cloak at vet 1 and +30% sight range at vet 3.
Your description of the Puma is also wrong. Puma is "flanker" since it accuracy and penetration does not allow it to engage enemy vehicles at long ranges.
In the end of day they Puma has nothing common with M36 and should not be compared with it.
As for historical accuracy pls read and understand the sentence in the section you quoted.
1 Mar 2018, 13:00 PM
#60
Posts: 1273
There are no flaws with his theory, read the full post instead of just picking sentences.
Whoever uses Puma as reconnaissance only has never fully discovered their full potential as mid game enemy tank deterring unit. I wouldn't call it a tank-destroyer, but that would be an useless bickering on schematics.
Flanking with a Puma is a clear no-no, and no experienced player would ever do that.
Whoever uses Puma as reconnaissance only has never fully discovered their full potential as mid game enemy tank deterring unit. I wouldn't call it a tank-destroyer, but that would be an useless bickering on schematics.
Flanking with a Puma is a clear no-no, and no experienced player would ever do that.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
44 | ||
 |
|
|
7 | ||
 |
|
|
31 | ||
|
|
|
|
22 | ||
 |
|
|
19 | ||
|
|
|
|
13 | ||
|
|
|
|
9 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
1 |
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
728 users are online:
728 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