About Jacksons

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.

Yes, and Primary reason you are getting luchs in your games is to scout with it, no one ever gets it for ist Performance vs infantry, but specifically for scouting, right?

Seriously, you are trying so hard you make yourself look silly.

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.

50 range, 50 sight and its mobility Warrant is being perfectly safe when engaging med armor frontally, ist perfectly capable to effectively kill all meds up front with exception of war speed brit tanks. It performs best when flanking due to its Penetration Profile, but is still very effective frontally as it can effortelessly kite and poke.

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.

Only thing that keeps puma in check is its pen profile.
However you can not deny its a TD.
Its fast(like Jackson), it got sight(like Jackson), it got turret(like Jackson), majority of the time you would use it exactly the same way as Jackson, simply against lighter targets.

If you get it for scouting instead of kubel, I seriously question your ability to comprehend most basic unit use in game-you may be greatest stat search engine around, but when it Comes to actual in game unit use its hard not to cringe reading your posts.

edit: german auto correct I am not allowed to turn off messes up every other word on this weird pc, I gave up trying to fix it now, hence weird shit

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.

Just watch some high level games where Puma is used. You claim simply demonstrates you lack of game knowledge.

Seeing something being used in the game doesn't automatically mean it is a good idea to do that, especially if the result of the action is poor. You don't simply flank with the Puma. The games where the Puma is used is all about outmaneuvering the enemy tank, whilst still keeping its distance to it, then rush away. It is all about Hit and Run tactics using the advantages of the Puma. Not flanking - one doesn't simply flank with the Puma. A traditional flank maneuver would result in a dead Puma. Furthermore, your previous "claim" also counter-arguments your claim:

it accuracy and penetration does not allow it to engage enemy vehicles at long ranges.
Puma has nothing common with M36 and should not be compared with it.

If you really want to argue the schematics of flanking and hit and run tactics, be my guest.

Just watch some high level games where Puma is used. You claim simply demonstrates you luck of game knowledge.

Attacking someone's game skills without any grounds because you disagree with the person - or because they didn't see the videos you saw - is poor argumentation and deters from the topic. Ad hominem, much? For instance, I don't argue about your utterly poor English Grammar (e.g. you luck of game knowledge) - it's pointless and off-topic.

Yes, and Primary reason you are getting luchs in your games is to scout with it, no one ever gets it for ist Performance vs infantry, but specifically for scouting, right?

If and why I getting a Luch is irrelevant. A unit can be good vs infantry and a reconnaissance vehicle like the T-70, your argument and theory that is has to be one or the other is simply wrong.

Since you are so fond on using Relic and modder as an argument according to Relic Luch is a reconnaissance vehicle.
Show Spoiler

50 range, 50 sight and its mobility Warrant is being perfectly safe when engaging med armor frontally, ist perfectly capable to effectively kill all meds up front with exception of war speed brit tanks. It performs best when flanking due to its Penetration Profile, but is still very effective frontally as it can effortelessly kite and poke.

Try calculating the chance to hit and penetrate a medium tank a range 50 or even provide a video of you using a Puma and demonstrate how "effortelessly" you can "kill all medium up front"

Only thing that keeps puma in check is its pen profile.
However you can not deny its a TD.
Its fast(like Jackson), it got sight(like Jackson), it got turret(like Jackson), majority of the time you would use it exactly the same way as Jackson, simply against lighter targets.

A unit can be a an antitank unit and reconnaissance vehicles at the same time, your argument and theory that is has to be one or the other is simply wrong.

I will not even dignify the argument of Puma/jackson comparison with an answer.

Show Spoiler

Offtopic: Vipper, I seriously disagree with your new practice of hiding insults towards other users in spoiler-tags. I recommend to use PM if you really must reply to personal comments. I don't think it is the intention to use spoiler tags to do that - I love clicking on spoiler tags, and opening them to see an insult towards another user isn't fun.

Do you all have a different version of the game than I do? This thread is giving me confusing flashes, but so do many others....

Sometimes I'm like 99% sure that when people say a unit name and what it's intended function is (or rather, what it can actually do) they are actually talking about a completely different unit than the one I have.

It's like we are both staring at a tree and the guy next to me goes "man, that polar bear sure is lazy".

Do you all have a different version of the game than I do? This thread is giving me confusing flashes, but so do many others....

Sometimes I'm like 99% sure that when people say a unit name and what it's intended function is (or rather, what it can actually do) they are actually talking about a completely different unit than the one I have.

It's like we are both staring at a tree and the guy next to me goes "man, that polar bear sure is lazy".

You'll note that typically occurs when discussions revolve around concepts that involve player input, such as a units 'role'. For instance, a player can use whatever unit they'd like for reconnaissance. What that 'reconnaissance' entails can be debated as much as calling a tree a polar bear.

I find it funny to see someone say the Jackson is good when ive seen a vet 2 use apcr on a panther and the round bounces. Then that same panther pens first shot. The lack of smoke chargers and blitz make it an inferior vehicle to the panther. Change my mind

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.


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)
when people say "open top" turret they don't just mean the lid is open. They mean the turret is missing the top ~20%.

For example, the m10 Achilles (which use the same hull and turret as the m10 wolverine) is listed as 2.57m on wiki. The vehicle achieve this height partly through its use of an open top turret.

The in game "size" stats is clearly a vague representation of the vehicle's size IRL.
As some clear example, the size 17 jp4 was only 1.85 m tall. The size 20 stug was 2.15 m. the panzer4 is 22. Larger vehicle get bigger size.

The height listed on wiki for the jackson is 3.28 m over the .50cal, which is clearly mounted on a elevated gun mount. The best stats I could find of the jackson's height is 2.71m, similar to the panzer's 2.68m on wiki.

the panther tank is 2.99m IRL, and 24 size in game.

2) the puma have a 50m range gun and a 50m sight. It can spot for itself and still out-range most enemy.

only looking at the puma as a "recon" unit is demonstrating a lack of imagination.

...
The in game "size" stats is clearly a vague representation of the vehicle's size IRL.
...

And in this case balance is more important since as I have already explained units like PzIV or even the Panther have trouble hitting the M36 even with its current size.

...only looking at the puma as a "recon" unit is demonstrating a lack of imagination.

You need to tell that to people who claim Puma has a single role. I already explained that Puma is Recon and "flanker" is previous posts.

You need to tell that to people who claim Puma has a single role. I already explained that Puma is Recon and "flanker" is previous posts.

Puma is a reconnaissance vehicle comparing it with a TD is rather misleading especially since the stug has the normal SR of 35.

Keep in mind that it is you who keeps changing her mind about what the Puma is and what it can do, whilst obfuscating posts to make things even more difficult to understand and follow. You argued yesterday that it was a Recon unit, suddenly it's a "flanker" (that you leave between quotes, for some kind of interpretation reasons I suppose). No wonder Firesparks misreads your ideas. Don't point fingers at other people.

Attacking someone's game skills without any grounds because you disagree with the person - or because they didn't see the videos you saw - is poor argumentation and deters from the topic. Ad hominem, much? For instance, I don't argue about your utterly poor English Grammar (e.g. you luck of game knowledge) - it's pointless and off-topic.

Your claim that :

Flanking with a Puma is a clear no-no, and no experienced player would ever do that.

Is simply utterly and completely wrong.

I did not attack your "game skill". I do not know what your "game skill" is and its rather irrelevant.

I simply pointed out that writing something that is so wrong when their many cases even available on video where top player flank with Pumas clearly demonstrates that you know very little subject of Puma in game.

You claim simply demonstrates you lack of game knowledge.

Your claim that :
Is simply utterly and completely wrong.

I did not attack your "game skill". I do not know what your "game skill" is and its rather irrelevant.
I simply pointed out that writing something that is so wrong when their many cases even available on video where top player flank with Pumas clearly demonstrates that

you know very little subject of Puma in game.

Jeez, we finished that discussion in the shout-box yesterday to keep this thread on-topic - and it was for once that we agreed on something. There was no absolutely point bringing it up again but only to put on oil on the fire.

But since you brought it up again: If you really must keep on going on telling me again and again in this thread and in the shoutbox that "Vippers knowledge and skills of the game > Anybody elses' knowledge and skills", you may go on and do that. It is not important to anyone to show who knows the most theory about the game. Bring meat to the topic, stop telling people that they're wrong and that their game knowledge (which by definition includes and skills acquired through experience) sucks over and over again.

About Jacksons to About Shermans to About Pumas

And in this case balance is more important since as I have already explained units like PzIV or even the Panther have trouble hitting the M36 even with its current size.

And why you believe it should not be like that?
US ATG is not effective vs panther, nor are zooks. That leaves only 1 AT Option that Needs to be viable and beat the panther.
What is your insane reasoning to believe otherwise?
Show Spoiler

You need to tell that to people who claim Puma has a single role. I already explained that Puma is Recon and "flanker" is previous posts.

You also denied completely ist effectiveness frontally against meds, despite ALL top Players using it in this very specific way-not to Scout, not to flank(unless ISU), to kite and poke meds frontally.

Your definitions are completely detached from the reality of how the Units are used in game.
If you would have spent 25% of the time you spend reading dictionaries and stat Charts actually playing the game, you would know that yourself.
Show Spoiler

the puma has not that great accu while moving, can pentratet by anything (even pistoles) and has not the HP form a jackson. Puma misses a lot while moving on far range..its feels sometimes like a mini panther..in view of the accurracy

sometimes like a mini panther..in view of the accurracy

Don't shoot'n drive. I wonder why I've never seen your kind complain about the accuracy of the Comet or Pershing.

I think nerfing the turret traverse to firefly or Puma level would solve the problem.

It is still fast, still hits hard, but at least it can be flanked instead of having the turret swivel on you and instantly smash your face in.

I think nerfing the turret traverse to firefly or Puma level would solve the problem.

It is still fast, still hits hard, but at least it can be flanked instead of having the turret swivel on you and instantly smash your face in.

+1

Don't shoot'n drive. I wonder why I've never seen your kind complain about the accuracy of the Comet or Pershing.

cause pershing has 0.75 moving acc ? and comet can boost accuracy with mun ?