About Jacksons

Ok I'm curious why people have such an issue with using the USF AT gun. For starters it's pretty cheap and can be acquired without going Captain if you go Airborne or Recon Support (both of which are very good doctrines this patch so you're certainly not gimping yourself with those). It has the largest cone of fire and the rate of fire will do wonders against mediums and can get good chunks of health off from heavier tanks if it gets some rear armor shots.

Granted the base penetration (assuming the stat site is up to date) is only 140 compared to the Pak40s 200.

Then again the Pak doesn't have the AP round ability that should give it 50% extra penetration which would make the penetration 210 which is far from lackluster in my opinion. I found that the M1 penetrated a Tiger frontally pretty reliably from max range + the self spotting and increased range it gets with vet 1 is very useful.

If I can pick for example between stealing a raketen and an M1 i would pick M1 every single time. I will gladly pay a minuscule amount of munitions (and USF is not a munitions starved faction to begin with so I see no problem in paying for penetration) if it nets me a proper AT gun. It may not always penetrate from max range but it will stay relatively safe compared to certain gimmick AT gun that gets instagibbed by the things its meant to counter and is such fun and joy to play against/with...

I don't know what people expect from an AT gun that has specifically been given a munition ability that is meant to help dealing with heavier armor and not utilizing it when fighting heavy tanks. In its price range it performs its job well enough and will scale into late game with its utility and vet. And yes I admit it is more micro intensive than just A-moving double 6-pounders but I think that issue can be overcome with L2P and smoke and flank. Kappa

Not sure if you're trolling as your nickname let's suppose it.

M1 ATG lost its effectiveness when Tigers, panthers and such are hitting the field. You like to pickup the M1 over the raketen, that's normal but have you tried to analyse why? Simple, USF only have medium tanks, you wouldn't be picking any M1 left on the field if the USF player had steal you your King Tiger.

USF is the one with the less AT option of all factions, I let you do the count of what OKW (better AT faction), Ostheer, UKF and Soviet have in comparison.
The problem with the Jackson lies in two points:

-1 Lack of stock AT option between the M1 and the Jackson, per say the M10 should have been stock along with the sherman.
-2 Lack of Tier 4 where the Jackson should have been put with a stock Sherman upgrade to meet Ez8 stats.

In the current format the Jackson will never be balanced, it has to stay relevant vs Medium, even if not dominating them and need to be a capable counter for KT, JT, Ele, that's not possible from a design perspective without introducing at least an upgrade to differentiate both figures.

Now IMO, there is an upper problem in COH2, it's the dominance of Tank Destroyers on the battlefield to the point where nobody build regular tanks.

and the bazookas are not schreck. 110-130 penetration is not going to deter axis german heavy.

lel

https://www.twitch.tv/videos/235222348?t=08m49s

HERE YOU CAN SEE schrecks vs zooks....they need for resons mostly the same time to kill jgdtiger and Kt.

For guys like you i made this example....which fail to know thats zooks are penetrading/ DO DMG very well.

go on and learn my friend.

You will drain your munition if you try to use the tungsten every time an axis tank get in range, and it's hardly a sure-pen against the big cat anyway.

Are you saying occasionally using a 30 munition ability that lasts 30 seconds in late game where its regularly needed is budget breaking? Assuming your unit preservation is decent you already have your BAR / lmg blob well before later stages of the game where US has only a few good munition sinks like the Thunderbolts which is commander specific. Against mediums without armor skirts normal rounds will do well enough imo.

Also I have no idea how OKW survived with their 35 munition fausts while having to upgrade their inf, use flame nades and bundles to maintain good field presence and plant mines in that case.

Not sure if you're trolling as your nickname let's suppose it.

M1 ATG lost its effectiveness when Tigers, panthers and such are hitting the field. You like to pickup the M1 over the raketen, that's normal but have you tried to analyse why? Simple, USF only have medium tanks, you wouldn't be picking any M1 left on the field if the USF player had steal you your King Tiger.

USF is the one with the less AT option of all factions, I let you do the count of what OKW (better AT faction), Ostheer, UKF and Soviet have in comparison.
The problem with the Jackson lies in two points:

-1 Lack of stock AT option between the M1 and the Jackson, per say the M10 should have been stock along with the sherman.
-2 Lack of Tier 4 where the Jackson should have been put with a stock Sherman upgrade to meet Ez8 stats.

In the current format the Jackson will never be balanced, it has to stay relevant vs Medium, even if not dominating them and need to be a capable counter for KT, JT, Ele, that's not possible from a design perspective without introducing at least an upgrade to differentiate both figures.

Now IMO, there is an upper problem in COH2, it's the dominance of Tank Destroyers on the battlefield to the point where nobody build regular tanks.

First of all you seem to have a lack of playing hours in Skyrim or you never talked to a City Guard

2nd I pick an M1 over a raketen because i want an AT gun that doesn't get instagibbed by a random medium tank shell and that doesn't take ages to fire on a target that is near the edge of the cone of fire. (& while not having to be in harms way while doing so is a plus)

3rd I agree that USF has few AT options and maybe keeping Wolverine in Armor Company is not worth it anymore since it seems to be extinct after December for understandable reasons. That has lead to most of the burden being put on the Jackson which seems to be at least partially the same problem Sturmpioneers have (having to deal with repairs, mining, sweeping, field fortifications, combat, AT and garrison clearing) but unlike Sturms actually overperforming versus certain targets.

4th: I'd say the biggest problem with Jackson is that it has no real weaknesses or downsides. Flanking it amounts to very little because of its mobility and turret traverse speed. Outranging it relies on doctrinal heavy TDs (which now have worse synergy with the rest of the army imo because for example if you have a JT and a panther as a team the panther still needs 3 shots to kill a medium after a JT has fired at it so the nerf in a vacuum seemed a lot better than in practice where heavy TDs work in tandem with other units.)

Dives against Jacksons are also risky because if you miss a few shots the Jackson might very well chase you on retreat with its good speed. I'd go as far and say even mirroring its stats with a Firefly which has clear disadvantages might be more beneficial to the gameplay than the current Jackson meta.

GeneralsGentlemen mentioned one of their frustrations with snipers in one of their shoutcast which I agree 100%. Your opponent will not lose a sniper due to you outplaying him/her. The sniper gets killed when the user makes a mistake or gets greedy, not because you outsmarted your opponent. (assuming decent sniper micro naturally) I think the same can be said for Jackson. The sniper argument seemed pretty valid in last weekends King Of The Hill with Luvnests amazing sniper use and ridiculous kill counts vs VonIvan.


And finally I agree on the TDs dominating most gamemodes over other armor types. Elephants and JTs were at least doctrine specific so you wouldn't see them every single game but any US player in their right mind will build a Jackson or two or three at some point in the game.

Are you saying occasionally using a 30 munition ability that lasts 30 seconds in late game where its regularly needed is budget breaking? Assuming your unit preservation is decent you already have your BAR / lmg blob well before later stages of the game where US has only a few good munition sinks like the Thunderbolts which is commander specific. Against mediums without armor skirts normal rounds will do well enough imo.

Also I have no idea how OKW survived with their 35 munition fausts while having to upgrade their inf, use flame nades and bundles to maintain good field presence and plant mines in that case.







First of all you seem to have a lack of playing hours in Skyrim or you never talked to a City Guard

2nd I pick an M1 over a raketen because i want an AT gun that doesn't get instagibbed by a random medium tank shell and that doesn't take ages to fire on a target that is near the edge of the cone of fire. (& while not having to be in harms way while doing so is a plus)

3rd I agree that USF has few AT options and maybe keeping Wolverine in Armor Company is not worth it anymore since it seems to be extinct after December for understandable reasons. That has lead to most of the burden being put on the Jackson which seems to be at least partially the same problem Sturmpioneers have (having to deal with repairs, mining, sweeping, field fortifications, combat, AT and garrison clearing) but unlike Sturms actually overperforming versus certain targets.

4th: I'd say the biggest problem with Jackson is that it has no real weaknesses or downsides. Flanking it amounts to very little because of its mobility and turret traverse speed. Outranging it relies on doctrinal heavy TDs (which now have worse synergy with the rest of the army imo because for example if you have a JT and a panther as a team the panther still needs 3 shots to kill a medium after a JT has fired at it so the nerf in a vacuum seemed a lot better than in practice where heavy TDs work in tandem with other units.)

Dives against Jacksons are also risky because if you miss a few shots the Jackson might very well chase you on retreat with its good speed. I'd go as far and say even mirroring its stats with a Firefly which has clear disadvantages might be more beneficial to the gameplay than the current Jackson meta.

GeneralsGentlemen mentioned one of their frustrations with snipers in one of their shoutcast which I agree 100%. Your opponent will not lose a sniper due to you outplaying him/her. The sniper gets killed when the user makes a mistake or gets greedy, not because you outsmarted your opponent. (assuming decent sniper micro naturally) I think the same can be said for Jackson. The sniper argument seemed pretty valid in last weekends King Of The Hill with Luvnests amazing sniper use and ridiculous kill counts vs VonIvan.


And finally I agree on the TDs dominating most gamemodes over other armor types. Elephants and JTs were at least doctrine specific so you wouldn't see them every single game but any US player in their right mind will build a Jackson or two or three at some point in the game.

Nop I have never put my hand on Skyrim. Sorry for the lack of pop culture

Raketens have their own weaknesses as the M1, I agree with you. The problem with the M1 is unlike the 35mu pfaust, you are not sure that it will do good. Using Pfaust in the right circunstancie guarantee you a engine damage, your 35 munitions are spend for that. M1 Tugshot ability does not guarantee you any penetration hit vs heavies, even OKW Pz4 can deflect those shots. As I said, vs USF I would also pick any M1 left on the battlefield, but in case I have to fight big cats, I would first consider to pick a Pak, a UKF ATG and raketen for their camo ability and then a M1.

Difference between Jackson and Sniper is the manpower bleed sniper does.
A Jackson that hit you twice from max distance, reverse engine and repair.
A Jackson can be engine damaged, sniper not. I would agree with you to compare Sniper and Jackson if Relic decided to remove the retreat button from the Sniper.

At the end, what I say is simple, Or the Jackson feel OP or it feel UP as it need to fill two gaps in USF design. Or it fill only one gap and is UP vs the other, or it fill both gaps but be OP on one of them if not both simply because of the nature of those gap.

Not sure if you're trolling as your nickname let's suppose it.

M1 ATG lost its effectiveness when Tigers, panthers and such are hitting the field. You like to pickup the M1 over the raketen, that's normal but have you tried to analyse why? Simple, USF only have medium tanks, you wouldn't be picking any M1 left on the field if the USF player had steal you your King Tiger.

USF is the one with the less AT option of all factions, I let you do the count of what OKW (better AT faction), Ostheer, UKF and Soviet have in comparison.
The problem with the Jackson lies in two points:

-1 Lack of stock AT option between the M1 and the Jackson, per say the M10 should have been stock along with the sherman.
-2 Lack of Tier 4 where the Jackson should have been put with a stock Sherman upgrade to meet Ez8 stats.

In the current format the Jackson will never be balanced, it has to stay relevant vs Medium, even if not dominating them and need to be a capable counter for KT, JT, Ele, that's not possible from a design perspective without introducing at least an upgrade to differentiate both figures.

Now IMO, there is an upper problem in COH2, it's the dominance of Tank Destroyers on the battlefield to the point where nobody build regular tanks.

You pick the m1 over the rak because having 60 range at gun that can fire from the fow is as good at cloak. Plus reverse is better than retreat.

You pick the m1 over the rak because having 60 range at gun that can fire from the fow is as good at cloak. Plus reverse is better than retreat.

UP to 70 range with "take Aim".

Imo the 57mm become less used when "take Aim" had a mu cost attaches to it. As I pointed out at the time adding MU cost was a mistake. The ability should be free but timed with a medium duration CD and not toggle.

Right now if jackson keeps its OP stats, it absolutely needs another price increase. I mean its far better imo then a firefly while costing less.

If price does stay the same it needs its range put down to 55 or/and have its moving accuracy put down to 0.5

Jacksons does nto need nerf axis got best AT panthers keep bounved shots wtf do oyu want else tis a TANK DESTOYER learn to fall back not thing htat you got an unstopptable panzers

again, range to 55 and jackson is balanced

then put stupid stug fuel to 120 cuz it kills my sherman

I understand your idea of making the jackson the last hope in terms of AT for the USF. But the fact is that USF always has a lot of AT in their infantry, plus a well balanced AT gun, plus almost always floating on resources (specially in team games).

Jackson doesnt need to be that powerfull to snipe KT or JT, because you invalide all of the others axis tanks aswell, specially OST: Panther, Tiger, P4, Stugs.

IT DOES NEED you got OP fireafly 640 and OP damage and jacksons is oyur problem how muc hfar will you go my dude

IT DOES NEED you got OP fireafly 640 and OP damage and jacksons is oyur problem how muc hfar will you go my dude

Yeah, Fireflys also have 640HP, High DPS, Pen and Accuracy, but do not have the speed, ROF, rotation, etc of the Jackson. That is why Fireflys, IMO, are not OP.

Apples vs oranges.

You all would be bitching about Fireflies just as much if brits had any means to snare vehicles without resorting to a PTRS squad.

Apples vs oranges.

You all would be bitching about Fireflies just as much if brits had any means to snare vehicles without resorting to a PTRS squad.

Brits do not have PTRS they have "Boys".

Brits also have a number "of means to snare vehicles" at their disposal:
Stock:
Gammon bombs
AEC's Target thread
Snipers Critical Shot
Tullips

Doctrinal:
Tank hunters AT grenade

Yeah, Fireflys also have 640HP, High DPS, Pen and Accuracy, but do not have the speed, ROF, rotation, etc of the Jackson. That is why Fireflys, IMO, are not OP.

Yeah USF got one buff to late game FINALLY and you all cry cuzx oyu odnt know how to counter it easu p4 get 3 they got fast relaod and run and flank jackson before they aim at you and your p4 has faster reload time

Hey look, mr "I will nit pick on semantics and ignore the sole fact thats exactly the same weapon, pretending to be called differently" is here.

Now, if you have managed to snare any kind of vehicle other then JT with a gammon bomb, you'd be the first in CoH2 history. Its also only temporary snare, just like the others short of sniper crit and sniper is probably last unit you want to have in the armored combat fray.

Also, thank you for so generously repeating what I have said about AT squad, you added nothing but your usual smug, your job is done and you may leave.

Apples vs oranges.

You all would be bitching about Fireflies just as much if brits had any means to snare vehicles without resorting to a PTRS squad.

So wait my dude they got PIATS and OP AS m1919s stupid double bren AND AEC cancer shot GG and then jacksons is the problem non commadner comet or chiurchil CHOISE USF what has E8 if commadner which i always go and if not jackson ONLY JACKSON which are fiannlly usuable and if the enemy has like 3 panthers elephant paks and p4s and palyign defensive you are doomed you cant even kite cuz sometimes shot bounces especialyl vs super heavies

Apples vs oranges.

You all would be bitching about Fireflies just as much if brits had any means to snare vehicles without resorting to a PTRS squad.

Brits do not have PTRS they have "Boys".

Brits also have a number "of means to snare vehicles" at their disposal:
Stock:
Gammon bombs
AEC's Target thread
Snipers Critical Shot
Tullips

Doctrinal:
Tank hunters AT grenade

Please, I really wish you didn't try to rush conversation off-topic if Katitof isn't exactly choosing perfectly how to describe or define units, abilities or weapons - Right after he posted. We all know exactly what he was talking about, there's absolutely no need to nitpick for correction to start yet another knowledge-war going full off-topic...

Jacksons exist in team games too... and that's the foundation of the Jackson changes. I understand there's merit to 1v1 discussions about brits to compare to 1v1 usf...

But that doesn't change the realities of team games where the new Jackson was specifically made to thrive.

Hell, a brit player with a usf ally barely needs a firefly anymore. Another Cromwell can pay off better for bullying infantry and gliding around the map to flank, etc.

Hey look, mr "I will nit pick on semantics and ignore the sole fact thats exactly the same weapon, pretending to be called differently" is here.

Now, if you have managed to snare any kind of vehicle other then JT with a gammon bomb, you'd be the first in CoH2 history. Its also only temporary snare, just like the others short of sniper crit and sniper is probably last unit you want to have in the armored combat fray.

Also, thank you for so generously repeating what I have said about AT squad, you added nothing but your usual smug, your job is done and you may leave.

btw we are not arguing or something like that i love hearing others opinion i really do

Yeah USF got one buff to late game FINALLY and you all cry cuzx oyu odnt know how to counter it easu p4 get 3 they got fast reload and run and flank jackson before they aim at you and your p4 has faster reload time

First here https://languagetool.org/
second p4 Reload duration
5.3 - 5.7
jackson reload 4.375/4.975;
p4 speed 6.3 acc 2.1
jack speed 6.5 acc 3
and jackson get 0.75 moving accuracy and has enough armor to bounce p4 shot (115 pen vs jackson armor 130), so no p4 is not the counter to jackson
the only somewhat counter right now is the jagdp4 but it still can't chase it and still miss it on the move