Profile of Agomongo1235

does that mean he ignore puma range advantage and went in danger close to stuart ?

dont get me wrong but i am that kind of player that always throw in like his way and the result was...... well no doubt same as yours opponent and i deserved it while any other player shouldn't even have a scratch

Used the terrain to my advantage. Backed up on the road, turned at the forest, and backed up into my base. Also, was out of his line of sight I think when I backed up. I also flanked his Puma, but his rockets caught be off guard. Hence the reason why I backed up since the Puma and rockets both got shots off.

stuart dies to 1 mine and the pathing of it is just shiet whats OP in that u just got bless by RNG thats all
ps: all usf tanks are paper made according to lelic

Stuart does extremely well against light vehicles. Probably the best light vehicle there is. With the exception of the Puma. Especially has nice utility. Does decent inf damage IMO. Also, I've never had a Stuart die from one mine... Also, I wouldn't call it RNG considering that fact that I knowingly made the decision to back up into the forest and turn so that his LoS was cut. Then to use shell shock knowingly it would blind him, get to his backside and finish him off.

Reponse to PS: yeah I agree. The whole misconception of "German armor was so thick and American armor was paper" needs to die.

Agreed with terrible teamgame faction. I usually play 4v4, but I lose most of them; I can never get past level 8. The thing with USF is that they're mainly meant for flanking, as said by numerous other posts. That creates a huge problem if the team isn't coordinated enough, and helpful enough, to help pin the enemy and for you to go around them. Even then since it's a 4v4 if you outflank one opponent his teammate nearby will just flank you. It's a flank sandwich. Flank on flank on flank, haha.

I agree with double Scotts. I've been experimenting with the double HMC. Once they get to vet 2 they're fantastic AND you don't piss off the RNG god before Vet 2. IMO the normal foot howy is better in terms of accuracy, but they are on foot AND they can't shoot while moving. Make sure to capitalize on that. Being able to shoot while moving. Remember the scotts have longer range than their sight, so if you can put men infront and the enemy schreks are charging you you can just shoot while going backwards.

Also, I agree with HMG not being worth it. Also, it comes in too late. I've pretty much decided to skip T1 altogether and just get 1 AT and a scott. If I need MG I'd rather just go with the Airborne Company. I back tech sometimes if the enemy Axis player has a lot of planes (AA half are great for inf and planes. Just make sure that you keep the enemy blob away from you at max range. Smash that U button.)

I've also noticed Axis players love to blob, so getting mortars and howy's from T3 is pretty damn important and make sure to have your teammates get MGs.

The most important thing I find with 4v4's is to:
1. Cap all fuel points and hold on to them for your dear life
2. Try to harass their fuel point and starve them of it
3. Destroy their fuel caches if you can
4. Put the pressure up
-for the love of GOD do NOT try to destroy their buildings early or mid game. You'll overextend and then waste men and time) (best to keep the keypoints and build up your defences)
5. Don't push too hard
-biggest mistake I see are people getting cocky and just charge in then retreating all their men and letting the Axis push with no resistance and just take everything and build up their defences
6. Caches, caches, caches

I find that it's a guarenteed win if you do this, but doing all of this is the most difficult thing if you're USF in a 4v4.

There are numerous other problems I find with the USF in 4v4, but buffing it could throw the 1v1 scene out of whack.

EDIT: M20's are actually fantastic if microd like a MOFO. Also, the mines are another great thing about it... I don't think there's a cooldown on them actually. However, I usually still skip T1.

I think everyone makes the mistake of doing this, it's just a bit more punishing for the jackson since it doesn't have very much health and is meant to be supported by spotting/screening infantry. In 1v1s, I usually just spam jacksons unless I'm really ahead and feel like a sherman (or shermans) will end the game. My reasoning is that seeing as I mostly go lieutenant tier and get a M15 and .50 cal and have 3-4 squads of bar riflemen (counting an officer squad), I usually have enough anti-infantry firepower that I don't need the HE capabilities of the sherman or scott, but I am very vulnerable to enemy armor. I'll just stick the jackson like 30 meters behind my other forces wherever I'm expecting armor and whatever is in front (usually rifles of course) will spot for the jackson and protect it from at infantry and tank dives. And then of course the jackson will be able to take another hit from all tank/at guns with the FBP. I didn't know they were making the M10 450mp though. That's a bit insane, considering a comet is 500, but that's offtopic anyway.

Double scotts are actually a bit insane, especially against four man squads, as they have very fast projectile speed and won't get stuka/pwerfer'd like pack howies and are pretty mobile. They can also take 3 hits from pretty much all hard at sources (tanks, at guns). The only problem is taht getting a scott means you're 75 fuel farther from getting a normal tank. I only make mortars when I'm really really desperate for some indirect.

I'm actually rethinking how I use Shermans and I find that their smoke ability is crazy nice. The range is great and can really stop the AT guns well. Which could help with Jacksons moving up a little bit. Also, agreed I do find that almost everyone does it.

The 450 is insane, but it costs that much if you don't get a major. Which I still disagree with.

I'll have to try the double scotts. Had no idea they were that strong against AT. Also, very true so many times have the enemy arty killed my howys and mortars. Another thing you mention yes the 75 fuel is pretty harsh. Not saying it shouldn't cost that much, but definitely a very heavy option to weigh.

i find at guns much better than jacksons to protect your rear/flanks, building such a expensive unit to just keep it in the rear doing nothing feels like a waste of resources, at guns do the same and are cheaper

I agree they are expensive hence even more the reason not to commit them fully to an attack. No good Axis player will let their tanks go unsupported with shrecks and AT. I was thinking about this and I guess (which most people know, but don't really do I think) is to take out the PAK and inf first then move in your tank at an angle.

While you are very correct in that they are effective as a defensive unit, the real meat of it is that they're effective when they have a screen. Remember that the vehicle AI will target the closer tank unless given a direct command by the player, but that command stops the tank from moving. So if an Axis player wants to try and attack your Jackson over your, let's say, Sherman, they have to stop moving (if not move forward), which allows your sherman to continue to advance, flank, and even block from the rear of your target.

The M36 Jackson also has two crucial benefits that does allow for it to be used without support offensively: range and sight. It has better range than most enemy units, but more importantly it has better sight. A couple Jacksons can be extremely powerful with a slow approach. As long as you don't attack directly head on, and try and get as much of an angle as possible, your targets may not even be able to fire back before you fade back out of sight. (Of if you manage to approach from the rear, or flank an unturreted vehicle, kill them outright.)

A similar game can be played as either Axis faction using the Puma, though this is much more dangerous, though you have better sight. (50 instead of 40.)

Keep in mind though against ostheer that pioneers have 42 sight, 2 more than the Jackson. So be wary of that if you're hunting repairing vehicles. Also, spotting scopes.

Agreed and definitely new insight having Jacksons shoot then scoot back. Which is exactly what Shermans did in the war since they were the only tanks to have stabalizers I think.

I say this cause I always see USF players deciding to run their Jacksons into the enemies line and trying to kite a unit they think is alone. I don't think anyone is denying that the Jackson is a great tank, but I wanted to see what other people thought if they would rather have a tank with a tank with stronger armor or an upgradable option for a better gun for the Sherman.