Profile of BlueKnight

Purely a L2P issue on your side. Virtually all good players agree that the T34-85 is the best (or at the very least top 3) medium. Its cost-effectiveness is through the roof since it is highly capable at fighting infantry as well as bullying other mediums. Its health pool also makes it a great choice for taking on the KT.

There is a big difference between being the best and top 3rd unit. Also you must have some sort of a complex as you like to refer to people being worse in a PC game all the time. It automatically makes them all wrong of course.

You might not realise that it has 800 health, more armour, and a lot more pen than the T34-76, but that really matters in tank vs tank fights. Statistically it has approximately a 90% chance of winning 1vs1 against an Ost p4 (significantly higher % chance to pen + 25% more health), which costs 30mp and 10 fuel less. There's literally no medium as cost-efficient as the T34-85.

160 armour instead of 150 makes huge difference
Anything has a lot more pen than T34/76 and I wouldn't call 120 far pen of T34/85 anything impressive vs axis vehicles.
Having ability to defeat OST P4 (but only before it reaches vet2) is totally worth building a doctrinal tank
The only thing going there for T34/85 is the extra shot it can take before dying, surprisingly enough, 234 armour of OKW P4 (vetted OST P4) also boosts survivability against everything that isn't top tier TD.

Ost has plenty of counters to the T34-85, but that doesn't change the fact that the T34-85, in and of itself, is a top-of-class unit. If Ost had a unit that good, you and CODGUY would have quit the game already. Ost P4s already have a slight edge vs Shermans, T34-76s, and Cromwells, but the P4 still gets blown away by T34-85s.

You are retarded and I wish never to have to speak to you again.

The OKW p4 has high armour that gives it a very light repair burden and great survivability, so certainly an argument can be made that it's the best medium. But dissing the T34-85 simply means you're a really bad player who doesn't understand how incredibly cost-efficient the T34-85 is.

I'm happy you can finally see how good 234 armour of P4 is. If only you would notice the marginal far pen difference between the two tanks being inferior to the faster rate of fire of P4 with P4 also being stock.
If you can judge my skill level to be low by reading my comment which says that T34/85 was not the best medium tank, I can judge you to be retarded based on your comment that T34/85 "is great choice for taking on the KT".

In a world of medium tanks, OKW P4 has an advantage or fights on even ground with any any allied medium except for Comet and E8 and is stock. Doctrinal T34/85 has only advantage when fighting unvetted OST P4. How does that make T34/85 more desirable for allied players than OKW P4 for axis players? Please, don't answer, I don't care how bad you think I am. Also vetted OST P4 almost becomes the OKW P4. I rank the P4s right after stock Sherman and before the E8, then there would be your beloved T34/85.

Even if you are not retarded, you are not nice to talk to.

No "You are very picky" your claim that " you don't have mines available unless you pick a right doctrine" is simply false and no matter how much "cherry picking" you do that your claim will not become true.

Following your logic you can just fight Jacksons using Pak40 or Pgrens with schrecks, because Jackson is very inefficient against them.

Bashing someone's opinion by refering to his/her rank, as presented in this thread, is rude.

One can protect his SU-85 or Firefly with mines on the flanks, you can't do that as USF because you don't have mines available unless you pick a right doctrine. Also both SOV and Brits have ATGs with decent penetration that can support you and provide extra DPS. USF ATG will ask you for MU tax and even after you pay that you may or may not pen axis armour. This means that if you make Jackson vulnerable to flanking or just nerf it in other way, USF is dead in lategame. As USF you don't have any reliable lategame AT platform other than Jackson unless you pick a doctrine with Rangers and spend 150 MU on 3 bazookas, this should be good enough for P4, but not for the MetaTiger that you see every game now.

I say Panther and Jackson are okay as they are now. Both are hard to kill, both are very mobile and costly to replace if one is lost.

Also listing T34/85 as the best medium is a joke lol. It fights infantry exactly the same as T34/76 while being 40FU more expensive, taking longer to vet and it still doesn't pen P4 reliably.

PTRS Penals were introduced in the fast place because it was decided making a faction reliant on commanders was a bad thing.

I'm convinced the right design for the Jackson is return it to 480 HP, restoring its identity as an agile sniper tank.

But if you did that, you'd have to rework USF's other AT units to compensate.

Until that happens, the 640 HP Panacea Jackson is a balance necessity.

With Jackson HP decrease, JPIV would counter all USF vehicles even more than it does now. You are making it look like Jackson is solution to every problem which is just not the case.

What if you returned the Jackson to 480 HP, but gave it a cloaked lockdown similar to the one in Tank Hunter Tactics (cloaked but completely immobile)?

That'd make the Jackson vulnerable to being flanked again (it can only take 3 hits) but it'd retain its viability in long-range slugging matches because of the cloak.

It'd also be historically accurate: the US did hide their tank destroyers for ambushes like that.

480 HP is not an option for a Jackson as a lot of axis doctrines have AT loiters that would insta finish off any damaged TD. A lot of resources dying quickly in a game about preservation is a bad idea.