That's not the case, creeping barrage and the normal barrage share the same cooldown. For me is this ability completely useless now as i have first to check if my sextons are ready to fire just to gain a bit more range that i in most cases with the buffed range don't need just to pay 35 mun.
For you it might be completely useless, the difference though between 160 to 400 is not simply "a bit more".
The difference is humongous since it is x250% more and it cost only 35 mu.
No, he didn't. He very clearly brought up the resource cost of two Jacksons.
You criticize people all the time for ignoring everything that doesn't fit your argument. Might want to look in the mirror sometime.
Why are you continuing down this pointless route?
Now PLS accept that what you wrote about pop is wrong and move on.
In addition pls cut down on the personal comments, for me this is not a personal vendetta. I criticize what others write not the persons, actually you are the one turning a balance issue into a personal issue.
Building Pz.IV when Jackson is on the field is perfectly fine as you can still infilct drain on enemy MP (althouhg limited by Jackson), while Jackson can do nothing to your infantry.
I don't understand what we are arguing about anymore.
You think that Tiger is fine and the only problem with it is Jackson? But then it is also SU-85 and Firefly.
What do you suggest? Nerf them all? Do you remember why they were buffed in the first place - the state of balance in big game modes?
If you ask me yes I do believe that M36, Su-85 and FF have too high change to hit and penetrate all axis vehicles from a Kubel to KT and things get even worse when these units are vetted since not only they have OP base stats but they also get OP vet bonuses.
The current state creates a stale meta where allies can simply spam infantry and TD and be pretty much covered while axis have to used a combination of units and still find themselves in trouble.
Elslayer clearly asked for clarification why your theory that: "A double Jackson build has thrown ~40% of its popcap into vehicular anti-tank" is wrong which I provided.
This made no sense at all since the sexton got an range buff and especially with the patch notes who said "no longer share the same cooldown"
And also it cant fire contentiously since u have to bring your valentine in a dangerous position to trigger this ability.
Can a member of the balance team confirm this?
The changes to Valentine are simply not well documented in the patch notes.
It Valentine also lost its ability to crash infantry something it did extremely good.
Actually using valentine to call in victor artillery is not that dangerous, due to reckon mode/arty flares, high speed, small target size, not being 1 shot snared ,the commander ability to call 25p artillery and the need for the enemy to relocate fast once the arty (weather 25p or Sexton) is called. Things get even easier if valentine used "warspeed" and/or vets since it gets a combination of ridiculous high speed and small size.
I am in support of small changes (and I have been advocating them for years now). Keep it small and eventually you will find the right values without breaking things.
The overnerf overbuf circle has going for far too long from Relic and I was actually unpleasantly supersized when it was continued when the community got involved in the patches.
Could be, as your opponent invested X amount of resources in pure AT unit and you still can't beat him in AI.
Not sure about 1v1 as I don't play it, but according to casts that I watched Pz.IV is perfectly viable in matchup vs USF. The idea of sitting on fuel just to build slow fat target and be outranged looks indeed bad.
4v4 is completely another beast. You can pretty much spam rocket artillery instead of tanks(if you see enemy is investing heavily in AT units) and be totally fine. You just need to mine flanks in order to avoid throw-away medium tank rush for your rocket artillery.
The theory that one have invested 40% of pop to AT is simply flawed as I have explained.
The point is that a USF player can built a single M36 that can counter the majority of enemy vehicles from Kubel to KT and if the does opponent does not make tanks he can still disembark the vehicle and use the crew for repairs, for capping or even for fighting if they have Thompson and have only 4 pop upkeep.
In addition one can relay on riflemen to beat enemy infantry or even built the Scott which is extremely hard to counter without vehicles.
Ostheer especially have a very hard time attacking if not support by vehicles.
What is "completely wrong" in theory that you shouldn't invest 230 fuel into unit which hard counters are already present on the field?
Having opponent to have 16 pop and 720 MP and 270 FUEL (don't remember exact cost of M36, but it doesn't matter here) sitting without job, since they don't affect your infantry in any way, is completely wrong strategy?
The part that in bold:
"A double Jackson build has thrown ~40% of its popcap into vehicular anti-tank."
USF vehicles can be disembarked so if someone has a m36 doing nothing he is actually doing something wrong since he should disembark the crew.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
Heartless Jäger 
