About Jacksons

- Firefly is flanked with fast Cromwells who have better AT than sherman 75s

M4A3 75mm sherman with AP rounds: 100/120/140
Cromwell: 105/120/135

Just off the top of my head IIRC

I'm just tired of those people who thought KT killing it's counter in two shots was perfectly fine, while the M36 being the final AT unit for US, it struggled to penetrate it before going up in flames when fired at by anything above a Mauser.

I'm just tired of those people who thought KT killing it's counter in two shots was perfectly fine, while the M36 being the final AT unit for US, it struggled to penetrate it before going up in flames when fired at by anything above a Mauser.

umm, im sorry what? didnt read anywhere that a kt killing the jackson in two shots was fine. dont know why people like you go to the past to some how justify that the jackson being OP is fine.

umm, im sorry what? didnt read anywhere that a kt killing the jackson in two shots was fine. dont know why people like you go to the past to some how justify that the jackson being OP is fine.

Because it's the USF lategame AT, all it's supposed to do is kill Tanks, let it be a Tank Destroyer that actually does it's job for once.

Because it's the USF lategame AT, all it's supposed to do is kill Tanks, let it be a Tank Destroyer that actually does it's job for once.

Can we make the KT have a tactical nuke launcher that immediatly wipes out your opponets base then?

The fatal flaw of USF is the Jackson, USF's late game faction design is shit. Making one unit the entirety of the USF late game essentially dictates the faction around one unit. Like before the Jackson buffs USF's late game was a joke, now USF's late game is strong because of how good the Jackson is. To balance the faction out the USF need more late game options.

- Firefly has tulip rockets with stun.
- Firefly has tank commander upgrade.
- Firefly has Command Tank synergy.
- Firefly is flanked with fast Cromwells who have better AT than sherman 75s
- Firefly has better armor than Jackson.
- Firefly has AT stun Sniper synergy

Sure. You can mirror the stats of the Firefly if you also mirror stats every benefit that
UK has.

- If you simply copy the Firefly slow speed and slow reload coupled with the large lack of AP
from it's fellow Shermans, then you not only have weak USF, you have neutered USF. And massed
Axis heavies now have no counter.

Would YOU play USF with no AT in 4vs4 vs 4x king tigers?
Also, Jackson went from 125 fu and 12 pop to 140 fu and 14 pop
325 manp (?) to 400 manp.

it has no AI. It has no HE. It has weak armor. If it loses speed and maneuvrability and ROF
would you buy it?

It's damage already just went down from 200 to 160.
And you propose further nerfs?

* Some have proposed giving the Jackson Puma mirror stats (but keeping Jackson price) would this
please you?

"I understand this game is rock paper scissors, but, I really really love scissors. And my
enjoyment would be increased if you removed rocks. Rocks suck when you love scissors".

Well you seemed to pick the least serious argument I said and I'm feeling some negative vibes here. Let's roll with it shall we.

- Firefly has tulip rockets with stun.

A stun that requires actual timing and is not a point and click heatseeking rocket that costs a fair bit of munitions and is only temporary. So added utility which requires skill to use and can rarely be spammed.

- Firefly has tank commander upgrade.

A no-brainer upgrade which is practically free, like the pintle gunner was for wehr tanks before the big price increase because it was such a no-brainer thinkingemoji

- Firefly has Command Tank synergy.

Doctrinal and I've seen the AVRE commander used exactly once this year and it didn't go too well, yes the synergy is good but only one viable commander has it and people usually seem to want pure raw firepower instead of nerfing an armor unit to boost the rest of their army.

- Firefly is flanked with fast Cromwells who have better AT than sherman 75s

I assume this doesn't mean Firefly getting flanked by Cromwells because that some mirror match level immersion breakage I don't want to get into. (The lower speed of the Firefly without the war speed might leave it behind from the rest of the army making tank coordination harder while Jackson will keep up with the rest of the army / speed ahead of it)

- Firefly has better armor than Jackson.

Armor on a unit that should always be shooting farther than any medium tank can retaliate shouldn't be a big issue. Don't headbutt a Pak wall or avoid a Doctrinal heavy tank destroyer and everything will be alright and unless you do a reckless dive you can always fall back before losing your TD.

- Firefly has AT stun Sniper synergy

That indeed requires some amount of combined arms and unit coordination while a Jackson duo will do just fine without any stuns or AT guns defending it as long as you use the 60 range and kite kite kite.


The original point of the mirroring firefly stats (and I aimed to make the context I mentioned it not a super serious one in the first place and now I feel like having to explain a joke step by step) was that Firefly has some serious weaknesses which can be exploited and what Brit players have to try to avoid or they will get punished. Flanking a Firefly is a lot more dangerous to the allied player than flanking a Jackson:

Fireflys low speed and "clunkyness" makes falling back harder and the slow turret speed means it might not be able to retaliate unlike a Jackson. The lack of common snares makes it hard to stop the diving tanks while usually there are plenty of rifle nades for every diving tank unless the USF has thrown every single rifleman out the window. The tulips require carefull aiming in a panic situation and might miss and putting the gun on cooldown + the AEC has the only non-doctrinal temporal snare. Mines will work but a good axis player will have sweepers or pick a point of entry that is not a common mine place.

Jackson on the other hand will usually be able to make a hasty retreat and will fire back with good penetration, turret rotation and decent players will have at least a double bazooka on Rear Echelons which will penetrate rear armor of diving tanks. Also Jackson has much better synergy with M8s and not Shermans.

Combination of M8s which are very cost effective and Jacksons can snipe most targets from afar and should never get into harms way with their good range and accuracy. Being able to stay farther from the frontline also lowers the chances of hitting enemy mines.

And last for the lazy 4v4 argument: if your opponents manage to get 4 KTs they probably controlled both fuels and most of the normal points or had no medium armor which they should have been punished by decent allied players. And also that means not a single heavy TD will enter the field and KTs are a prime target for the new Thunderbolts. The low mobility means they can be picked apart one by one or kited from long range with tank destroyers which was possible before the new buffs as well. Also fun fact: there actually were USF players in 4v4 before the Jackson buff and many managed to do fine in larger team modes as well even with the armor disadvantage. (somethingsomething artyfest)

And finally my most controversial opinion: OKW is supposed to be the strong lategame faction which should perform the best at that stage of the game while USF is the early game faction which should have a bit harder time in super late stages of the match. (And if you have doubts about my bias feel free to take a peek at my match history this year )

Can we make the KT have a tactical nuke launcher that immediatly wipes out your opponets base then?

No.

No.

Wait wasnt that pre patch

I'm confused about this "jackson is the only AT for USF" Are soviets and brits any different? Their TDs are the only heavy AT lategame. Or are we also talking about AT guns? The M1 has the best RoF and arc of any AT gun and with sabot it has the best pen of any AT gun. Yes it costs munitions, but after you bar up your rifles you start floating munis as USF. Either for p47 rocket straffe or grenades.

I'm confused about this "jackson is the only AT for USF" Are soviets and brits any different? Their TDs are the only heavy AT lategame. Or are we also talking about AT guns? The M1 has the best RoF and arc of any AT gun and with sabot it has the best pen of any AT gun. Yes it costs munitions, but after you bar up your rifles you start floating munis as USF. Either for p47 rocket straffe or grenades.

the soviet have the isu-152 and the is2.

the british have the comet and the churchill. (although they took a nerf hammer to the face)

the USF have the weakest tank arsenal in entire game, including the doctrine tank. There's also the fact the Jackson was basically the USF's best anti-tank weapon in the war. The pershing was fielded in very small number. There's nothing else to give to the USF beside the super pershing.

So you are proposing a unit with self spot, self repair, great mobility, good accuracy/penetration at long range and on the move and smoke with low HP.

What in your opinion would be proper Ostheer and OKW counter that vehicle?

The jackson would be a Puma with a better gun and slightly worst survivability, that's it. the Puma is hardly immortal, and the jackson need to punch above its weight.

is the axis that scared of a super-Puma?


The wehr puma get 50 sight by default and another 10 at vet 2. Jackson with 45+5 would be puma with a stronger punch, but still benefit from proper scouting.

the soviet have the isu-152 and the is2.

As far as 1v1 is concerned, ISU isn't viable and the IS2 is too inconsistant. Similar to the new KT.

the british have the comet and the churchill. (although they took a nerf hammer to the face)

Forgot about those, my bad

the USF have the weakest tank arsenal in entire game, including the doctrine tank. There's also the fact the Jackson was basically the USF's best anti-tank weapon in the war. The pershing was fielded in very small number. There's nothing else to give to the USF beside the super pershing.

I'm not sure which doctrinal tank you're refering too. The pershing is by no standard of the word "weak" its AoE rivals that of the KT, and its veterancy is paralleled only by the Tiger. It is a phenominal tank. The Ez8s are also borderline OP. For 140F you get a 720HP, 200(?) or 215(?) armor tank that has 0.75 moving accuracy and significantly higher pen than that of standard mediums. Also doesn't have to switch between AP and HE, but the infantry damage potential is less than that of the HE sherman.

As far as realism goes, it has little place when determining balance.

As far as 1v1 is concerned, ISU isn't viable and the IS2 is too inconsistant. Similar to the new KT.


Forgot about those, my bad

I'm not sure which doctrinal tank you're refering too. The pershing is by no standard of the word "weak" its AoE rivals that of the KT, and its veterancy is paralleled only by the Tiger. It is a phenominal tank. The Ez8s are also borderline OP. For 140F you get a 720HP, 200(?) or 215(?) armor tank that has 0.75 moving accuracy and significantly higher pen than that of standard mediums. Also doesn't have to switch between AP and HE, but the infantry damage potential is less than that of the HE sherman.

As far as realism goes, it has little place when determining balance.

the pershing will lose to the panther 1v1, much less the tiger and the King tiger.

It's basically another great infantry killer the USF doesn't need.

and even in 2v2 the USF are running into problem. The USF tank force might be suitable for 1v1 but they get stomped hard by axis armor in 2v2+. The jackson effectively serve as the USF's best anti-tank unit.


and if the USF is overpower in 1v1 there's more suitable way to address the issue beside keeping the USF tanks weak. Team games are as important to the game as 1v1 duel.

and regarding the E8. Despite its moving accuracy and gun there's a pretty big flow. It's the slowest medium tank in the game at 6.1 Top speed and 2.1 acceleration. The panzer 4 will out run it. The e8 is still too weak to out muscle the axis heavy and can't really flank them due to slow speed.

Diving is also significantly more risky than being able to reliable win in a slug fight.

This is still a ww2 game. Tanks are expected to vaguely follow their IRL characteristic. Tiger and panther are expected to be great in a fight because of "realism".

the pershing will lose to the panther 1v1, much less the tiger and the King tiger.

Statistically the pershing will win against the OKW Panther, and it's more of a draw against the ostheer panther.

Pershing: Pen: 220/240/260 Armor: 300, Reload 5.5, Winddown 1, Target size: 24, Moving acc: 0.75
Ost Panther: Pen: 220/240/260, Armor: 320, Reload: 5.2/5.6, Winddown: 1, Target size: 24, Moving acc: 0.5
OKW Panther: Pen: 220/240/260, Armor: 320, Reload: 6.1/6.4 Winddown: 1, Target size: 24, Moving acc: 0.5

One of the deciding factors of this is the scatter, which in both panther cases is worse than the pershing. Another point is the HVAP round that can be used on the pershing. Which has the pen of 300/350/400. Almost guaranteed damage given you can aim.

It's basically another great infantry killer the USF doesn't need.

Correct. USF doesn't need more AI with 2x BARs, HE shermans, scotts and other things all performing exceptionally well.

and even in 2v2 the USF are running into problem. The USF tank force might be suitable for 1v1 but they get stomped hard by axis armor in 2v2+. The jackson effectively serve as the USF's best anti-tank unit.

What fact is this based on? The way I see USF currently has an issue in 2v2+ because they have zero utility till tech. They provide nothing to a team except rifleman, rifleman, rifleman etc. Vickers deals more damage in HMG house fights, and the HM38 is the best mortar currently till it receives its respectful nerfs. The M1 is overshadowed heavily by the 6 pounder.

and if the USF is overpower in 1v1 there's more suitable way to address the issue beside keeping the USF tanks weak.

Indeed. Many people suggested different units stats for teamgames and 1v1 units, myself included. Unless something like that occurs though, USF will suffer from horrid tech design.

and regarding the E8. Despite its moving accuracy and gun there's a pretty big flow. It's the slowest medium tank in the game at 6.1 Top speed and 2.1 acceleration. The panzer 4 will out run it. The e8 is still too weak to out muscle the axis heavy and can't really flank them due to slow speed.

OKW Panzer 4: Acceleration: 2 Top speed: 6
Speed honestly doesn't mean that much though. Unless you're reacting PERFECTLY 0.2 top speed won't mean anything.

Diving is also significantly more risky than being able to reliable win in a slug fight.

It is, but there are things you can do to make dives game ending plays. Including, scouting, smoke, and minesweeping.

This is still a ww2 game. Tanks are expected to vaguely follow their IRL characteristic. Tiger and panther are expected to be great in a fight because of "realism".

Vaguely yes. But that doesn't dictate whether or not the jackson should be a suitable tank destroyer or seal clubbing axis.

The jackson would be a Puma with a better gun and slightly worst survivability, that's it. the Puma is hardly immortal, and the jackson need to punch above its weight.

is the axis that scared of a super-Puma?


The wehr puma get 50 sight by default and another 10 at vet 2. Jackson with 45+5 would be puma with a stronger punch, but still benefit from proper scouting.

That does not answer the question which OKW and Ostheer units would counter the suggested M36.

(PLS stop bringing up the Puma the chances you suggested to not turn the M36 into a Puma, I have illustrated clearly that M36 and Puma use a different gun profile)

Raketen/Pak, panzershrek.

That does not answer the question which OKW and Ostheer units would counter the suggested M36.

(PLS stop bringing up the Puma, I have illustrated clearly that M36 and Puma used a different profile gun)

if u are so smart tell me how counter ele or jagtiger in teamgames as usf especialy redball express. Tank destroyer with super armor and 70 range its real cancer not jackson. If u have problem with jackson u propobly never play as allies especialy teamgames. Adapt like alies players to heavy tank destroyers. And dont tell me they are after nerf because they are still game breaking

if u are so smart tell me how counter ele or jagtiger in teamgames as usf especialy redball express. Tank destroyer with super armor and 70 range its real cancer not jackson. If u have problem with jackson u propobly never play as allies especialy teamgames. Adapt like alies players to heavy tank destroyers. And dont tell me they are after nerf because they are still game breaking

I would like to make a suggestion to you. If you want to join a debate take the time to read and understand what it is about.

I have no trouble dealing with this specific M36, because it does not exist, it is a suggestion made by Firesparks.

if u are so smart tell me how counter ele or jagtiger in teamgames as usf especialy redball express. Tank destroyer with super armor and 70 range its real cancer not jackson. If u have problem with jackson u propobly never play as allies especialy teamgames. Adapt like alies players to heavy tank destroyers. And dont tell me they are after nerf because they are still game breaking

ah..now we talking about 4v4 maps.

all the german super TDs have not thinks like:

super fast turning turret, super speed, self spoting range, self repair.


german td are so easy flankable and slow that you only need a good strat.

jackson...hmm..they are super fast and mobil with turrent..no way to flank them against a same lvl opponent