I showed the numbers, skipped only one point related to accuracy in movement. At the expense of magical HPAV, I also explained. Objectively, there can be no complaints against Jackson when you have the Panther and the Tigers. And you just brought your subjective opinion, for example, "panthers should be more than enough to take out allied heavies reliably and effectively, with doesnt happen."
No, its happen. I dont agree. Panthers easily destroy usf medium and even "heavy" pershing tank. Panthers can push your line, destroy your tanks and go back. This because of high armor and health. Jacksons can't this. They will be quickly destroyed. Especially when an hidden Raketenwerfer is ambushed. With such a massive offensive, armor and health already play a role, and not the accuracy of movement. What was demonstrated at the 2v2 masters cup.
We can debate for a very long time. Therefore, I gave the numbers and percentages.
Given that these people actually think the bazooka constitutes a viable counter to the Panther ("muh combined arms"), I'm not sure you're going to find balance discussion with them to be very productive. |
but why ? u have also Paks and mines and u can equip all inf with zooks and offmap if u want too.
maybe u just have to develop a combiend arms tactic.
And not the standart infs spam into Jacksons ...where 0 micro is required.
in 1v1 and 2v2 u just NEVER see a JT or an Elefant.
U see only panthers in axis lategame because it is the only stock Tank that is not useless when it hits the field.
What game are you playing where zooks are effective versus heavy tanks? These aren't Panzershreks we're talking about; bazookas struggle even against Panzer IVs.
Off-map? P-47 Rocket Strafe is good, but you're not going to be able to build an AT defense around it.
Mines? USF only has stock access to the RE M7 light mine; 80 damage and a quick stun. There's the heavy M6 mine, but it's 60 munitions each and only produceable by the M20. Your opponent is going to know what you're doing if he sees one pop up 20 minutes into a game lmao.
This leaves an AT gun wall as the only option other than the Jackson, and once youve dumped the ~810 manpower and ~21 popcap required to make that tactic work it's probably time already for them to get fucked by rocket artillery, obers or stormtroopers. Allied ATGs dont get TWP either so you'll have to be playing against someone ballsy or retarded enough to get satchel charged or already eat enough damage for an infantry snare to work if you want to kill anything without blitzing away first.
If the Pack Howitzer was so much to bitch about on the basis of it's uniqueness, you really have to wonder why the Panther gets a free pass. Your Panzer IVs and Stug AGs wouldnt be useless if Allies actually produced medium tanks instead of the Jackson/TDs, but its already been established that this is what you have to do in order to stop axis heavy armor, which Axis in return have plenty of capability to stall towards, having no such difficulties with stock allied armor aside from maybe the Churchill.
Not everyone has teller mines or shreks, man. |
|
Basically every armor stage balance issue goes back to the Panther tbh. You can't beat it with medium tanks because of the armor, hp, and range advantage. You're forced to buy and often spam TDs to counter it, especially in team games, since artillery saturation means the only other counter, spamming 3-4 AT guns and dumping munitions into them, is no longer viable. It's no real surprise at all, then, that USF goes for the M36 every time instead, and it's a no brainer that they get spammed in team games where panther spam itself is a real possibility, as 2-3 Panthers on the field is a magnitude more trouble to deal with than 2-3 M36. The question being asked shouldn't be so much if the M36 is too good or needs a nerf, but why allied factions all need such powerful AT units to deal with a stock tank, and whether this is good design at all.
If the Panther gets toned down, perhaps it's HP pool or frontal armor, maybe we can do something to the M36 to make it less efficient versus lighter tanks, but presently the same problems Axis players have using Panzer IVs versus the M36 are a hundred times worse when matching Allied mediums against the Panther. Presently, I can say if the M36 price is nerfed it's just going to make allied mediums even more rare, since now even more fuel is required to build the M36 that basically has to be built anyway to face off against the Panther/Heavy tank that might come out. Only exception is 1v1s where it's already clear fuel dominance has been achieved and/or the enemy fuel depleted. |
|
Plates? |
|
Give it a HE shell switch like the Sherman or something idk, or limited AOE. It wouldn't be too groundbreaking if this thing's gun had some better AI value.
That said, this unit is fine; it's already meta in high level games (unlike, say, the SU-76) |
Thread: IR Ht5 Aug 2019, 18:36 PM
So why hasn't it been fixed? Any Relic staff around to fix the unit? Why ban it in tournements, just fix the bug!!1!!1!.
There is no other analog to the IRHT in any other faction. Any ones that use to exist got removed or neutered. On top of it being a map hack, its also cheap as shit. The integrity of the game would be better if the unit was deleted.
At the very least it should cost more than the USF Ambulance lmao
Im generally opposed to deleting or nerfing units to hell, but the glitches associated with this unit are pretty severe and its 200 fucking manpower 5 fuel for constant recon.
Make it 250 MP and 10 fuel at the very least, make this thing actually cost something. It's not like it eats up popcap. |
This is a nice list of the lend-lease numbers and units available in CoH2 compiled by Planet Smasher, I won't copy it over since it's a long ass thing so here's the link: https://www.coh2.org/topic/81304/lend-lease-numbers
Just a note here tho, it's just the American lend-lease, no British things are present but even if so, Churchill, UC and Valentine are all good and viable things that could be added from the British side. Supplies and infantry weapons are also another option.
And just a note here, there were never any "M4C" Shermans, only M4A2 75mm and 76mm (the one in this game) ones were sent to the Soviet Union since they were basically the M4A3 but fitted with diesel engines, I also think some were sent to Britain, not sure, so a change of name for the sake of historical accuracy would be nice.
Something to keep in mind for those Bazooka numbers: https://tankarchives.blogspot.com/2017/08/lend-lease-impressions-bazooka.html
60 mm anti-tank rocket launcher
Proving grounds trials showed unsatisfactory results, specifically:
Low muzzle velocity (89 m/s).
Complex rocket design and sensitive detonator.
Unreliable function of the launcher at temperatures less than 10 degrees Celsius.
Fire is ineffective at a range of over 100 m due to an insufficiently flat trajectory and poor precision.
Low rate of fire.
Danger when firing the weapon while shouldered. Due to the rocket charge continuing to burn, it is possible to burn the shooter's hands and face.
Trials showed that the 60 mm American anti-tank rocket launcher cannot be accepted for use by the Acting Army, and further purchase is unreasonable.
3,000 rocket launchers were shipped in total, and only 4,260 rockets, or about one and a half rockets per launcher."
Edit: Although, tbh, giving assault guards a bazooka upgrade would be a cool flavor thing, and some pictures of them being used (albeit almost certainly staged propaganda photos) do exist. So meh. |
You can already do this with the airbourne commander if your playing 2v2, .50 cal is a relatively vulnerable mg if you get deathlooped. Cons or Engies crewing it do have much better RA 1.07/1 compared to 1.25 normal weapons crews though. Should be tried for sure in testing.
Pretty sure all MG and Mortar crew members get the 1.25 RA automatically, regardless of what model they are or what squad they were in. It is worth noting, however, that the M2HB MG squad (no matter who crews it) is more vulnerable retreating than any squad in the game due to a higher retreat received accuracy (afaik the only squad in the game with it). |
In my opinion (having just played a game using the Lend-Lease commander), the item that needs fixing is the Assault Guards unit itself.
Their equipment should reflect their role as an elite assault unit but, it doesn't. The frag grenade is good but, the Vet1 trip flares are wasted on this sort of unit. The Trip Flares should be replaced with something that enhances the unit's assault capabilities.
At the risk of being accused of making them "too much" like another unit, I would suggest Oorah or AT Grenades should be their veteran ability. They would also benefit from a stock smoke grenade, even if it makes them very similar to Shock Troops (it's not like you have both units in the roster of this commander).
Elite units should have elite abilities but, the Ass Guards don't. Fix that and you fix a lot of what's wrong with this commander.
I agree with this. I think Thompsons would also go a long way towards making this unit more unique and theme-consistent. Maybe even a BAR (though I am unsure these were seriously used in large quantities by the Red Army. I know, for example, that bazookas were not widely used, despite the continued depiction of their use elsewhere.) |
Do bulletins affecting a unit type still apply to models recrewing team weapons? Like the 2% RA bonus to pioneers or the 3% RA bonus to paratroopers; would this apply to the models even once part of a team weapon crew? I know paratroopers can still paradrop even when part of a gun crew, for example, and Rangers used to have their damage resistance still. |
Relic Entertainment
보드카 중대 
