Login

russian armor

Pershing Madness

15 Oct 2014, 20:33 PM
#41
avatar of Romeo
Honorary Member Badge
Benefactor 115

Posts: 1970 | Subs: 5

The jackson is fine.
15 Oct 2014, 20:43 PM
#42
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
jump backJump back to quoted post15 Oct 2014, 20:33 PMRomeo
The jackson is fine.


needs pen buff. thats all
15 Oct 2014, 22:15 PM
#43
avatar of Hon3ynuts

Posts: 818

Jacksons struggle vs Panthers in the first place but this is exacerbated when they are very vulnerbule to screening volks/Pak 40s, where as the Panther is hardly effected by 57 mm guns or bazookas

Jacksons are quite good vs everything other than Tank destroyers of a higher class though, but making too many will leave you vulnerable to infantry and if you don't make any tanks you will struggle with map control
15 Oct 2014, 23:37 PM
#44
avatar of Ashmole

Posts: 61

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Oct 2014, 09:37 AMy3ivan
3 reason why ppl believe that jackson is bad

1. blitzkrieg
2. panzershreck
3. pak 40

Its not that jackson does not matchup with OH/OKW tanks, is that OH/OKW support weapons are too good at performing AT, making it extremely risky to flank with jackson.

Honestly, blitzkrieg has no place in this game for German heavies. That's the main problem I have when playing against the Axis is that they have too many "oh shit!" buttons. I've had too many German tanks carelessly move into an AT trap to only pop smoke and blitz retreat out.
16 Oct 2014, 14:07 PM
#45
avatar of JohnnyB

Posts: 2396 | Subs: 1



needs pen buff. thats all


If it needs something, it needs either more speed, either more health.
16 Oct 2014, 15:15 PM
#46
avatar of The_Courier

Posts: 665



thats is very true and allow me to play devils advocate for a second do you think that a Persing and Jackson combination would proform the same as tiger P4 combo? in a 1v1


It would be better against armor, but unless the Pershing is OP it would be much worse against infantry. Which makes sense, P4 is a generalist tank, Jackson is a dedicated TD.

And anyway, it's not like the IS-2 and Jackson combination is breaking the 2v2 game at the moment. Don't see why it would in 1v1 at all, Jackson + Pershing would be a significant investment, and it's not like Axis lacks for powerful AT.
18 Oct 2014, 06:06 AM
#47
avatar of acosn

Posts: 108 | Subs: 1



It would be better against armor, but unless the Pershing is OP it would be much worse against infantry. Which makes sense, P4 is a generalist tank, Jackson is a dedicated TD.

And anyway, it's not like the IS-2 and Jackson combination is breaking the 2v2 game at the moment. Don't see why it would in 1v1 at all, Jackson + Pershing would be a significant investment, and it's not like Axis lacks for powerful AT.



The 90mm gun actually had a perfectly capable HE round. If the Jackson is to be an AT gun on treads, the Puma should as well.
18 Oct 2014, 12:11 PM
#48
avatar of Kronosaur0s

Posts: 1701

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2014, 06:06 AMacosn



The 90mm gun actually had a perfectly capable HE round. If the Jackson is to be an AT gun on treads, the Puma should as well.


Can we stop talking about IRL? -___-
18 Oct 2014, 16:30 PM
#49
avatar of acosn

Posts: 108 | Subs: 1



Can we stop talking about IRL? -___-



Nope. Relic claimed they wanted to make an "authentic" WW2 experience.


18 Oct 2014, 19:00 PM
#50
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2014, 16:30 PMacosn
Nope. Relic claimed they wanted to make an "authentic" WW2 experience.


Authentic ≠ Realistic
18 Oct 2014, 20:27 PM
#51
avatar of Cardboard Tank

Posts: 978

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2014, 16:30 PMacosn



Nope. Relic claimed they wanted to make an "authentic" WW2 experience.


We have Su-85s with more range than a Panther, because there´s a sticker on the vehicle that says "tank destroyer". I think we can screw realism.



Authentic ≠ Realistic
This.
18 Oct 2014, 20:40 PM
#52
avatar of Kronosaur0s

Posts: 1701

jump backJump back to quoted post18 Oct 2014, 16:30 PMacosn



Nope. Relic claimed they wanted to make an "authentic" WW2 experience.




Then keep dreaming about Jackson getting antiinfantry abilities XDDD
20 Oct 2014, 06:12 AM
#53
avatar of ThoseDeafMutes

Posts: 1026

The Pershing will absolutely go a ways to making 2v2 viable with double Ameris. It won't change the situation in Sov/USF mixed team games because the Sov already has access to heavies to cover the Americans in the late game.
20 Oct 2014, 06:24 AM
#54
avatar of acosn

Posts: 108 | Subs: 1

The Pershing will absolutely go a ways to making 2v2 viable with double Ameris. It won't change the situation in Sov/USF mixed team games because the Sov already has access to heavies to cover the Americans in the late game.



Having these super tanks as a whole is bad practice.


COH1 got it right when the Pershing was, out of the box, basically a Panther with better anti-infantry capability.


Relic really shot themselves in the foot when they insisted on vehicles like the ISU-152, the King Tiger and the Elephant.
20 Oct 2014, 07:38 AM
#55
avatar of QueenRatchet123

Posts: 2280 | Subs: 2

Permanently Banned
Pershing isnt a "Super Tank"
20 Oct 2014, 23:54 PM
#56
avatar of ZombieRommel

Posts: 91

People want the Pershing as a breakthrough tank. Americans don't have any. Jackson is a TD, and Sherman is a glorified infantry-muncher. USF doesn't have any meatshield tanks. The closest you get is a bulldozer Sherman hiding behind the heavy cover it builds.

Whereas we can say that most Axis tanks are brute force tanks that encourage A-moving, with EZ mode smoke + blitz to escape death, USF tanks are all finesse units. Shermans must use hit and run tactics to do damage and Jacksons have to carefully manage range at all times.

Compare this to A-moving Jagdtiger who can shoot at immense range through buildings and world terrain and take a hell of a beating.

So, yes, part of the problem is the lack of armor on both the Jackson and the Sherman. They both need armor slightly beefed up for better survivability in the absence of Allied War Machine or similar ability.

EDIT: I think it would be cool if the borderline-useless Rear Echelon squads could, with an upgrade, gain the ability to over-repair Allied armor, to maybe 130%. This would be reflected in-game visually with sandbags being welded on.
21 Oct 2014, 00:48 AM
#57
avatar of butterfingers158

Posts: 239

jump backJump back to quoted post20 Oct 2014, 06:24 AMacosn

COH1 got it right when the Pershing was, out of the box, basically a Panther with better anti-infantry capability.



Which is what is what most people seem to want. Pershing wouldn't be a Super Heavy, it would be in the IS-2/Tiger mold.

1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

595 users are online: 595 guests
22 posts in the last 24h
52 posts in the last week
105 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44659
Welcome our newest member, Yourcounselling
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM