M36 Jackson

make it have 55 range

I think they were gonna do this in the same patch they added an extra shot of health. It seemed like a fair trade to me, i cant remember why it didnt go through

A rebalancing of USF tank destroyers is only viable if you also restructure how they are acquired. Specifically, you have to make M10s non-doctrinal if you make the Jackson specifically a long range anti-heavy tank unit that cannot fight medium tanks.

I vote to move the M10 to the Captain and make it locked behind the company command post upgrade.

This allows the USF to have a medium TD and a heavy TD like most other factions. You can then rework the Jackson to be a slow firing but heavy damaging high penetration unit that counters heavy tanks and have the M10 as a fast and quick firing unit that counters medium tanks but lacks the penetration to frontally engage heavy tanks except at very close range.

Replace the M10 in the Armored Company with the M8 armored car. (Which was originally designed as a light tank destroyer back when a 37mm gun could beat the average tank’s armor like the early war Panzer Is, IIs and IIIs).

This clearly shows that M36 are to be nerfed. If a unit relies so much on a single *not OP* heavy TD then what the rest of the faction for? The last time i saw M10s was when i fielded them and it was quite a while ago.

Now, in a more neutral tone. A faction can have a single tool to deal with tanks/inf/indirect fire. But it shouldnt only depend on it. Thats why there are call-ins, commanders and multiple variations using skills and upgrades. That way the only OP thing is the good player and not the units he commands.

If M36 had to pay for a single, mutually exclusive upgrade. One being better motor and the other being upgunned to almost HVAP levels. That coupled with a moderate nerf (not those triple ban hammer). IMO can be a good start.

No what needs to be looked at is the other aspects of USF and how to optimize this so that they don't need to solely crutch on the Jackson when facing anything above a medium. When this is done, you can obviously change the Jackson. I thought that was clear, but it seems not. As someone else mentioned, a price increase would be the safest option if the other aspects of USF remain the same. Performance nerfs will mean serious trouble for USF.

Do not touch jackson anymore

its fine now

As someone else mentioned, a price increase would be the safest option if the other aspects of USF remain the same. Performance nerfs will mean serious trouble for USF.

My favorite way to balance units. Performance vs cost.

If it’s too good for what you pay, make it cost more.

If it’s not good enough for what you pay, make it cost less.

If it’s a total shit show that gets either abused every game (old school maxim spam) or so bad it’s never used ever (IR Halftrack), that is when you need to look as making drastic changes.

I think they were gonna do this in the same patch they added an extra shot of health. It seemed like a fair trade to me, i cant remember why it didnt go through

cause people were crying too much

cause people were crying too much

Thats the reason 99% of changes that get scrapped dont go through, but ever since balance previews became a thing at least there's been actual testing done.

Thats the reason 99% of changes that get scrapped dont go through, but ever since balance previews became a thing at least there's been actual testing done.

1 hilarious argument was that at 55 it had the same range as the panther, that tells u how much people that complaint on the official forum (and sometimes here) knows about sats

1 hilarious argument was that at 55 it had the same range as the panther, that tells u how much people that complaint on the official forum (and sometimes here) knows about sats

I'm not gonna pretend that 55 range is equal to 50, but I can see where those people come from. When you factor in getting into that 55 range, you have to tell the tank to stop which moves you closer than 55, you have your own latency to the server which can further delay stopping and restarting of movement to get both in and out of that 5m gap, and at any time the panther can move in and take that shot or even capitalize potentially if they want to go for the kill because of the higher HP pool on the panther.

Basically, the 5 range gap is too small IMO to warrant a 320 HP gap between a jackson and panther.

Basically, the 5 range gap is too small IMO to warrant a 320 HP gap between a jackson and panther.

Yeah so this seems like a pretty good reason they backed out on 55 range nerf.

Maybe increase it's cost by like 20 fu? 400mp 160 fu would be new price. Make hvap a free toggle ability at vet 1, cause it seems fair for it not to cost muni at that price

I'd rather a perfomance balancing than a price adjustment. Price AND actually having disadvantages didn't save the KT, I don't think the Jackson should be spared being the absolute best in quite literally every metric with nothing but price holding it back.

I don't think the Jackson should be spared being the absolute best in quite literally every metric with nothing but price holding it back.

I don't necessarily disagree, but then the conversation comes back to the other AT options for US. Feels like they are missing a vehicle for lighter AT if the Jackson is supposed to be more specialized to heavy tanks

I don't necessarily disagree, but then the conversation comes back to the other AT options for US. Feels like they are missing a vehicle for lighter AT if the Jackson is supposed to be more specialized to heavy tanks

I could see building on the sherman shells. Rn the sherman AP had good pen but also decent enough AI (2 aoe vs 2.5 of other tanks) so maybe more clearly defining the AP and HE shells could help. Something like an extra 10 pen on the AP and less AI as well as a cost reduction (due to the added micro) could be enough. Giving officers something more abilities wise (the increased target size and decreased armour mark target comes to mind) could also be considered. As is officers are sort of bland anyways...

There is room to move I think, and keeping the Jackson as the entirety of their AT as well as all the vehicular design advantages usf has is simply too much imo

Here's a thought: maybe the game shouldn't be designed so that Panthers invalidate all Allied medium tanks, while Soviets and USF have absolutely nothing that invalidate Axis medium tanks besides doctrinal heavies. (PIVs can and do solo a SU-85 by running circles around it, and two PIVs can and do beat a single jackson or firefly) And, as has been said, maybe USF shouldn't have literally zero AT options besides the Jackson. (remember, HVAP shells on their AT guns requires vet, much like their snares do. these are not a counter.)

No what needs to be looked at is the other aspects of USF and how to optimize this so that they don't need to solely crutch on the Jackson when facing anything above a medium. When this is done, you can obviously change the Jackson. I thought that was clear, but it seems not. As someone else mentioned, a price increase would be the safest option if the other aspects of USF remain the same. Performance nerfs will mean serious trouble for USF.

I can agree with you, but if you let me add a little detail. M36 are very good and useful TD, versatile to say the least, able to dominate the tank territory (unless they get outnumbered, of course).
If they were to be so good that risking some of the midgame is worth to get a jackson in time or that it is so useful it can turn tides in lategame because axis tank are bein pray instead of predator, then we have a usf metagame that centers about the jackson instead of a usf starving of AT tools.
Its perfectly fine for tides to turn, but the only and best tool to get that done is for the USF, the jacksons. There is a before and after a jackson field the game, not to mention when 2 of them are present.

In other words, USF is not lacking of AT tools, its that jacksons are so worth they force most of the sensible players to rush and get one ASAP. I've seen lots of complaints of USF players of the grenade and racks sidetech, only because they slow the jackson timing.

On the other side, As long as axis superheavys have to be countered by other tanks and TD (and not other game mechanics), jacksons are a necesary evil. But an evil unit aswell. Sadly there is no simple solution for this, there has been countless threads about jacksons. But this might get things right for once, i hope. Maybe if M36 can find itself a good spot between the other allied TD we can call it a day.

As i said earlier, USF mechanic is to have unit upgrades and lots of muni price tags, to enable them to adapt and punch hard at the same time. Most units are cost effective to allow high risk plays to be often executed and force trades that will mostly corner axis.

I don't necessarily disagree, but then the conversation comes back to the other AT options for US. Feels like they are missing a vehicle for lighter AT if the Jackson is supposed to be more specialized to heavy tanks

Easy8/M10/The new Sherman76 are more than enough if handled correctly, sure on some cases the cost effective ratio turns around, you end up paying more than axis tanks to beat them, but hey, its a start at least.

Easy8/M10/The new Sherman76 are more than enough if handled correctly, sure on some cases the cost effective ratio turns around, you end up paying more than axis tanks to beat them, but hey, its a start at least.

Except the problem is that all of those solutions are doctrinal. Does USF really need their medium counters hidden behind commanders?

Except the problem is that all of those solutions are doctrinal. Does USF really need their medium counters hidden behind commanders?

Not at all, but so are SU weapon upgrades for cons. I would say that doc units are rarer, but not less reliable because of that. AFAIK most USF commander picks are done early, because of pathfinders or assengies. But if there were doctrines that reward a late commander pick to reliably counter mediums, i'd say it is fair enough. At least USF get offensive armour options.

Edit: With the tech unlock patch for USF we could really analyze if midgame AT power for USF is really lacking. Maybe some buff on zooks and you get a solid USF that uses doc units to hunt and kill tanks, or to fight even P4 but with a cost efficiency price. Many possible ways, few people wanting to adapt.

Im just going to spoil the idea of what we have brainstormed for the jackson and FF.

-Jackson far pen down: you still get your 60 range jackson and can outrange panthers, but maybe it shouldnt be so reliable at that range...
-Jackson fuel cost up: the jackson is a premium tank destroyer (again, basically the best in the game), but its price doesnt really reflect that. Its the only dedicated AT vehicle usf have, and people argue its high performance is a necessity for usf. So then keep its performance, but at least make sure players have to pay for that performance.

FF cost down: same deal. FF performance is okay, and performs well against heavies relative to the other TDs, but its the most expensive allied TD by a sizeable margin, and thats just not very justifiable. I personally want tulip costs decreased (one of the other things that makes the FF distinct from other TDs besides its damage; sad that theyre too expensive to be practical) but thats not currently in the draft.

That approach will not solve the issue that allied TD are very effective vs ALL vehicles.

Imo one should be more creative. One should test creating 2 set of rounds similar to Sherman 76 and use them to balance Super heavy tank and medium tanks separately. Unit meant to Counter Super heavies could have access to "AP rounds" with range, accuracy, penetration and ROF design vs those units , while normal round with characteristics better suited vs mediums tanks.

One could ever take a bit further increasing the target size of Super heavies (maybe decreasing of other vehicles also) so that thing become easier to balance. Finally one can create more interesting profile for vehicles and create a "flanker" clash that would benefit the most from engaging enemy units close.

That approach will not solve the issue that allied TD are very effective vs ALL vehicles.

Imo one should be more creative. One should test creating 2 set of rounds and use them to balance Super heavy tank and medium tanks separately. Unit meant to Counter Super heavies could have access to "AP rounds" with accuracy, penetration and ROF design vs those units , while normal round with characteristics better suited vs mediums tanks.

One could ever take a bit further increasing the target size of Super heavies (maybe decreasing of other vehicles also) so that thing become easier to balance. Finally one can create more interesting profile for vehicles and create a "flanker" clash that would benefit the most from engaging enemy units close.

If you want to be more creative, then here's an idea: panthers should be removed from the game altogether, except maybe as expensive, limited doctrinal units. Then give ost non-doctrinal tiger like OKW gets (but limit them to 1 heavy, so no tiger and elefant at the same time) because, ironically, tigers are easier to take out than panthers are because of how slow they move and fire. If you want allies to stop spamming TDs, then remove the unit that forces them do to so in the first place.