Profile of mons7erz

Well, then if you would loose your jackson to the PUMA then that would mean your too deep too m8.

That depends on the context of the scenario.
Jackson v Tiger is pretty forward--Tiger pushes, Jackson fires 4 times, tiger retreats. the jackson,and TDs in general, exsists so heavies like the tiger cant go ham without being punished

Jackson v. Puma:
-Jackson pushes, Puma stuns, Jackson gets hammered by p4/tiger/panthers/etc. that would be a l2p issue
or
-Puma flanks, hits jackson once or twice/stuns, jackson gets pushed by tanks, dies. that would be an outplayed issue.

depends on the scenario, really. most times the jackson is at the back line, so its hard to say.

Jackson 400MP 145F
Tiger 630MP 230F
Tiger ACE 800MP 250F
KT 720MP 280F

It seems that you fine with a unit being able to counter something that cost 1.5~2.0 times as much. Seems like a double standard.

Jacksons are the fireflys of the USF, you lose your tiger to a Jackson (ONE jackson) you're in too deep my friend.

Is the Puma being a counter to the Jackson that bad an idea though?

The Jackson is the only tank destroyer in a faction who's AT is otherwise all geared towards killing lights (low pen ATG, low pen bazookas, pathetic pen Stuart).

If the Jackson needs a vehicular counter, what better vehicle than the one USF is best equipped to deal with without a Jackson?

Cost is a big factor, for one.

Puma 370MP 70FU.
Jackson 400MP 145FU

I don't believe a vehicle that's literally half the cost, should be able to counter. if we're re scaling costs/Performance, it wouldn't be a bad thing, i guess. Or, we could just make the M10 viable again, there would probably be less Jackson play. making the Puma a hard counter to the jackson would just push the poor soul in the dark more...
Think of the m10s!

this woudnt change the Jacksons performance at all, only stupid rng moments when p4 bounces

Now, I'm not trying to sound undermining here; but if that happened because you got bad RNG, then the results could not be reliably reproduced, therefore the nerf wouldn't make sense outside of someone venting their frustrations with the RNG. Unless they can be reproduced, I currently dont see a need to hit the jackson with the nerf stick. I've seen a cromwell tank bounce 6 shots off a crippled P4 (happened recently, Should of saved the replay, was pretty funny.) But we're not asking for the P4 nerf, because it happened as a result of a one-off.

Personally, I think the P4 is a very balanced tank. Sometimes bad RNG just gets ya.

But back to the OP, If this were happening all the time (with evidence) I'd be on board, but as far as I see, and the millions of jacksons I've used, I dont believe I've ever come accross a P4 who has bounced 4 times hahaha

If someone can test it, and post their findings, would be interesting to look at, but I can't see that result being reproduced.

please nerf Jacksons armor, i dont think they should be able to bounce p4 shots.

It woudnt change anything against pretty much any interaction, exept for stupid rng moments with p4

Edit: It might make them worse against Pumas, doesnt anyone have exact pen numbers?

What would you purpose be given in return? The Jackson is already difficult to balance, given its USFs only counter to heavy tanks. Especially now, since the Pershing has been moved to a more Anti-Infantry Tank (which is not to say it can't punch on with a Tiger or other big tank, but its less effective).
Moreso 57mm AT guns are essentially noise makers when against a heavy tank, especially one that can call in arty (Looking at you, Grand offensive ).

Besides, if you're struggling, Might I suggest backing your tank pushes up with a few AT guns? Raketen's Keep Jacksons from "poking", and Paks have a great range that will usually reliably pen a Jackson, especially with their ability.
Alternatively Panzerschreks will always be a threat to jacksons, especially since they have no anti infantry measures.
Counters Exsist, and Jacksons are Predictable, you always--ALWAYS know USF will get at least one.

Why not nerf jackson's mobility instead, I hate the fact it has a turret and reverses to safety while still dishing out damage to my tanks.

Unless there's infantry or recon in front of the Jackson, it will usually only shoot under 1 of two conditions: You Shoot first. This gives the Jackson Vision, and will return fire. There's a "Hold Fire" Button that can be utilised, if your tank is low and you want to retreat it, or dont want to take any more damage.

The Second condition: someone's rolling the dice on a ground target. can be hit or miss, depending.