M36 Jackson

Yup, you are again just making up definitions to suit your needs. Since there is no objective listing of "intended roles" you are just trying to get away with subjective opinion as fact.

There is.
Its in the units description in game.
That yellow-ish text below fluff description.

The arguments some people use.

Well according to the "yellow text" of the Panther:

"Effective against all armored vehicles. Weak to infantry anti-tank."

While the M36 "yellow text" says

"Effective vs Tanks. Weak vs anti-tank weaponry"


According to this logic since Panther is "anti-tank weaponry", comes from higher tier and is more expensive it should dominate M36.

Now can we pls move on.

According to this logic since Panther is "anti-tank weaponry", comes from higher tier and is more expensive it should dominate M36.

Can you guess what happens when panther gets in range?

(careful, spoilers ahead)

Show Spoiler

Can you guess what happens when panther gets in range?

(careful, spoilers ahead)

Show Spoiler

Or it runs over a mine and dies. Or it gets snared and dies. Or its poor moving accuracy causes it to miss a lot.

Or it runs over a mine and dies. Or it gets snared and dies. Or its poor moving accuracy causes it to miss a lot.

Or it stands at 1 range behind PaK and HMG42 and M36 can do absolutely nothing.
We can theorycraft like this until the end of times.

The Jackson's vulnerable to non-vehicular AT. It'll also lose to its weight in light AT vehicles.

In theory yes. But the raw power of the Jackson means you as a usf player can focus your infantry on AI meaning of one of those 4 man AT squads manage to close to the 35 range that Shreks have and manage to get off their 120-240hp Shrek volley you as a usf player have likley secured a wipe and your Jacky boy will be healing itself and back in action before the enemy can rebuild their lost squad.

The problem is that the Jackson was designed around being a highly mobile but squishy unit. They axed the squishy but it's still mobile as fuck. It still has all the tools to survive while being squishy but enough health to be extremely forgiving. There is no TD in the game with as many advantages nor as few disadvantages. It's just simply stacked and allows for the usf to focus on killing the infantry with everything because they know the Jackson will obliterate absolutely everything else. You don't need a sherman that might lose to a p4 when you can use that fuel to get weapon racks and then a Jackson to ensure their p4 spends the whole game repairing or smoldering.

If usf (rather all allied infantry) were toned down a smidge so that they couldn't absolutely dominate all infantry combat to the point that shutting down the enemy armour is more important than having your own to support your infantry against theirs we would see a decline (hopefully) in TD saturation. Know what I'm sayin?

Keep it on the Jackson and keep insults and heavy sarcasm out of it.

I think all can agree jackson is too cost effective competing against panther + 1 pio squad.

I find FF is a good example of a turreted TD that punches far and strong, and good survivability and abilities. Though the 60 range + 640hp is very dominating.

Jackson is pretty much FF+++.

Let see how relic work from here.

The Jackson's vulnerable to non-vehicular AT. It'll also lose to its weight in light AT vehicles.

I can agree with your statement but i feel you are being a little picky about it. Not a single TD is able to fight against non vehicular AT because they are have bad AI. Its like a category weakness rather than one specific for M36s and that was my point, specific weaknesses. Maybe only SU76 can hurt any with the barrage, buts thats the expeption of the rule, that also confirms it.

Someone i cant remember now said jacksons were glass cannons, well, why was that design really changed then? If the new design was meant to give M36s some self preservation, then why dont we remove the other (if not the strongest) aspect of jacksons, Their mobility? To set up and fire jacksons must be static, with a wind up time to 'aim' precisely, a mechanic completely different than raw acc stat.

Its offtopic to mention but we all know that pak howie wreaks havok against axis team weapons, so technically balance is towards USF again.

Final words, but be warned. Not for the faint of heart
Show Spoiler

I think all can agree jackson is too cost effective competing against panther + 1 pio squad.

I find FF is a good example of a turreted TD that punches far and strong, and good survivability and abilities. Though the 60 range + 640hp is very dominating.

Jackson is pretty much FF+++.

Let see how relic work from here.

FF is a turreted 60 range TD done well. The Jackson is not..

A small change, i will swap Ff moving accuracy with panther.
Ff 0.55 to 0.5
Panther 0.5 to 0.55

The theme of long range td vs mobile td is kept better.

I still suggest panther armor skirts rear armour to 99 to 120. Just to put some distance against med tanks at max range. to keep the late panther armour theme. +1 pio squad

A small change, i will swap Ff moving accuracy with panther.
Ff 0.55 to 0.5
Panther 0.5 to 0.55

The theme of long range td vs mobile td is kept better.

I still suggest panther armor skirts rear armour to 99 to 120. Just to put some distance against med tanks at max range. to keep the late panther armour theme. +1 pio squad

I'd stick them both on 0.5.

Half accuracy when moving is easy to remember. "This unit is 0.5 just because" is not.

I can agree with your statement but i feel you are being a little picky about it. Not a single TD is able to fight against non vehicular AT because they are have bad AI. Its like a category weakness rather than one specific for M36s and that was my point, specific weaknesses. Maybe only SU76 can hurt any with the barrage, buts thats the expeption of the rule, that also confirms

Then I'd say most units only have category weaknesses.

What's the Pak 40 weak to that the 6-pounder isn't? What's different between countering a Cromwell and a Sherman? What tools work on the Jagdtiger that don't work on the Elefant?

Then I'd say most units only have category weaknesses.

What's the Pak 40 weak to that the 6-pounder isn't?

ZiS barrage.
6-pounder isn't going to see other ATG barraging it.

What's different between countering a Cromwell and a Sherman?

The amount of AT nade capable infantry on their side, allowing you to be much more aggressive vs cromwell.

What tools work on the Jagdtiger that don't work on the Elefant?

Well, I can name you tool that works on elephant and doesn't work on jagdtiger if you want instead, is that fine for you? Yes? Alright then:
Show Spoiler

Exceptions always exist, because factions aren't mirrored.

ZiS barrage.
6-pounder isn't going to see other ATG barraging it.

i wish to amend my example to stolen 6-pounder

The amount of AT nade capable infantry on their side, allowing you to be much more aggressive vs cromwell.

But you still kill it with the same stuff, no?

Well, I can name you tool that works on elephant and doesn't work on jagdtiger if you want instead, is that fine for you? Yes? Alright then:
Show Spoiler

nope i knew exactly what i was doing putting it that way around

Regardless, my point was that the Jackson doesn't need some special Jackson-specific weakness added when tank destroyer counters work fine on it. Surely you don't disagree with that?

Regardless, my point was that the Jackson doesn't need some special Jackson-specific weakness added when tank destroyer counters work fine on it. Surely you don't disagree with that?

That I can stand behind as well.

There are some really exceptional units that require different approach to counter them then rest of the archetype units, but jackson isn't one of them.

By increasing the cost of Jackson will impact team games more than 1 v 1!

Pretty much any change done in hopes of balancing 1v1 has geometrically bigger implications in team games.

Regardless, my point was that the Jackson doesn't need some special Jackson-specific weakness added when tank destroyer counters work fine on it. Surely you don't disagree with that?

But why then fireflies and SU85 do have a specific weakness than? What if jacksons had a weakness and it was gone?

Tank battles are a universe on its own, even though you can help them with AT guns and handheld AT to a point but what im saying is that playing USF you can clearly note that jacksons have their own sh*t together, self sufficient and effective

Panthers, the main adversary, are heavy tank-heavy TD hybrids and they do have weaknesses to exploit (very bad rear armor, loong repair time, very bad AI without pintle). Even though they still outperform compared to mediums tanks and some heavies. IMO panthers can come too early and move too fast, but we were talking about jacksons, so why does it need an advocate to defend its perks?

Exceptions avoid the game to go stale, they make circular paths around the same tier of units, they give a faint hope to turn the game around, by sensing the game and using mind tricks and not raw brute force.

I always expect the game to be the best it can, ive had many discussions already because of that point of view, a good game balance is like a fine piece of art, the details and the results have to be superb. This community has a lot of awsome people, COH2 is driven by the community, lets not forget that.

But why then fireflies and SU85 do have a specific weakness than? What if jacksons had a weakness and it was gone?

M36 use to cost a lot less and still have paper armor and big target size, those are the weaknesses. Now if by weakness you mean being super RNG dependent, yeah this one has been removed.