Everyone here in the thread missing the real point of the thread - the original poster doesn't know how to play, so all your suggestions are invalid. Somehow he still hasn't commented on why he doesn't just make 1-2 paks - literally the best AT option in the game to support his tigers. You guys can keep replying to him with many different options (as we have done) but you can't teach someone who has already made up their mind. He didn't make this thread to find out how to deal with it - in his mind this thread was made to teach all of you something that he already knows to be fact. Maybe a mod will think this is trolling, but I think it is important even for the poster to realize that this is what he is doing so he can think about whether he is really better than and knows more than the experienced players who have come to reply on his thread.
Any USF player knows that you can't just "replace the jackson whenever you want". If you are playing 4v4 and the game has gone long, maybe you are floating enough fuel to just replace them as you lose them in a game that you are already handily winning anyway. But in 1v1 and even 2v2, if you lose your jacksons you are going to have a very hard time recovering. There is also the issue of build time - they build pretty slow considering you have basically no decent AT while you are waiting.
I brought up the cost-effectiveness of the jackson in comparison to the majority of Ostheers tanks in this thread, specifically the tiger (which is the most expensive.) At 125 fuel it hard-counters a 230 fuel tank. In comparison a 125 fuel Pz4 doesn't hard-counter an IS2, nor a Stug or a panther. And so they shouldn't as they're all cheaper. Ofcourse this isn't the case with the jackson. At 125 fuel they easily destroy tigers and Pz4's, and are easily replaceable. It's fine to have this role but its price must be raised to reflect its effectiveness.
Someone here mentioned the jackson costs slightly more than a tiger (because of the tech)? That would be true if the USF didn't have such a huge early game advantage against Ostheer. Map control = more resources.
I will await your reply.
|
|
You USF guys have fun playing against a nerfed into the ground Ostheer then.
A Jackson cost 125 fuel and hard counters a tank that costs 640 mp and 230 fuel. Whether a loiter strafe destroys 1 jackson or not is irrelevant, its easily replaceable. The cost-effectiveness ratio is unbalanced. Ofcourse lets ignore that and sling insults.
By the same token a 125 fuel P4 should be able to challenge an IS2.. Ofcourse not. |
|
Apart from mainly being a USF player myself, I'm not sure I deserve all these allied fanboys' insults. I merely suggested that the jackson price be raised to 150 fuel. Why? Because now USF has a great early game combined with a great late game. I don't really see why such a cheap tank can easily hard counter an expensive one that is meant to push back the tide, whilst being cheap enough to instantly replace.
Mix that in with P-47 rockets or heaven forbid a Soviet ally with IS2's you'll see why many Ostheer players are scratching their heads right now.
|
Poor axis fanboys crying they actually have to support their tiger with other unit like the insanely good pak40 or else its not effective. Relic needs to make patch so that making the first Tiger just triggers a victory condition.
Wait, are you seriously crying about the tiger being micro heavy? You should actually try using the jackson if you want to see a micro-intensive piece of armor. Oh, and don't make a single micro mistake either because you have no armor and no health to rely on if you find yourself in a bad spot for even a split second.
tldr - try loiter strafe - a micro free way to kill multiple jacksons for just a small amount of ammo. gg relic.
The jackson is 125 fuel (easily replaced.) It has a longer range and is much faster than a tiger to get out of bad positions. |
Lets not get personal here. Only I can call other people assholes. 
On topic, I think the Jackson is in a fine spot, with the penetration buff/damage decrease its a whole lot less erratic than in the last patch and performs its role of mobile, long range AT well without being gamebreaking. The Tiger is overall decidely mediocre now, but that does not mean it sucks or has no place in the game, especially against USF. Think of it as a more beefy/cost effective PIV. Vs US, anchor the Tiger with double Paks to prevent Jackson kiting/ medium tank rushes, and protect the Paks (that is the most important part) with infantry, Mgs, mines and the Tiger itself. A HT is also a strong addition to keep your units at full strength and provide additional staying power, while a lategame sniper can inflict manpower bleed, poke your opponent, and goad him into unfavourable engagements.
This combination is micro intensive, but has strong synergy and won many a game. Being heavy on static play/teamweapons, the obvious vulnerability of this unit composition is to arty, but not all US commanders have arty available nor make effective use of their options in the first place.
I agree but such heavy micro to keep a tiger alive is not fun. It's actually quite stressful.  Furthermore if P-47 rockets or IS2's are called in it's good game tiger.
I agree with the jackson buff, but not at the same price (125 fuel.) Everytime one goes down its immediately replaced. |
|
I think jacksons cost should be 150 fuel. They're too cost effective now, & in team games are being spammed. Just my 2 cents. |
Fraction of price?
2 jacksons cost more then a tiger.
1 jackson isn't a spam.
Don't spam tigers against USF, P4 is still there as potent as ever.
And if jacksons are guarded, there isn't really any excuse why your tanks shouldn't be supported by PaKs and LMG rens.
Jacksons cost 125 fuel. Tigers cost 640 manpower & 230 fuel.
Nonetheless I agree that P4's are potent, but with its short range of 40 and no vehicle-lock , Jacksons easily do away with them.
|
The tiger is an all-round heavy tank, this means that it is decent at everything; it does not mean that it is excellent at everything and you can solve any problem with them. Support your tigers with panzershreks and AT-guns to deter enemy tank destroyers.
In a typical engagement my Jackson(s) are guarded by Rifles with Flamers+Bars, 1 MG and an E8.
My Rifles and the MG deal with infantry. Panzerschrecks only have 35 range, they would not be able to reach the Jackson before losing too many models.
|
|
Lately I've been seeing alot of USF players spamming jacksons. It basically hard counters the tiger whilst being at a fraction of the price. When I play USF against Ostheer my first tank is usually an Easy Eight as it easily deals with a PIV. Afterwards the E8 gets augmented by a Jackson, which easily deals with Tigers and Panthers. Its currently incredibly easy to play as USF, even easier than it was before the patch.
Ostheer has a slightly better early game since the newest patch... but the new Jackson performance did considerably nerf Ostheer's late-game performance. Mix that in with IS2 meta in team games it seems to be a nightmare now for any sort of comeback.
Thoughts? |
The first graph says that he was just floating resources (probably muni as allies tend to do this) the whole game not that he was earning them faster. Looking at the angle between graph and x axis you can see that his income was usually worse and sometimes the same as yours. It may mean that he had more caches or that you played okw.
I thought that too but he had no caches. I had 1. I was Ostheer aswell. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
