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 |
-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.
Is it one or both of these? Because I feel like nerfing a unit and increasing its cost simultaneously is too much all at once. But it is a case by case basis I suppose |
|
I dont think you can nerf its performance too much, but Lago's point about cost efficiency makes plenty of sense.
You can always just increase the cost and not touch the performance. If the US needs the Jackson at its current level, but that level is too good for its current price, that's the way to go. |
Who brougth up SU to discuss side techs?
Who's still talking about it? You
Ost teching was fixed several patches ago. That is literally the extent of my argument about that topic. You are reading way too far into this. Why dont we get back to the actual topic of the thread |
I doubt you understand axis factions opportunities/timings since you keep failing at the arguments logic.
I play all sides equally, I dont really care what your opinion of me is
"To unlock the same things, soviets need to spend more fuel." -I think soviets are very out of the scope of the current discussion. There is no need to mention them, since each building they get opens their rooster. If you want to compare SU vs OST building cost, you are missing a big point.
I dont want to compare them, I'm not the one who made a blanket statement about Ost teching in a thread about the Churchill and KV1...
"It is 100% false to say Osts teching is more prohibitive. Its flat out wrong." -It is true that OST tech is prohibitive
Okay but thats not what he said. He said its MUCH MUCH more prohibitive than all other factions. Stop rambling about nonsense that has nothing to do with my point, or his, or the thread.
don't forget all faction get perks and trade offs, brits get heal on the move and in map art flare, usf gets tank crews,wtc
Jesus christ can we stop expanding the scope of this thread even further? I'm well aware of the trade-offs. Ost has plenty of issues, teching is not one of them anymore. That's all I'm saying.... |
Here's a handy guide for figuring out if something is free:
Do you pay for it? >> Yes >> It's not free
V
V
No >> It's free
You'll notice free was in quotes dude. If you want to troll me go somewhere else. The point stands, you are simply wrong about Ost teching. Its not more prohibitive, this was fixed a long time ago
If you still dont understand, I can explain it you in further detail in PMs. Your whining about Ost is not on topic for the thread |
Since when do people count side tech into tech equations? Do we count OKW Medtruck + Medics, Mechanized + Repair engineers and then FlakHQ + Panther prize for the Panther as well? Big, big think.
Seriously? Uhhh, because Ost unlocks snares, weapon upgrades, AND grenades in their tech for "free". YOU said Osts teching is more prohibitive, if you want to accurately compare costs, you need to include EQUIVALENT sidetechs. Nobody gets a free repair station, so thats far from equivalent
To unlock the same things, soviets need to spend more fuel. It is 100% false to say Osts teching is more prohibitive. Its flat out wrong. |
The Firefly has +40 damage per shot, but +3 seconds reload time.
It's got the lowest damage output over time of all three TDs.
Wow and apparently lower max range penetration too? Is that right? I thought the firefly had more but coh2db says Jackson is 220, Firefly 210.
I was gonna say the firefly is more consistent but not if that's the case. Seems like tulips are its only advantage
Shermans are pretty good no?
When Axis rear armor are now 90-117, bunch of Sherman variations are your AT vehicles.
Yea nothing wrong with shermans, but I left them off the list because everyone has medium tanks
|
I can see why its stats are the way they are, but it seems way more cost efficient than its Soviet and UKF counterparts. It makes the SU-85 and Firefly look kinda shit.
I think its definitely better than the SU85, whos only real trick over the Jackson is self-spotting, which has an obvious drawback. And its only 10 fuel cheaper yet needs to be babysitted way more than the m36 so you might be right on that one.
As for the firefly, idk. It does have more damage and the tulips are still a great trick. Its definitely less forgiving micro-wise due to its mobility and turret rotation like you said, but I think its ceiling is still higher. |
they got a rubber projectile AT gun that is awesome vs light tanks but trash vs any tank on okw p4 level or higher....
They actually have the best AT gun in the game IF you spend the muni for HVAP.
But for AT vehicles, the US have the fewest options. Stuart is the next best thing (not counting medium tanks for anyone). Ost has stug,panther, OKW has puma,jp4,panther, Brits have AEC, Firefly, Comet, Sovs have su76, su85
That doesnt mean the Jackson shouldnt be tweaked, but I think the reasoning for it being better than Firefly and su85 is the surrounding vehicle roster |
0
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
