Login

russian armor

USA scotts (M8A1)

PAGES (16)down
25 Sep 2021, 13:55 PM
#181
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 835 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 13:35 PMEsxile


P4s aren't supposed to be counter to Jackson (like atgun are supposed to counter P4j), and again it's long range penetration, P4 like panther have already 100% to pen at low range in case of dive.

And its not counter to jackson, the same way T34\76 arent supposed to counter Elephant. But if you flank Elephant or if you managed to get close to the Jackson then you can counter them with mentioned units.

Long range with P4 is 40, Jange of Jackson is 55, long range for P4 is close to a medium range of Jackson, if you let P4 get so close, its really your fault because you have huge range window to kite with it.

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 13:35 PMEsxile

Calliope don't have panther or damage engine mines to protect them. If a panther dive, then you have to keep your jackson at distance and the calliope because there nothing that can temporize your escape.


For mines its true, but you still have snares on your riflemen, you still can lay mines with RE to slow dives, one of the cali comms have ranges with elite zooks.
Its not like you dont have anything but jackson to protect your calis (while jacksons are still the most effective) and cali survivability was nerfed to begin with because it requred less protection and was more forgiving on the unit which is supposed to be protected and used on range.

And unlike any rocket arty in the game, it cant be killed with counter-arty and it cant be sniped if its too close, its doc unit sure, its more expensive sure but its still by far the best rocket arty unit in the game survivability wise, and when it was able to bounce and had 3 shot-hp its survivability was just over-tuned.
25 Sep 2021, 14:24 PM
#182
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1238




For mines its true, but you still have snares on your riflemensurvivability was just over-tuned.


Snares on rifles are downright useless. Low range, extra long animation. 80% of the time the snare will cancel due to the animation bugging out.
Snares on rifles and mines on RE are downright useless in most scenarios. Heck, I've had situations where a 222 dived on my AAHT and managed to kill it before the snares were fired from the riflemen. So a rotating AAHT couldn't fire the cannon due to the rotation and the animation took so long that the AAHT died. A couple of seconds later, 2 snares start flying.
Or what about the ever brilliant "snare model died". Heck, lost a whole squad not once due to the long animation where you try to snare a 50% hp P4, only to have the squad die because the snare takes too long.
Same with RE. The vehicle stun is short, and most of the time means nothing, especially on large maps in 3v3+. In 1v1 the RE stun mine can be utilized because when you react, the supporting units have less territory to traverse.
25 Sep 2021, 14:30 PM
#183
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3303 | Subs: 1


And its not counter to jackson, the same way T34\76 arent supposed to counter Elephant. But if you flank Elephant or if you managed to get close to the Jackson then you can counter them with mentioned units.

Long range with P4 is 35, Jange of Jackson is 55, long range for P4 is close to a medium range of Jackson, if you let P4 get so close, its really your fault because you have huge range window to kite with it.



Doesn't make sense, T34-76 can fail to pen at all ranges on an Elefant. P4 will always Pen a Jackson at any range now.


For the rest, I think you simply don't want to acknowledge the question of RNG because it suit you. So let's stop here.
25 Sep 2021, 14:41 PM
#184
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12567 | Subs: 1

It seem that the "make USF great again" team has simply lost touch with reality.

In order for a unit to do damage it has to hit and penetrate so if one check the number one gets a completely different picture than the one portrayed here.

A PzIV on the move (even it manages to move in to range 40) it has a 30% change to score a hit and do damage to a M36. (collision hits are not taken into account)

A M36 (even firing at 60 range) has a 52.5% to score a hit and do damage to PzIV.

In sort a PzIV needs all the RNG it can have to win a fight vs an M36 even if it caches it out of position.
25 Sep 2021, 15:05 PM
#185
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 835 | Subs: 1


...


I agree that USF arent having the best dive stopping tool kit. But again, we are talking like there is x3\4 USF player team. But even if there is, one of them might just pick a commander with normal mines.

Point is, old cali was over-tuned when it came to a real game, in 1v1 scenarios maybe bounce and 3 hit HP pool was alright on paper, but in reality it wasnt.

Not to mention that, unless you are shotgunning with your cali its not that easy to dive to begin with.


jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 14:30 PMEsxile

Doesn't make sense, T34-76 can fail to pen at all ranges on an Elefant. P4 will always Pen a Jackson at any range now.

No its not, Elephant rear armor is 110, T34\76 close range penetration is 110, mid 100.

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 14:30 PMEsxile

For the rest, I think you simply don't want to acknowledge the question of RNG because it suit you. So let's stop here.

What you want me to acknowledge?

When it comes to armor combat Sherman is a generic medium, with a generic medium price and generic medium RNG behind it.

Jackson is the best TD in the game, utilizing range\turret\mobility to avoid ANY damage, why would you want RNG on top of that?

Scott is utilizing range, surviability and smoke on top. Thats why people complain.

And when it comes to the commanders:
Buldozer, EZ8, Pershing, Assault sherman grade gives you plenty of armor RNG. Its the core roster of USF just dont have place for RNG considering what units you have.
Vaz
25 Sep 2021, 15:09 PM
#186
avatar of Vaz

Posts: 1139


Meaning that if you allowed yourself to get dived YOU either put them in a bad possition or YOU didnt have proper support via mines\AT guns\inf with snares to stop diving units.



I just thought this excerpt was kind of funny in the given situation, with the context of an atgun bouncing 4 times, but it is a part of what constitutes a "proper support". Whether or not it's proper support seems to be decided by rngesus. Really the at gun isn't reliable. The mines and infantry are way more reliable.
25 Sep 2021, 15:15 PM
#187
avatar of GachiGasm

Posts: 835 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 15:09 PMVaz

I just thought this excerpt was kind of funny in the given situation, with the context of an atgun bouncing 4 times, but it is a part of what constitutes a "proper support". Whether or not it's proper support seems to be decided by rngesus. Really the at gun isn't reliable. The mines and infantry are way more reliable.


Well it was said that USF AT gun with AP rounds is still the most reliable AT gun to penetrate P4J. But again, P4J is an idiotic unit for both enemy and the owner.

Other premium mediums can be reliably penetrated by AT guns\TDs and its compinsated with increased health, while P4J has the same health as all mediums, but increased armor.

So as I was saying you either can have situations like 4 bounces in the row with it or you can have it gibbed with all 4 shots penetrating it with 0 bounces.

25 Sep 2021, 18:23 PM
#188
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1171

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 14:41 PMVipper
It seem that the "make USF great again" team has simply lost touch with reality.

In order for a unit to do damage it has to hit and penetrate so if one check the number one gets a completely different picture than the one portrayed here.

A PzIV on the move (even it manages to move in to range 40) it has a 30% change to score a hit and do damage to a M36. (collision hits are not taken into account)

A M36 (even firing at 60 range) has a 52.5% to score a hit and do damage to PzIV.

In sort a PzIV needs all the RNG it can have to win a fight vs an M36 even if it caches it out of position.


Dont go and point the finger at others.

You are not showing all context. The p4 is a generalist medium. The jackson is hard at, the excact purpose of the jackson is to hard counter armour such as the p4. The p4 fills multyple roles, the jackson fills only 1.

The p4 has no need nor justification to 100% pen its hard counter on hit at max range. Yet it can now because of reasons.

You would support a t34/stug change to pen the stug 100% at max range? They are simaler in price after all. Also no one bats an eye that the t34 cant.

25 Sep 2021, 18:31 PM
#189
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 12567 | Subs: 1



Dont go and point the finger at others.

You are not showing all context. The p4 is a generalist medium. The jackson is hard at, the excact purpose of the jackson is to hard counter armour such as the p4. The p4 fills multyple roles, the jackson fills only 1.

The p4 has no need nor justification to 100% pen its hard counter on hit at max range. Yet it can now because of reasons.

You would support a t34/stug change to pen the stug 100% at max range? They are simaler in price after all. Also no one bats an eye that the t34 cant.


I am showing the exact context (and you are taking what I have posted out of context):

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 10:59 AMEsxile

....

There are no more RNG going in favor for USF, Jackson, Calliope, Sherman, Scott are all unable to bounce anything (kidding, sherman can sometime once every year). The last units able to get some favorable RNG are the Pershing and heavier variant of sherman which are irrelevant on teamgame.

So why do you think people prefer going for Path&Scott? Because this strat reduce the need for favorable RNG.


In the PzIV vs M36 the RNG is in favor of the M36 contrary what has been claimed.
25 Sep 2021, 18:33 PM
#190
avatar of Geblobt

Posts: 197



Dont go and point the finger at others.

You are not showing all context. The p4 is a generalist medium. The jackson is hard at, the excact purpose of the jackson is to hard counter armour such as the p4. The p4 fills multyple roles, the jackson fills only 1.

The p4 has no need nor justification to 100% pen its hard counter on hit at max range. Yet it can now because of reasons.

You would support a t34/stug change to pen the stug 100% at max range? They are simaler in price after all. Also no one bats an eye that the t34 cant.



The stug has 50 range, no turret and is slower than any stock allied medium tank, while the jackson has superior range, speed and a turret. If you lose your jackson to a p4 push you simply missplayed. Having the incredible reliable 5% chance to get a bounce was completely worthless for both the attacking side and the defending. The armor nerf didnt change how good the jackson is nor did it change the matchup.
Pip
25 Sep 2021, 19:30 PM
#191
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1579


The p4 has no need nor justification to 100% pen its hard counter on hit at max range. Yet it can now because of reasons.

You would support a t34/stug change to pen the stug 100% at max range? They are simaler in price after all. Also no one bats an eye that the t34 cant.


What does the Stug have to do with it?

The P4 bounces when firing on the Firefly and SU-85 even from close range. This isnt an allies vs axis thing, this is giving the Jackson some type of weakness as it is otherwise the flat-out best (nondoctrinal) TD in the game. It has everything going for it, with the only actual downside now being that if it's caught out it will always be penned by PIVs. It's not even a hugely impactful downside, given that, as geblobt says, you went from an approximate 5% chance to bounce at max range to a 0% chance.

The Jackson is absolutely not an unit you can justify asking to buff, despite the nerfs it has received it is STILL extremely menacing.
25 Sep 2021, 20:21 PM
#192
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3303 | Subs: 1



No its not, Elephant rear armor is 110, T34\76 close range penetration is 110, mid 100.


What you want me to acknowledge?

When it comes to armor combat Sherman is a generic medium, with a generic medium price and generic medium RNG behind it.

Jackson is the best TD in the game, utilizing range\turret\mobility to avoid ANY damage, why would you want RNG on top of that?

Scott is utilizing range, surviability and smoke on top. Thats why people complain.

And when it comes to the commanders:
Buldozer, EZ8, Pershing, Assault sherman grade gives you plenty of armor RNG. Its the core roster of USF just dont have place for RNG considering what units you have.


P4 could always pen a jackson from behind. Why wouldn't you flank the Jackson with your superior velocity earn at vet1 and use you superior firing rate to outgun the Jackson the same way you describes it with the T34 vs Elefant?

Jackson is what it is because there nothing else to perform on the late game on its side. Be sure that if the balance team had the opportunity to bring the Calliope stock, Jackson would have been nerfed in return.
Talking about pure Jackson's stat and not taking account of the faction as a whole isn't going to make you having any point here.

Scott use what every other faction has access too: survivability, but instead to be in a form of superior armor stats, its range, speed and smoke. Again here let's not forget that the smoke is vet1, the same way as P4 and P5 get blitz at vet1 negating any form of speed USF units could have.



Pip
25 Sep 2021, 21:58 PM
#193
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1579

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 20:21 PMEsxile


P4 could always pen a jackson from behind. Why wouldn't you flank the Jackson with your superior velocity earn at vet1 and use you superior firing rate to outgun the Jackson the same way you describes it with the T34 vs Elefant?


Because the Jackson has a turret, and moves significantly faster than the Elefant. It also turns twice as quickly as the Elefant.

This all combined means that getting onto the flank/behind an Elefant with a T-34 is a reasonable event to occur, whereas you have very, VERY little reason for a medium tank to get anywhere near the Jackson.

This is also ignoring the fact that you're trying to compare a casemate superheavy doctrinal TD to a nondoctrinal turreted TD in this fashion. This is kind of laughable.

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 20:21 PMEsxile

Jackson is what it is because there nothing else to perform on the late game on its side. Be sure that if the balance team had the opportunity to bring the Calliope stock, Jackson would have been nerfed in return.
Talking about pure Jackson's stat and not taking account of the faction as a whole isn't going to make you having any point here.


The Jackson's incredibly strong AT performance doesn't have anything to do with the Calliope. If you're buying a Jackson because you can't get a calliope then I would want to know your thought process, given that the two units don't have any sort of use-case overlap.

I'm also seriously not sure why you're even implying there's anything weak about the Jackson. The Jackson no longer bouncing shots from the P4 has not stopped it being the best nondoctrinal TD in the game.


jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 20:21 PMEsxile

Scott use what every other faction has access too: survivability, but instead to be in a form of superior armor stats, its range, speed and smoke. Again here let's not forget that the smoke is vet1, the same way as P4 and P5 get blitz at vet1 negating any form of speed USF units could have.


The scott already has fantastic range, speed, survivability, and then on top of this ALSO has smoke. Your scott simply shouldn't be engaged by AT threats if you are using it at all correctly, given that it outranges them and can even move while performing its barrage (Which is, to my knowledge, unique among these units)

You're still trying to compare the statistics/abilities of medium (And premium medium, in the case of the Panther) tanks to what is effectively a small self-propelled artillery piece for some reason. What exactly does the Panther having blitz have to do with the Scott having smoke? How are those two abilities at all related, other than the fact they're both on (Completely unrelated) vehicles at veterancy one?
25 Sep 2021, 22:20 PM
#194
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1171

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 18:31 PMVipper

I am showing the exact context (and you are taking what I have posted out of context):

you went on about chance to hit and pen, the issue presented was about how and why a change such as the armour nerf happend to the jakson

In the PzIV vs M36 the RNG is in favor of the M36 contrary what has been claimed.


this wasent the point and no one claimed it was other wise

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 18:33 PMGeblobt


The stug has 50 range, no turret and is slower than any stock allied medium tank, while the jackson has superior range, speed and a turret. If you lose your jackson to a p4 push you simply missplayed. Having the incredible reliable 5% chance to get a bounce was completely worthless for both the attacking side and the defending. The armor nerf didnt change how good the jackson is nor did it change the matchup.


so if it isent noticable why nerf the jaksons armour? A stug can bounce rounds from allied mediums while the jackon cant.

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 19:30 PMPip


What does the Stug have to do with it?

The P4 bounces when firing on the Firefly and SU-85 even from close range. This isnt an allies vs axis thing, this is giving the Jackson some type of weakness as it is otherwise the flat-out best (nondoctrinal) TD in the game. It has everything going for it, with the only actual downside now being that if it's caught out it will always be penned by PIVs. It's not even a hugely impactful downside, given that, as geblobt says, you went from an approximate 5% chance to bounce at max range to a 0% chance.

The Jackson is absolutely not an unit you can justify asking to buff, despite the nerfs it has received it is STILL extremely menacing.


i never said the jakson is bad. The reason i brought up the stug is because the jackson having a 5% chance to bounce is unexptable yet the stug wich is also a good td bounces a lot more then the jackson.
The jackons real weakness imo is its lack of ai entirely while it already had lower armour then most td's. The armour nerf didnt chance a thing apperantly so why do it?
Pip
25 Sep 2021, 22:41 PM
#195
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1579


i never said the jakson is bad. The reason i brought up the stug is because the jackson having a 5% chance to bounce is unexptable yet the stug wich is also a good td bounces a lot more then the jackson.
The jackons real weakness imo is its lack of ai entirely while it already had lower armour then most td's. The armour nerf didnt chance a thing apperantly so why do it?


The Jackson is significantly faster than the Stug, has a turret, has much better penetration (Absurdly so with HVAP), better range, better performance on the move, can repair itself for free, and can capture points (Though this is niche).

All of these reasons combined should give you some indication of why the Stug bouncing shots is understandable, and why the Jackson bouncing shots is not.

The Jackson doesn't have the "weakness" of no AI performance. Most TDs have little to no AI ability, excepting the ISU and Jagdtiger (Both doctrinal superheavies).

The Stug and Firefly's MGs are nice, but they're not really the most impactful things in most cases.
26 Sep 2021, 02:38 AM
#196
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4071 | Subs: 3

lets bring it back to scotts please
26 Sep 2021, 06:04 AM
#197
avatar of Mr Carmine

Posts: 1171

jump backJump back to quoted post25 Sep 2021, 22:41 PMPip


The Jackson is significantly faster than the Stug, has a turret, has much better penetration (Absurdly so with HVAP), better range, better performance on the move, can repair itself for free, and can capture points (Though this is niche).

All of these reasons combined should give you some indication of why the Stug bouncing shots is understandable, and why the Jackson bouncing shots is not.

The Jackson doesn't have the "weakness" of no AI performance. Most TDs have little to no AI ability, excepting the ISU and Jagdtiger (Both doctrinal superheavies).

The Stug and Firefly's MGs are nice, but they're not really the most impactful things in most cases.


The faction composition is what actualy matters not units in a vacuum.

Usf cant bounce much if at all unlike ost and okw and ukf. The jackson being the best td or at least lots better then stugs and jagdpzr4 is fine because as said before usf can bounce for shit and unlike all factions they dont get a heavy at all.

This alone should show the reason for that armour nerf was a bad one, probably pandering to one side as only one tank (the p4) could bounce off the the jackson with 5% chance. You dont even notice it most say. So its pointless as well.

As for the scott, its imo quite bad already. The only thing to change would be remove smoke but increase its damage potential imo. Its damage output/bleed is not good enough for its timing and durability. You have to get 2 and even then..
The pf also arent that good on their own. I dont know how to tackle the synergy without making them usseless.
Pip
26 Sep 2021, 12:41 PM
#199
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1579


As for the scott, its imo quite bad already. The only thing to change would be remove smoke but increase its damage potential imo. Its damage output/bleed is not good enough for its timing and durability. You have to get 2 and even then..
The pf also arent that good on their own. I dont know how to tackle the synergy without making them usseless.


Everything I've seen from the scott in most games i've observed recently seems to show it being EXTREMELY effective, especially when the USF player has two of them (Though this, of course, takes 20 population).

They're used to fantastic effect in a lot of Tightrope's recent casts, reliably obliterating team weapons, and providing a lot of firepower against infantry as well.
26 Sep 2021, 13:30 PM
#200
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3303 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Sep 2021, 12:41 PMPip


Everything I've seen from the scott in most games i've observed recently seems to show it being EXTREMELY effective, especially when the USF player has two of them (Though this, of course, takes 20 population).

They're used to fantastic effect in a lot of Tightrope's recent casts, reliably obliterating team weapons, and providing a lot of firepower against infantry as well.


Every unit paired are fantastic, maybe except RE.
PAGES (16)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

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

Replay highlight

Board Info

97 users are online: 1 member and 96 guests
Klement Pikhtura
22 posts in the last 24h
140 posts in the last week
656 posts in the last month
Registered members: 28231
Welcome our newest member, peterson.stella.93
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM