Login

russian armor

Jackson nerf

PAGES (7)down
23 Apr 2018, 08:17 AM
#41
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3596 | Subs: 1



I find the idea of introducing a “Light AT” vehicle to US interesting, but ultimately destructively difficult to balance. US have lots of AT spread throughout all levels of tech, bazookas hard counter light vehicles while soft countering larger ones, while Jackson hard counters heavies but isn’t as efficient for its cost against light vehicles. If anything the problem with the Jackson TD results from uneven effectiveness of the tiers as a whole. Buffing the Stuart might make Captain play more rewarding and allow LT-Capt as a viable teching route instead of LT to Maj or Capt to Maj. Tier skipping allows fast tech, but takes away tools from the player. That’s a good risk/reward scenario, but if LT or Capt is always better than the other, and neither one is worth a back-tech after getting Maj, then you end up with less diversity. What I mean is that you end up with Maj tech being imbalanced because it is trying to fill the role of whatever you skipped to get there. Bazookas, .50 cal M2HBs, M1 ATGs and M36 Jacksons need to be balanced together as AT options scaling to different threats, but the tiers that they all come from must also be balanced to each other in other aspects as well.

Maybe move the mortar to Capt and Pack Howi to LT? Maybe buff Stuart against infantry? Maybe none of those things, but Jackson problems are a result of over reliance on it as “only” or “best” US AT option.

#makebazookaszookagain


Seeing where the general game design is going, USF Lieutenant vs Capt is a dead design now. It has always been a drawback to contain USF snowballing from a superior early game back then. But USF doesn't have superior early game anymore, so today USF ends up with a stupid choice between suppression or atgun and then one of both or medium while being at the same level than its opponent which already get everything to counter any situation at that time.

People complain about the homogenization of the game and I understand that but since we are at it, let's finish it and give USF all the tools they need to be in pair with other factions.

1- Remove free lieutenant and free captain (they could be bought in there respective tier)
2- Unlock .50 and Atgun whenever T1 or T2 is achieved
-- T1 is Lieutenant / M20 / Halftrack
-- T2 is Captain / Stuart / pak
-- T3 unlock gives the Major then Sherman / Jackson / Scott

23 Apr 2018, 10:39 AM
#42
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17875 | Subs: 8



you do know that the m10 have had 560 hp and 50 range since USF release? this mean the m10 were semi-brawlers to begin with.

you're complaining about the m10 being too weak at the same time urging for the jackson to become more like the m10.

Originally, Jacksons were fragile sniper and Wolverines spammable brawlers.
I believe personally that USF TDs had better Dynamics in CoH1, where they all were brawlers instead of long range snipers and Dynamics between M10 and Hellcat were much better then M10 and M36.

Existence of M36 and tech requierment of M10 ensure that M10 will never be taken into account.
23 Apr 2018, 11:57 AM
#43
avatar of swordfisch

Posts: 138



you do know that the m10 have had 560 hp and 50 range since USF release? this mean the m10 were semi-brawlers to begin with.

you're complaining about the m10 being too weak at the same time urging for the jackson to become more like the m10.


Enough with this sissy boy "skirmisher tank" talk, the Jackson is an all American brawler baby with 90mm of kraut pushing power.

The Jackson is finally in a good position yet Relic are nerfing it. If you want to mess around with this sissy "skirmisher" concept we have the m10 over here that you can turn into a copy of the Puma since you seem so obsessed with. Sure give it smoke and call it a day.

If anything the Jackson needs a slight MP or fuel increase, possibly to slightly cheaper than a panther. It's role now is vital in giving the USF a vehicle that doesn't get utterly destroyed by medium armour spam or big cat heavies (JT or Ele).

25 Apr 2018, 05:31 AM
#44
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Apr 2018, 10:39 AMKatitof

Originally, Jacksons were fragile sniper and Wolverines spammable brawlers.
I believe personally that USF TDs had better Dynamics in CoH1, where they all were brawlers instead of long range snipers and Dynamics between M10 and Hellcat were much better then M10 and M36.

Existence of M36 and tech requierment of M10 ensure that M10 will never be taken into account.

it didn't really work in coh1. The American were routinely getting their ass kick in late.

although the situation hasn't improved much since then.



Enough with this sissy boy "skirmisher tank" talk, the Jackson is an all American brawler baby with 90mm of kraut pushing power.

The Jackson is finally in a good position yet Relic are nerfing it. If you want to mess around with this sissy "skirmisher" concept we have the m10 over here that you can turn into a copy of the Puma since you seem so obsessed with. Sure give it smoke and call it a day.

If anything the Jackson needs a slight MP or fuel increase, possibly to slightly cheaper than a panther. It's role now is vital in giving the USF a vehicle that doesn't get utterly destroyed by medium armour spam or big cat heavies (JT or Ele).



do you seriously think the jackson can out brawl a king tiger? do you want to have it both ways where jackson have both range and high hp?

this is simple greed. This isn't going to work.
25 Apr 2018, 18:49 PM
#45
avatar of Felinewolfie

Posts: 868 | Subs: 5

I rather M36 Jackson be low health, long range, high dps as before.
This nerfing it's range and dps, while increasing it's health and cost
and pop is... woah.

I prefer it return to the old way of paper Jackson.

Or swap it entirely with M10. I agree.
Making the Panther a brawler is also strange as
the actual tank had paper sides and rear.
25 Apr 2018, 23:52 PM
#46
avatar of swordfisch

Posts: 138



do you seriously think the jackson can out brawl a king tiger? do you want to have it both ways where jackson have both range and high hp?

this is simple greed. This isn't going to work.


How is asking for a TD that can deal deal with axis armour and not get blown up by shreks instantly like has been the case before the health buff "greedy"?

May I remind you the OKW Panther and Comet already exist, Jackson is in this tier but solely a tank destroyer. It just does the job better, but the trade off is zero AI. (unlike panther with its better mobility, armour and ton of mg's). Again any adjustment should have been a small price increase.
26 Apr 2018, 00:01 AM
#47
avatar of ZombiFrancis

Posts: 2742


it didn't really work in coh1. The American were routinely getting their ass kick in late.

although the situation hasn't improved much since then.


Americans that didn't choose Armor Company you mean. Armor company scales quite nicely, despite the effects of Wehrmacht potentially dumping hundreds of fuel into vet.

And it's not like a Wehrmacht player ever ran out their VPs trying to stall for that KT. ;)

(Point is, you can't analyze CoH1 with CoH2 gameplay in mind.)
26 Apr 2018, 00:08 AM
#48
avatar of SturmTigerVorgo

Posts: 307

Jackson's power is supposed to be speed and being able to get behind WM tanks.
ATM they can do that(cirle a stug or a tiger) and ALSO shoot from a safe distance, that's what we call OP.

ATM it has everything..super speed, rotating turret, range, crush infantry potential, penetration and decent damage. Only the Panther has those kind of perks but compare the cost of the two.

I think a decrease in range is fair, not sure though that 55 is enough. We shall see.
26 Apr 2018, 00:28 AM
#49
avatar of Outsider_Sidaroth

Posts: 1323 | Subs: 1

Jackson's power is supposed to be speed and being able to get behind WM tanks.
ATM they can do that(cirle a stug or a tiger) and ALSO shoot from a safe distance, that's what we call OP.

ATM it has everything..super speed, rotating turret, range, crush infantry potential, penetration and decent damage. Only the Panther has those kind of perks but compare the cost of the two.

I think a decrease in range is fair, not sure though that 55 is enough. We shall see.


It has everything because it's USF "Final Solution" to enemy Armor, they have nothing else in their entire rooster in most of their doctrines, it is the American lategame and any nerf will likely dumpster USF in teamgames outside of providing meat and indirect fire again. Specially with the P47s being nerfed too.
26 Apr 2018, 00:39 AM
#50
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post22 Apr 2018, 17:27 PMKatitof

Fun fact: Slugger is its historical nickname :romeoHairDay:


Something something zveroboy?
26 Apr 2018, 03:34 AM
#51
avatar of Firesparks

Posts: 1930



How is asking for a TD that can deal deal with axis armour and not get blown up by shreks instantly like has been the case before the health buff "greedy"?

May I remind you the OKW Panther and Comet already exist, Jackson is in this tier but solely a tank destroyer. It just does the job better, but the trade off is zero AI. (unlike panther with its better mobility, armour and ton of mg's). Again any adjustment should have been a small price increase.


comet lost its long range a while back. It's only 45 now. It's far from being the british' best anti-tank weapon.

The panther only have 50 range.
26 Apr 2018, 05:46 AM
#52
avatar of ullumulu

Posts: 2243

give USF a doc with T95, return jackson to old stats and all is fine.
26 Apr 2018, 05:55 AM
#53
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3596 | Subs: 1

Jackson's power is supposed to be speed and being able to get behind WM tanks.
ATM they can do that(cirle a stug or a tiger) and ALSO shoot from a safe distance, that's what we call OP.

ATM it has everything..super speed, rotating turret, range, crush infantry potential, penetration and decent damage. Only the Panther has those kind of perks but compare the cost of the two.

I think a decrease in range is fair, not sure though that 55 is enough. We shall see.


I'm 100% with that, if you make Jackson immune to damage engine.
26 Apr 2018, 07:28 AM
#54
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post26 Apr 2018, 05:55 AMEsxile


I'm 100% with that, if you make Jackson immune to damage engine.


Could lower the threshold. Make it require 50% instead of 75%

But i maintain that at this point we might as well swap the m10 and the old jackson (glass cannon) for diversity amd balance. Cheaper expendable armour is more to the theme of the usf and the current jackson is too much, but the old one would be ideal for doctrinal diversity.
26 Apr 2018, 07:45 AM
#55
avatar of Kurfürst

Posts: 144

Jackson's power is supposed to be speed and being able to get behind WM tanks.
ATM they can do that(cirle a stug or a tiger) and ALSO shoot from a safe distance, that's what we call OP.

ATM it has everything..super speed, rotating turret, range, crush infantry potential, penetration and decent damage. Only the Panther has those kind of perks but compare the cost of the two.

I think a decrease in range is fair, not sure though that 55 is enough. We shall see.


It needs to loose two things - 0.75 moving accuracy (should be nerfed to .50) and range needs to be reduced to 50. At this point it can get some price decrease. Keep the self-vision for good measure.

Its quite absurd that USF has something that it is far, far better at killing tank, medium or heavy than the Panther (which is shit) at a cheaper price and better survivability to boot. Currently it has all, it hits all the time, outranges everything OST has on tracks (bar the elefant), it can retreat at any time and win any engagement while retreating against any pursuer.

M10 should retain the 60 range to differentiate the two at make the M10 more desireable.

26 Apr 2018, 12:35 PM
#56
avatar of Blalord

Posts: 742 | Subs: 1



This is everything IMO. Not to mention the fact that US is the only one who might not even have AT guns available in the late game, should you choose Lieutenant.

Sovs sorta have to make that choice, but its very feasible to get both of their early tiers since they only total in 30 fuel together.


Dont forget that when the Sov techs, they dont have a "free unit" with 1 member with a thompson
26 Apr 2018, 13:23 PM
#57
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Its quite absurd that USF has something that it is far, far better at killing tank, medium or heavy than the Panther (which is shit) at a cheaper price and better survivability to boot.


Every faction has a more cost efficient tank-killing vehicle than the Panther, namely their tank destroyer. The Panther's not a tank destroyer. It's more of a TD/Generalist hybrid: like a tank destroyer with a light vehicle's anti-infantry power thrown into the mix. It's not as cost efficient as a tank destroyer but it also doesn't become completely useless when there are no vehicles to shoot.
26 Apr 2018, 15:05 PM
#58
avatar of Waegukin

Posts: 609

Definitely in the "make the M10 stock" group. The Jackson's already trying really hard to be an M10+ anyways and dirty-cheap flankers seem to fit the USF's mobile design better than a 60 range sniper that can only be balanced if designed to be defensive, as it was pre-buff. The only major design change they would need to support that would likely be making AT-Gun AP shells a toggle that reduces RoF/cone of fire but boosts pen, but that's fairly minor assuming they can get all three into the #Scope
26 Apr 2018, 15:26 PM
#59
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3596 | Subs: 1

So USF would be the only faction who wouldn't stock option to fight tiger/KT and such.
Amazing design.
26 Apr 2018, 15:35 PM
#60
avatar of Lago

Posts: 3260

Fairly sure he meant make M10 nondoc without locking the M36 behind a commander. Replacing the Jackson with the Wolverine would leave you with exactly the same problem as before: one tank destroyer having to fill all the vehicular AT needs of the faction.
PAGES (7)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

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

460 users are online: 1 member and 459 guests
OKSpitfire
6 posts in the last 24h
32 posts in the last week
86 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44639
Welcome our newest member, trickproblem
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM