Profile of LeOverlord

Steam has it at 60€, while some stores in Greece will sell it slightly less, at 58€, just playing with the cents for marketing purposes xD

if you play usf you will know that at 3 min it is not possible to have any of that unless you start the game focused on spending valuable resources to have 1 bazzoka on the field without even knowing if the enemy will have a 221 or something else . Which is certainly a sure defeat. USF mines are pretty inefficient and in the early game then. ridiculous.

I personally make it mandatory to get bazookas as soon as possible for 2 reasons

1. The enemy will absolutely bring some kind of vehicle in the field (in this case, the 221)

2. Most of the time, the enemy fields tanks first (this is just a l2p issue for me) so i want to have something to deal with them. And i also don't like the Riflemen AT because it's very inconsistent.

This is a case of observer bias. Jackson has about 15% chance to bounce a max range shot of a P4. Not sure what you want with the caliber of weapons here though. The game works completely differently and is far from realistic.

Also the Jackson should not get touched by Panzerschrecks unless you really misjudged the situation, get caught by surprise during a push of yours (but then there is normally no follow up for the Axis player). The Jackson has 60 range, Schrecks have (don't know exactly) 30/35 (someone please confirm) and need a bit of setup time. If your backline unit gets into knife range with Panzerschrecks that it deserves to be punished. Also in a tank rush it can still drive away unless you're overmicroed heavily or positioned it in front of a path blocker. It does not get deleted much quicker than a similarly prices OKW P4 vs an Allied composition.

The Jackson has no drawback apart from a slightly underwhelming armor for the price. The only reason why it's strong is that it has to be that way due to the design of the whole USF faction. Every other unit in the game has a weakness, either be it a strong counter or a clearly underperforming stat or feature (like casemates) that can be exploited. A Jackson however is usually lost by either the USF player making a mistake or being heavily outplayed which would probably kill every other tank in the game as well.

As you said yourself, 15% at max range. I want to believe that the bounce rate is reduced as the P4 gets closer. As for the caliber statement, I replied to the other guy that said that vehicles lighter than P4 don't always penetrate the Jackson. It has some armor, not paper armor. Moving on.

3-4 Shrek shots are enough to take down a Jackson. The problem is that the games I play are a blob shitshow from both sides. Enemy brings armor, I respond with Jacksons, he then brings AT equipped squads and I fall back while holding him with my infantry. Still not enough to stop them sometimes.

Yeah, the Jackson is fast, but if you have 1-2 and the enemy rushes you with 2-3 P4s and is focused on taking them down, he won't back down until he destroys the Jacksons. Plus, if you find it difficult to destroy a Jackson with a P4, you have alternatives. And if you don't, then use P4s and go up close and personal. If you can't take it down from far away, get close. Jackson is nothing more than a sniper. Good from afar, mediocre if you get close. This is how I see it.

And a solution would be to make the M10 Wolverine non doctrinal. Seriously, I wouldn't mind having it as a stock unit instead of the Jackson. It costs nothing, you can spam it and it's seriously perfect in every aspect. You don't even have to change it. Spam it, roll over the enemy, replace casualties. What's 80 fuel lost?

Except that's untrue. It's as mobile as the enemy, but better on the move.
It deals more damage per shot but has the same health (this means any support will hit a bit harder)
Its got 50% more range so odds are it will have the first shot in and if the enemy pulls out odds are it will have the last shit out.
After receiving damage, even if not killed the Jackson can immediately start repairing itself, including engine damage making it even more likley to escape even the most unfortunate circumstances.

The Jackson has all the same tools to survive as it did when it was a 2 tap, but with double the health and none of its extreme handicaps level out. If you sre losing a Jackson to a tank rush you have to have walked away from the game with the crew out because even a static Jackson will put up a hell of a fight against a p4. Let alone of you micro it....

Jackson's armor = mobility. I don't have to mention how this game is inaccurate, when German tanks are as fast as the allied ones, but you sacrifice something to gain something. You can't be both well armored and fast. This happens only with modern infantry.

I appreciate that you didn’t try to ridicule but you raise good points.

I just want the 100 pop cap enforced. Yesterday we played a 3v3 with my friends on Fields of winnekendonk. Every player in the game accumulated massive resources by the 40min mark, but the usf player was able to make 4 Jacksons on top of his army and vehicles and destroyed all of us with an armoured push. If I was able to do the same, I would have utilized my resources and done something similar, yet only he was afforded the opportunity to do so. In my view this is not unique gameplay, it is an exploit.

This is an issue that I want addressed. Nothing more. I’m not ranting because I somehow hate usf or whatever.

With the same logic, Ost's bunkers should also get a pop cap, it's not fair to defend a part of the map free of pop cap