M36 Jackson

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.

Wouldn't it simply be easier to give allied TDs deflection damage and lower their pen? You get the best of both worlds the-armour makes units more durable without being trivialized but intended counters are always effective.

I'd like to see some tweaking with targer sizes as well but as a strictly minimum extra work maximum effect I think deflection damage really is the way to go forward.

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.

Show Spoiler
Edited: I felt sorry because i went too far, i put the picture in spoilers, i wanted to bring up some exageration humour.
IMO panthers are not neccesary to be removed to fix USF lack of good AT. But indeed panthers are strong late game presence. When massed they are a big issue too.
Maybe a non-doc tiger I could decide the better heavy tank meta (maybe?) but i think that solution goes too far.

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

the only reason jacksons are "op" is because they're the only thing that can compete with panthers in the first place. a jacksons vs mediums match up is an entirely different game, one where both AT guns and infantry AT are extremely useful against the paper bag armored TDs. Firefly's higher burst damage doesn't make it bad at all, in fact it makes it better as a long range TD than jackson which gets speed instead.

the only reason jacksons are "op" is because they're the only thing that can compete with panthers in the first place. a jacksons vs mediums match up is an entirely different game, one where both AT guns and infantry AT are extremely useful against the paper bag armored TDs. Firefly's higher burst damage doesn't make it bad at all, in fact it makes it better as a long range TD than jackson which gets speed instead.

I just said sorry about the picture. I only meant to do a joke, but i admited it went too far. I understand it does not promote a clear concensus between POV. I hid it in spoilers to not avoid i made it.

The panther vs jackson story is a never ending one. There have been countless threads about one and the other and every single time one is attacked the other is used as an excuse. I understand that panthers are good, but they are not godlike nor cost effective and Jackosns are effective at TD, even better than any other late game TD but when cornered they are easy targets. Fireflies and SU85 cant compare to jacksons directly because both have clear disadvantages that axis can exploit, but jacksons are great all-around and also premium TD. Thats why the thread started and i want to keep it advancing on.

Lets we both agree with the M10 proposal, to make it nondoc captain tech to give USF a midgame AT presence, and let M36 to a heavy-superheavy TD role, with the corresponding reworks. This way neither USF gets nerfed nor Jacksons bully the metagame anymore.

Anyways i would say sorry again if it is neccesary

Moving the m10 into stock leaves the issues of: now the captain has an entire extra unit AND what do we replace the m10 with in its doctrine?

I just said sorry about the picture. I only meant to do a joke, but i admited it went too far. I understand it does not promote a clear concensus between POV. I hid it in spoilers to not avoid i made it.

The panther vs jackson story is a never ending one. There have been countless threads about one and the other and every single time one is attacked the other is used as an excuse. I understand that panthers are good, but they are not godlike nor cost effective and Jackosns are effective at TD, even better than any other late game TD but when cornered they are easy targets. Fireflies and SU85 cant compare to jacksons directly because both have clear disadvantages that axis can exploit, but jacksons are great all-around and also premium TD. Thats why the thread started and i want to keep it advancing on.

Lets we both agree with the M10 proposal, to make it nondoc captain tech to give USF a midgame AT presence, and let M36 to a heavy-superheavy TD role, with the corresponding reworks. This way neither USF gets nerfed nor Jacksons bully the metagame anymore.

Anyways i would say sorry again if it is neccesary

The problem is that just adding wolverine to USF still won't change the end-game meta, just the mid-game one. If people ever want end-game in team matches to be anything besides TD vs panther and tiger/elefant with the occassional doctrinal med meme spammer, then something drastic has to change, and as long as this meta remains, there will ALWAYS be people complaining about OP panther or OP jackson, unless you whack them both with a nerf bat until they're completely unusable.

I was testing a stand/move mechanic for tank hunters with turret. So e.g. Jackson has 50 range while moving, but 60 when in possition, not moving.

So Jackson, Firefly have an advantage, but lose it on hunting. E.g. this increases the needed micro.

I think the issue lies with how the USF T4 is built. Ostheer and Soviet has light and heavier tank destroyers (su76, su85; stugIII and panther) wherefore no1 complains that if there is a heavy tank like pershing or IS-2 stugs aren't good enough vs them. Simply get a panther.

As USF it's way harder becouse you have only 1 basic tank destroyer which has to counter p4, panther and KingTiger in the same time. Jackson currently is way to cost effective for what i does but if you reduce it's combat performance then USA will be outclassed by axis armour. Safe choice would be increasing the cost for extra +/- 10 fuel or reduce it's penetration but not both. Radical change: additionally add M10 into the tech.

Moving the m10 into stock leaves the issues of: now the captain has an entire extra unit AND what do we replace the m10 with in its doctrine?

There are few options. Some would say that there is still sherman Jumbo or you can add command e8.

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.

Actually Ostheer would be in much better place if they had a main battle tank in T4 instead of expensive highly specialized vehicles.

And M36 does not need to have so high penetration at range 60 to counter Panther.

In the end of they day if Panther's armor is the problem iyo lets lower to 180, give panther an actually useful vet 2 bonus and set the fuel price to 140.

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.

That wouldn't solve anything? TDs would still be effective against all targets, it would just add a mostly insignificant three second delay to switch shells.

That wouldn't solve anything? TDs would still be effective against all targets, it would just add a mostly insignificant three second delay to switch shells.

Yes it would. The heavy TD would not completely shut down medium tanks.

For instance if normal M36 rounds had range 50 and penetration 170, it would still be able to counter the PzIV but far less effectively. There would be more effective counter like the 76mm and the Easy8. So one would built M36 only if heavier tank where used.

My thinking, we should have recategorise the tier and role of units. A lot of patching has made the game less aysmmeteric and a lot more dependent on higher aps reaction clicks.

Like light vehicles to counter infantry to light tanks to counter infantry/light vehicless to med to counter infantry/lights, to heavies that specialises against AT or AI, and not both.

I won't say Jackson is result of panthers, but super limited heavies, but somehow panthers AT role is weakened with armor nerfs yet is given more AI performance. Somehow super heavies AT could damage infantry It blurs the roles as an example.

Like i mean if super heavies are badly accurate against infantry and good against tank and limited, restricted to AT roles, i dont see the provlem

I will also say scaling and leveling should be more systematic. Like if allies td special is range and pen, than as they vet, they should overcome lower tier units. Likewise if axis tanks are meant to be more aggressive push with armour, then their vet bonus should reflect that. Hence i was suggesting armor skirts should raise "rear" armor to 120, so p4 and p5 should overcome med tanks at max range.

Hope coh3 can define clearer faction design roles and units performance

Yes it would. The heavy TD would not completely shut down medium tanks.

For instance if normal M36 rounds had range 50 and penetration 170, it would still be able to counter the PzIV but far less effectively. There would be more effective counter like the 76mm and the Easy8. So one would built M36 only if heavier tank where used.

If you just want to make the Jackson bad against mediums, you could just nerf its ROF instead of going through all the creative trouble of adding multiple shells. Either would make USF unable to deal with mediums unless they have a 76mm/E8/M10 commander, so I'd say that wouldn't be very ideal.

The Jackson needs to be strong (overpowered) because it's the only thing holding USF late game together, because they have a severe lack of other good AT options. If it's too cost effective against all targets, and mostly against mediums, I'd say it's a good start to... just make it cost more than a medium and make it a bit less likely to penetrate Panthers and heavies at max range.

How about giving all officers a stronger version of the bazooka as an upgrade, and reducing jacksons ROF?

USF wins the infantry late game hands down, so I'm not entirely sure why they have to also win the armor aspect, or why it'd be unfair for the panther to be the strongest mobile TD. USF AT gun is probably the best in the game due to it's ROF. While it's not guaranteed a significant percentage of the time a single 57mm can kill a light vehicle even if an axis player immediately retreats. Two can do the same to a p4.

USF has strong infantry AT. While I'm not sure they would even need an infantry AT buff, it seems reasonable for infantry AT damage to play a necessary part in non-doc late game AT since they also win the infantry game hands down.

If you just want to make the Jackson bad against mediums, you could just nerf its ROF instead of going through all the creative trouble of adding multiple shells. Either would make USF unable to deal with mediums unless they have a 76mm/E8/M10 commander, so I'd say that wouldn't be very ideal.

The Jackson needs to be strong (overpowered) because it's the only thing holding USF late game together, because they have a severe lack of other good AT options. If it's too cost effective against all targets, and mostly against mediums, I'd say it's a good start to... just make it cost more than a medium and make it a bit less likely to penetrate Panthers and heavies at max range.

No that does not make sense and you are actually contradicting yourself.

If creating multiple shell is trouble why was it choosen for the Sherman 76mm and since it has already been created why it simpler to change the ROF than to add the same ability to other units?

Why in your opinion it would be difficult for USF to deal with PzIVs? They have the Sherman, the M1 ATG, Bazookas 2 commanders (about to become 4) with "Super" bazookas. And the M36 would be useless simply less cost efficient.

If they M36 need to OP to hold the late it does not have to be OP in the mid game also. USF do not have a severe lack of good AT option vs PzIV.

Having different shell allow the unit to be balanced separately vs mediums and Super heavies. That would make the M36 not the optimum choice regardless of target.

It is not simply "too cost effective against mediums" it completely shut downs PzIVs being able to hit and penetrate with (nearly) 100% chance 20% units away from where PzIV can even fire back while being faster and better at firing on the move.

And this change can be applied to all "heavy" TDs including Panther/Su-85/FF.

Assuming the critical peak for Jackson is when you can field 2 and use them in duo during late game.

- Or you do increase significantly Jackson's price to a point where it is too costly to get 2 Jacksons and then Axis can simply overrun it with more armor. In that case just spam Pz4.
- Or you don't and it doesn't change anything. I mean 10 fuel more isn't going to change the perception of the Jackson for the majority of players. You can make Overpowered units super expensive they remains OP once fielded.

You can also just make the Jackson limited to one per player at the same time and adapt its stats. Should be easier to implement.
Anyway in both way this should end the viability of USF as a faction.

How about giving all officers a stronger version of the bazooka as an upgrade, and reducing jacksons ROF?

USF wins the infantry late game hands down, so I'm not entirely sure why they have to also win the armor aspect, or why it'd be unfair for the panther to be the strongest mobile TD. USF AT gun is probably the best in the game due to it's ROF. While it's not guaranteed a significant percentage of the time a single 57mm can kill a light vehicle even if an axis player immediately retreats. Two can do the same to a p4.

USF has strong infantry AT. While I'm not sure they would even need an infantry AT buff, it seems reasonable for infantry AT damage to play a necessary part in non-doc late game AT since they also win the infantry game hands down.

None of that is really true, and you have to decide if you're talking about ostheer or OKW here because the matchups are very different - USF does not win the infantry late game "hands down" against OKW, but it wins the infantry game all the time against ostheer. Zookas are really bad, especially compared to schreks, and are also up against more armored targets which further make them a tough sell.
As for why it's wrong for panther to be the strongest mobile TD? It's because it's fast, heavily armored, has high health, and has an MG + an upgradeable MG so it can deal enough damage to push off infantry (but it will certainly not be wiping squads). This means with a panther, if you win the tank game, the late-game just turns to hide-and-seek, with allied inf running to the far edges of the map to cap vps, getting pushed off by panthers when they get there, and repeat. This is not something a jackson can do, obviously.

No that does not make sense and you are actually contradicting yourself.

If creating multiple shell is trouble why was it choosen for the Sherman 76mm and since it has already been created why it simpler to change the ROF than to add the same ability to other units?

Because HVAP on the 76mm was mostly created as an AT shell because its regular shells have AOE damage.

Why in your opinion it would be difficult for USF to deal with PzIVs? They have the Sherman, the M1 ATG, Bazookas 2 commanders (about to become 4) with "Super" bazookas.

Yeah USF is all fun and games against Ostheer Panzer IV, until it gets vet 2 or until an OKW Panzer IV shows up. USF can't deal with 234+ armor tanks without the Jackson. The AP rounds on the M1 is a decent option, but ATGs are vulnerable, it costs a lot of munitions to use continuously and it can be countered by running away and coming back 30 seconds later.

It is not simply "too cost effective against mediums" it completely shut downs PzIVs

Yes, did you miss the part where it said tank destroyer?