Gee, I wonder what would happen if axis factions had AT guns and AT infantry.
>AT guns and AT infantry
>Shitketen + 1 shreck per SP squad
Pick one
Jackson Overperforming
22 May 2018, 19:44 PM
#41
Posts: 26
>AT guns and AT infantry
>Shitketen + 1 shreck per SP squad
Pick one
22 May 2018, 19:54 PM
#42
Posts: 5279
Is USF only baseline Tank Destroyer doing it's job such a problem?
It's not like you got any other options, because doctrinal options are usually all-rounders, the Jackson is the USF lategame and what used to hold back the faction when it was a meme.
The problem is its job is all the jobs. It should be doing mediums and heavy with such ease. The answer to at should be "just don't use armour because that's the only way to make it not worthwhile" case mate TDs are also ineffective if the enemy doesn't use armour, the counters are the same but on top of that they are either slow, have a slow turret or no turret meaning they can be flanked or in the case of the OST you might find yourself outranged. They can be out played but to lose a Jackson you have to play poorly, not necessarily be out played.
The Sherman has swappable shells. It could easily play the role of medium killer, but instead we have a TD who's literal only unique drawback is that it's a on the expensive side of TDs. One size fits all is bad design.
#stalinwept
22 May 2018, 20:59 PM
#43
Posts: 713 | Subs: 2
The problem is its job is all the jobs. It should be doing mediums and heavy with such ease. The answer to at should be "just don't use armour because that's the only way to make it not worthwhile" case mate TDs are also ineffective if the enemy doesn't use armour, the counters are the same but on top of that they are either slow, have a slow turret or no turret meaning they can be flanked or in the case of the OST you might find yourself outranged. They can be out played but to lose a Jackson you have to play poorly, not necessarily be out played.
The Sherman has swappable shells. It could easily play the role of medium killer, but instead we have a TD who's literal only unique drawback is that it's a on the expensive side of TDs. One size fits all is bad design.
Every single medium tank destroyer in the game is strong against all types of tanks except for ele and jt. How is this unique to the jackson ?
22 May 2018, 21:12 PM
#44
Posts: 138
The problem is its job is all the jobs. It should be doing mediums and heavy with such ease. The answer to at should be "just don't use armour because that's the only way to make it not worthwhile" case mate TDs are also ineffective if the enemy doesn't use armour, the counters are the same but on top of that they are either slow, have a slow turret or no turret meaning they can be flanked or in the case of the OST you might find yourself outranged. They can be out played but to lose a Jackson you have to play poorly, not necessarily be out played.
The Sherman has swappable shells. It could easily play the role of medium killer, but instead we have a TD who's literal only unique drawback is that it's a on the expensive side of TDs. One size fits all is bad design.
Only drawback? Please remind me what the jacksons armour is again, please remind me how it fairs against any axis vehicle with a gun larger than a 222. Even puma slices through it with ease. Meanwhile Panther and vet JP are bounce city vs Allied mediums.
If I build two shermans there is no way in hell I could deal with one panther. So I adapt and buy an AT-gun, my own TD or AT-inf.
If you got your way and the Jackson had its speed nerfed you could quite happily drive up with blitz and knock the thing out with two P4's. That's not right. Jackson already got a LoS nerf and popcap nerf, but it seems some of you lot won't be happy until it gets the comet treatment.
22 May 2018, 21:17 PM
#45
Posts: 728
For whatever reason the Jackson nerf did not make it into the patch (besides sight reduction). This unit is overperforming especially against ostheer who just recieved a nerf to the stug (long overdue). A large nerf is not needed, but I think a slight pen reduction at far range is definitely warranted with the extra health it has now.
I suggest you try the new panther it preforms extremely well now and is a late game tank as the jackson is and stug is not considered a late game tank.
22 May 2018, 21:17 PM
#46
Posts: 5279
Every single medium tank destroyer in the game is strong against all types of tanks except for ele and jt. How is this unique to the jackson ?
the jackson has the tools that make it far less vulnerable and lacks a weakness thats prone to exploitation its never on the back foot if you are paying attention. an su85 CAN be circle strafed if rushed or caught out of position and its high pen and average rof leave it wanting as a mediumkiller, the su76 while very much over performing in its own right is very squishy and again lacks a turret (although its a zippy little bastard) and deals sub standard damage per shot making it ineffective witout a spam of them against high health pool enemies, the jp4 has the same problem as the su85, the firefly is very slow and its turret, is also slow leaving it vulnerable to flanks/ rushes, without tulips its a very underwhelming beast clearly designed around facing off heavy targets (again the tulips throw a wrench in that becasue of their alpha strike but the unit itself is soundly a big cat killer). and stug has a range of 50 meaning its always ever so close to return fire and again it can be flanked. the m10 iirc only has a range of 50, so a jackson but without sniper ranges and again iirc its slightly squishier making it riskier. the jackson CAN act as a TD with all the drawbacks of others but it can also chase or flee, with great accuracy and a hard hitting gun, its turrets allow its gun to not be hindered by pathing on the hunt or retreat, it can effectively engage mediums or it can pop HVAP and effectively engage heavier armour with more bang for its buck. its got it all and thats a bad design.
it shares the drawbacks of vulnerability to non armour as all TDs do, but thats the end of the list of its drawbacks/vulnerabilities, all others have at least 1 or more checks to keep them balanced (or relatively anyways)
#stalinwept
22 May 2018, 21:21 PM
#47
Posts: 728
Only drawback? Please remind me what the jacksons armour is again, please remind me how it fairs against any axis vehicle with a gun larger than a 222. Even puma slices through it with ease. Meanwhile Panther and vet JP are bounce city vs Allied mediums.
If I build two shermans there is no way in hell I could deal with one panther. So I adapt and buy an AT-gun, my own TD or AT-inf.
If you got your way and the Jackson had its speed nerfed you could quite happily drive up with blitz and knock the thing out with two P4's. That's not right. Jackson already got a LoS nerf and popcap nerf, but it seems some of you lot won't be happy until it gets the comet treatment.
They wont be happy until Allies cant win 75% of their games or more, and they pretty much got their wish with this patch. Brits are fackin worthless now. IF they would of nerfed jackson anymore USF would be mostly too.
22 May 2018, 21:51 PM
#48
Posts: 3053
Guys this has nothing to do with the stug. I even said that the stug nerf was warranted because it was way too good.
Do you guys think Jackson is in a good spot right now? USF is one of my favorite factions and I still think it is a little too effective, especially since you can decrew them when they are not being used.
I do simply because usf has no other non doctrinal tank to tank alternatives that perform on a similar level. They are the only heavy tank counter usf has atm period. I also don’t buy the argument that it overperforms against mediums as it is a designated tank destroyer (not that you made such an argument, I’m just saying it to put it out there).
It also does literally absolutely nothing against infantry. No hull mgs or coaxials or anything (except crushing I guess?).
 | Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
22 May 2018, 22:21 PM
#49
9 
Posts: 1194 | Subs: 29
The sight reduction makes it harder to chase for the killing blow. Too early to say if it is overperforming.
| Playercard of tightrope | |||||||||||||||||||
|
22 May 2018, 23:09 PM
#50
Posts: 4474
more range, faster, better accuracy, 100% pen chance while the p4 can bounce frontal armor, try 1 vs 1 p4 vs jackson see how it ends
Jackson isn't even the go to counter Pz4 like it was before, two Stugs will keep the Jackson at bay. You are the one claiming the Jackson overperforms, but bring nothing to argument it. Please tell us how it is overperforming.
Does it counter its own counter?
Does it insta kill its targets?
katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
Katitof-2018
23 May 2018, 00:38 AM
#51
Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1
more range, faster, better accuracy, 100% pen chance while the p4 can bounce frontal armor, try 1 vs 1 p4 vs jackson see how it ends
Jackson is slightly more expensive than them now, so tell me, why would you try to kill a Tank Destroyer with a Tank?
23 May 2018, 01:00 AM
#52
Posts: 2742
I'd say the Jackson isn't so much over-performing as the Sherman is barely relevant. I think the only times I've used it effectively are in matches where I'm just trolling my opponent and writing messages in barbed wire to pass the time as VPs tick down...
The CoH2 Sherman is like the CoH1 Croc anymore.
The CoH2 Sherman is like the CoH1 Croc anymore.
Strategic Territory Points Mod:
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=604491510
Classic resource points!
23 May 2018, 03:24 AM
#53
Posts: 1930
nerfing the acceleration would just make it a sitting duck for P4 spam again, Axis armour should be a mixed composition against different vehicles. Jackson should force you to invest in Shreks, Pak, or Panther for example.
You shouldn't just be able to spam P4's and destroy everything. So it's a no from me.
in other words.
This is just turning the Jackson into another Firefly.
23 May 2018, 03:46 AM
#54
Posts: 310
The point that most factions have multiple anti vehicle vehicles themselves is important to the whole TD vs TD and TD vs tanks dynamic. If any Axis armored unit hard counters the only US TD then US is screwed in the late game.
However, there is a solution.
Make the M10 non doctrinal and available to the Captian. The M10 then can be made into the medium tank killer and the M36 Jackson can be made into a dedicated heavy killer. This would result in a dynamic similar to the SU-76 vs SU-85 that Soviets have. Of course it has to be done carefully or else you end up with too much overlap or one being OP like how the SU-76 used to be.
US could use a large change to their teching structure. I will be posting a thread on how I believe it could be reworked in the future.
This will be very op. M10 is already very cheap, and fielding it very early will heavily counter all Axis vehicles that will be out at that time. Unless you also mean that they will adjust the price, since players will only need 150 fuel total to field one (60 for Captain and 90 for the tank itself). And we all know that as USF, you can skip Lieutenant, and go straight for Captain.
"L is for L Shaped Ambush"
-Orion Training Group
-Orion Training Group
23 May 2018, 04:49 AM
#55
Posts: 3053
more range, faster, better accuracy, 100% pen chance while the p4 can bounce frontal armor, try 1 vs 1 p4 vs jackson see how it ends
Oh wow the more expensive one that is designed to kill tanks and only tanks won. I wonder why.
I'd say the Jackson isn't so much over-performing as the Sherman is barely relevant. I think the only times I've used it effectively are in matches where I'm just trolling my opponent and writing messages in barbed wire to pass the time as VPs tick down...
The CoH2 Sherman is like the CoH1 Croc anymore.
The sherman is just not a viable option anymore. I think it’s an ok tank with very good anti inf performance, passable at performance and useful smoke, but it almost seems like a waste to make them since they just get bullied by almost anything that can damage it by the time you get access to it. Sherman armor is also pretty weak when compared to what it has to go up against in terms of axis penetration power. What I mean is that even though it has armor values similar to the ost p4 without skirts (IIRC) the panzershreck and pak have higher penetration values than the zook and m1 57mm and will penetrate very reliably, where the latter two have a decent chance to bounce on mediums occasionally (enough to make a difference).
This will be very op. M10 is already very cheap, and fielding it very early will heavily counter all Axis vehicles that will be out at that time. Unless you also mean that they will adjust the price, since players will only need 150 fuel total to field one (60 for Captain and 90 for the tank itself). And we all know that as USF, you can skip Lieutenant, and go straight for Captain.
Yeah if m10 was in captain you’d either have to neuter it to hell or it’d just be hilariously op. New meta would be captain and a rushed m10 followed by another 1-3 m10s with paras or rangers and ending the game at like 12 minutes before they even have mediums, and all axis lights would be basically hardcountered.
| Playercard of LoopDloop | |||||||||||||||||||
|
23 May 2018, 05:34 AM
#56
Posts: 1930
buffing the jackson's hp was the wrong buff.
Tank destroyer like the stug, jp4, su85, firefly, and jackson need critical vulnerability to keep them from being overpowered.
For the stug, su 85, and jp4, that vulnerability is their lack of turret.
for Firefly that vulnerability is speed (slow turret speed, slow chassis speed, slow reload). This make the Firefly vulnerable to flanking despite its turret.
The Jackson's main vulnerability was low HP, since it had both speed and turret. The jackson can't really be flanked like the other tank, so to counter it you just get in range.
Buffing the Jackson's hp break its design, similar to the damage done by giving USF mortar.
The jackson should have been given smoke and a size buff (decrease). This increase its survivability at long range duel, but keep its survivability at close range relatively untouched.
The jackson should essentially be a Puma with a bigger gun. I'm sure people have used the puma before and wished its gun was better to keep up with the medium and heavy armor.
Tank destroyer like the stug, jp4, su85, firefly, and jackson need critical vulnerability to keep them from being overpowered.
For the stug, su 85, and jp4, that vulnerability is their lack of turret.
for Firefly that vulnerability is speed (slow turret speed, slow chassis speed, slow reload). This make the Firefly vulnerable to flanking despite its turret.
The Jackson's main vulnerability was low HP, since it had both speed and turret. The jackson can't really be flanked like the other tank, so to counter it you just get in range.
Buffing the Jackson's hp break its design, similar to the damage done by giving USF mortar.
The jackson should have been given smoke and a size buff (decrease). This increase its survivability at long range duel, but keep its survivability at close range relatively untouched.
The jackson should essentially be a Puma with a bigger gun. I'm sure people have used the puma before and wished its gun was better to keep up with the medium and heavy armor.
23 May 2018, 06:35 AM
#57
Posts: 310
buffing the jackson's hp was the wrong buff.
How much HP does the Jackson have?
The sherman is just not a viable option anymore. I think it’s an ok tank with very good anti inf performance, passable at performance and useful smoke, but it almost seems like a waste to make them since they just get bullied by almost anything that can damage it by the time you get access to it. Sherman armor is also pretty weak when compared to what it has to go up against in terms of axis penetration power. What I mean is that even though it has armor values similar to the ost p4 without skirts (IIRC) the panzershreck and pak have higher penetration values than the zook and m1 57mm and will penetrate very reliably, where the latter two have a decent chance to bounce on mediums occasionally (enough to make a difference).
Yeah if m10 was in captain you’d either have to neuter it to hell or it’d just be hilariously op. New meta would be captain and a rushed m10 followed by another 1-3 m10s with paras or rangers and ending the game at like 12 minutes before they even have mediums, and all axis lights would be basically hardcountered.
One solution for the regular Sherman, is the Sherman(76) from the Mechanized Company. They can do it non-doctrinal.
As for the M10, they can also adjust Captain's price by increasing it. I guess that it will balance the tech timing, so that Axis can have a proper counter to it.
"L is for L Shaped Ambush"
-Orion Training Group
-Orion Training Group
23 May 2018, 07:10 AM
#58
Posts: 5279
Sherman has great pen on its AP shells iirc. Don't recall the numbers but isn't it 140 close and something like 120 far? That's pretty great and again, I'm going off memory here but the AP shells also have an AOE of 2 (VS the regular 2.5 of multi purpose shells) so you are not trading so much AI for pretty solid AT. It might be interesting to see what knocking that AOE down a bit and seeing what elevated pen would look like (say give it TD AOE but like +20 pen on all ranges) then the Sherman could be the medium killer OR infantry killer but falls off VS combined arms approaches.
#stalinwept
23 May 2018, 07:34 AM
#59
Posts: 2243
Sherman has great pen on its AP shells iirc. Don't recall the numbers but isn't it 140 close and something like 120 far? That's pretty great and again, I'm going off memory here but the AP shells also have an AOE of 2 (VS the regular 2.5 of multi purpose shells) so you are not trading so much AI for pretty solid AT. It might be interesting to see what knocking that AOE down a bit and seeing what elevated pen would look like (say give it TD AOE but like +20 pen on all ranges) then the Sherman could be the medium killer OR infantry killer but falls off VS combined arms approaches.
when you look how much armor was nerfed on german tanks since the last patches...look to the KT and Panther..
even church have good chance to penetrate...while is a huge HP and armor monster...it is the spongebob for all the nice TDs on allie side.
23 May 2018, 07:36 AM
#60
Posts: 587
buffing the jackson's hp was the wrong buff.
for Firefly that vulnerability is speed (slow turret speed, slow chassis speed, slow reload). This make the Firefly vulnerable to flanking despite its turret.
The jackson should essentially be a Puma with a bigger gun. I'm sure people have used the puma before and wished its gun was better to keep up with the medium and heavy armor.
All great and dandy, but a high micro lategame tank is too much to handle for the average player (and quite alot of "top" players too) so that is why the jackson got it's hp buff.
So instead of focusing what went wrong, try to focus on how to fix it. Which is, as you stated, giving the jackson the same weakness as the firefly: slow speed and maybe slower turret rotation.
Yeah, I'd like to see you do that.
Sounds like a fun challenge, I'll do it for our next 2vs2 game.
Being bad at the game isn't something balance patches can fix.
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
108 | ||
 |
|
|
48 | ||
|
|
|
|
58 | ||
 |
|
|
55 | ||
 |
|
|
10 | ||
|
|
|
|
6 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.829222.789+35
- 2.34857.859+13
- 3.587233.716+3
- 4.1095612.641+19
- 5.882398.689+4
- 6.280162.633+8
- 7.996646.607-1
- 8.379114.769+1
- 9.300113.726-1
- 10.717439.620+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
999