|
Fighting Positions no longer provide any vision with the MG upgrade. |
If you're playing at an elo where your opponent can be flanked despite his unit being significantly faster and having 20 extra range (and you're also outnumbering him 2:1 in effective tank count AND he has no snares or AT guns), I'm not sure how much your balance opinions matter. Either that or matchmaking is really bad and you're getting opponents that aren't anywhere comparable in skill.
Jacksons are beastly and virtually uncounterable in 1v1, even though I'm certain most people here are talking about team games.
Look at your last sentence - it is incredibly illogical. You're pretty much acknowledging that to beat Jacksons, the Axis player needs to have an overwhelming armour advantage. Why on earth are we even assuming that Axis would have an overwhelming fuel advantage? In any case Jacksons do make P4s obsolete - they're going to get reduced to half health before they even start accelerating for a dive - and they're going to fail that dive because the Jackson is incredibly fast.
Even when I play with Pathfinders and have no snares (or mines) I've found it incredibly easy to escape from medium tank dives. The difficulty is with finishing them off without snares, but that's hardly the Jackson's fault. It was mine for choosing to skip Riflemen.
Jackson is not significantly faster than PIVs, they have a .2 difference in top speed. The only difference is Jackson accelerates faster. And apparently you're at the ELO where you think flanking is accomplished by driving directly into the middle of the enemy's forces to get at their tank, so I can understand why you would think that's a problem. And you don't need an overwhelming advantage to beat jacksons, only a minor one, but even if you did, why exactly should generalist mediums be any better at beating specialized tank destroyers? Is having nearly the same top speed, almost guaranteed penetration, and enough damage to wipe them out in the same hits your PIV can take against it not enough for you to figure out how to beat them? |
|
mortar emplacement should be in advanced emplacements commander, not lend lease assault |
There are some issues deserving of a balance thread. This is not one of them.
Oh sorry, would you rather I rephrase it as "has the potential to completely force back your defense if you don't deal with it, and if you do deal with it, they'll just rebuild it 5 feet back because losing some manpower is meaningless"? Because I can be more dramatic if that's what you want, like the other posts in the balance forum that will cry that everything is either singlehandedly game-winning OP or completely useless in every situation UP. |
Oh good. Brits can now pick exactly 2 commanders to have access to the basic tools every other army enjoys as standard, like convenient smoke and an indirect unit that can actually support your fights ratber than sit on one spot forever. Diversity in gameplay in action, folks. Clearly we learned a lot from the last few years of CoH2.
I also don't know what you think a pack howitzer is and does, but the mortar pit hasn't had a 10lb heavy shell barrage since the UKF beta. The mortar rounds do mortar round damage.
It can't retreat and it can't preserve its vet because of it. It shouldn't cost fuel until the UKF design is adjusted to compensate for the massive gaping weaknesses that its strong units have to comoensate for.
You're absolutely right that the UKF as a faction should not exist because everything about their design is horrible, but as long as they do exist, mortar pits should be rewarding to take out, not meaningless. Also, I don't know what you think a pack howitzer is, because vet barrage aside mortars, packs/leigs, and mortar emplacement do the exact same damage. |
It is not simply "too cost effective against mediums" it completely shut downs PzIVs being able to hit and penetrate with (nearly) 100% chance 20% units away from where PzIV can even fire back while being faster and better at firing on the move.
PIVs can and do beat jacksons. If you get two and flank a jackson, it will die very quickly. That the reverse is not true (shermans vs panthers) is one of the main reasons USF is forced to spam jacksons in the first place. If a single jackson shuts down a single PIV - it should, because it's A) a specialized tank destroyer, while PIV is a generalist medium and B) costs more; but what jacksons do not do is make PIVs obsolete, unless you let the USF player match you tank for tank. |
How about giving all officers a stronger version of the bazooka as an upgrade, and reducing jacksons ROF?
USF wins the infantry late game hands down, so I'm not entirely sure why they have to also win the armor aspect, or why it'd be unfair for the panther to be the strongest mobile TD. USF AT gun is probably the best in the game due to it's ROF. While it's not guaranteed a significant percentage of the time a single 57mm can kill a light vehicle even if an axis player immediately retreats. Two can do the same to a p4.
USF has strong infantry AT. While I'm not sure they would even need an infantry AT buff, it seems reasonable for infantry AT damage to play a necessary part in non-doc late game AT since they also win the infantry game hands down.
None of that is really true, and you have to decide if you're talking about ostheer or OKW here because the matchups are very different - USF does not win the infantry late game "hands down" against OKW, but it wins the infantry game all the time against ostheer. Zookas are really bad, especially compared to schreks, and are also up against more armored targets which further make them a tough sell.
As for why it's wrong for panther to be the strongest mobile TD? It's because it's fast, heavily armored, has high health, and has an MG + an upgradeable MG so it can deal enough damage to push off infantry (but it will certainly not be wiping squads). This means with a panther, if you win the tank game, the late-game just turns to hide-and-seek, with allied inf running to the far edges of the map to cap vps, getting pushed off by panthers when they get there, and repeat. This is not something a jackson can do, obviously. |
What a great idea
Make the brits pay even more for their limited, unretreatable, easily countered, static indirect
[/rampant sarcasm]
Lets not shed any tears for the equivalent of 2 static pack howitzers for 350 MP. The mortar pit is by no means a bad investment, as long as you know the right situations to use it. It should still cost something rather than nothing to lose, though.
Brits must have normal movable mortars
They will, in their new commander. |
I just said sorry about the picture. I only meant to do a joke, but i admited it went too far. I understand it does not promote a clear concensus between POV. I hid it in spoilers to not avoid i made it.
The panther vs jackson story is a never ending one. There have been countless threads about one and the other and every single time one is attacked the other is used as an excuse. I understand that panthers are good, but they are not godlike nor cost effective and Jackosns are effective at TD, even better than any other late game TD but when cornered they are easy targets. Fireflies and SU85 cant compare to jacksons directly because both have clear disadvantages that axis can exploit, but jacksons are great all-around and also premium TD. Thats why the thread started and i want to keep it advancing on.
Lets we both agree with the M10 proposal, to make it nondoc captain tech to give USF a midgame AT presence, and let M36 to a heavy-superheavy TD role, with the corresponding reworks. This way neither USF gets nerfed nor Jacksons bully the metagame anymore.
Anyways i would say sorry again if it is neccesary
The problem is that just adding wolverine to USF still won't change the end-game meta, just the mid-game one. If people ever want end-game in team matches to be anything besides TD vs panther and tiger/elefant with the occassional doctrinal med meme spammer, then something drastic has to change, and as long as this meta remains, there will ALWAYS be people complaining about OP panther or OP jackson, unless you whack them both with a nerf bat until they're completely unusable. |
the only reason jacksons are "op" is because they're the only thing that can compete with panthers in the first place. a jacksons vs mediums match up is an entirely different game, one where both AT guns and infantry AT are extremely useful against the paper bag armored TDs. Firefly's higher burst damage doesn't make it bad at all, in fact it makes it better as a long range TD than jackson which gets speed instead. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
