Login

russian armor

Tiger PzKpfw VI

PAGES (10)down
8 Feb 2019, 12:41 PM
#101
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4200 | Subs: 1


....
I'm sorry, I don't get it -

What is "completely wrong" in theory that you shouldn't invest 230 fuel into unit which hard counters are already present on the field?

Having opponent to have 16 pop and 720 MP and 270 FUEL (don't remember exact cost of M36, but it doesn't matter here) sitting without job, since they don't affect your infantry in any way, is completely wrong strategy?

The part that in bold:
"A double Jackson build has thrown ~40% of its popcap into vehicular anti-tank."

USF vehicles can be disembarked so if someone has a m36 doing nothing he is actually doing something wrong since he should disembark the crew.
8 Feb 2019, 12:43 PM
#102
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1563 | Subs: 2


Since jacksons hardcounters every vehicle, and jackson is build nearly every game..you should not build any tanks anymore?
I have problems winning the infantry game against vetted, double equipped rifles, but could be my lack of skill

Could be, as your opponent invested X amount of resources in pure AT unit and you still can't beat him in AI.

Not sure about 1v1 as I don't play it, but according to casts that I watched Pz.IV is perfectly viable in matchup vs USF. The idea of sitting on fuel just to build slow fat target and be outranged looks indeed bad.

4v4 is completely another beast. You can pretty much spam rocket artillery instead of tanks(if you see enemy is investing heavily in AT units) and be totally fine. You just need to mine flanks in order to avoid throw-away medium tank rush for your rocket artillery.
8 Feb 2019, 13:09 PM
#103
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4200 | Subs: 1


Could be, as your opponent invested X amount of resources in pure AT unit and you still can't beat him in AI.

Not sure about 1v1 as I don't play it, but according to casts that I watched Pz.IV is perfectly viable in matchup vs USF. The idea of sitting on fuel just to build slow fat target and be outranged looks indeed bad.

4v4 is completely another beast. You can pretty much spam rocket artillery instead of tanks(if you see enemy is investing heavily in AT units) and be totally fine. You just need to mine flanks in order to avoid throw-away medium tank rush for your rocket artillery.

The theory that one have invested 40% of pop to AT is simply flawed as I have explained.

The point is that a USF player can built a single M36 that can counter the majority of enemy vehicles from Kubel to KT and if the does opponent does not make tanks he can still disembark the vehicle and use the crew for repairs, for capping or even for fighting if they have Thompson and have only 4 pop upkeep.

In addition one can relay on riflemen to beat enemy infantry or even built the Scott which is extremely hard to counter without vehicles.

Ostheer especially have a very hard time attacking if not support by vehicles.
8 Feb 2019, 13:49 PM
#104
avatar of Lago

Posts: 1333

Why are you ignoring everything he said and quoting back an error from another post? He said nothing about popcap.
8 Feb 2019, 14:07 PM
#105
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 459

alright guys eslayer gave his solution! dont build tanks vs USF and hope ur volks or grens will beat fully vetted/dual equipped riflemen lol. god forbid if usf builds a scott its g fkin g
8 Feb 2019, 14:08 PM
#106
avatar of Princeps

Posts: 38


Why would you go for a Tiger if there is counter for it on the field already?


Thats what i want to tell u. The Jackson is too good in what he is doing. There is no reason to go for any heavy Tank play against USF. Because there is always the "free out of jail card".

As Ost u have to go for any form of Tank in the mid and late game. U will see no land aginst the 5-6Man Untis with double LMG.

If this is what you really think than it is obvious that you've NEVER in your life tried to micro 2 SU-85 and utilize self-spotting ability.


whuut ? u need no scout and the fighting area of the most maps are choke points.

The same thing that'll happen if you field an IS-2 against two Panthers.

If your opponent's gone all in on tank destroyers why are you calling in a Tiger?!

A double Jackson build has thrown ~40% of its popcap into vehicular anti-tank. You beat it by exploiting its relative anti-infantry weakness, not by building the things its good against.


If u go for T3 u want to go for the Tiger. U cant bring a P4 and than tech too Panther.
And how???!?!! go for more Grens ? against double Bar stuff? Build support weapons? or arty and hope for the best? USF is one the best Inf factions in the Game.(Just not consider blobbing in this case)

The theory that one have invested 40% of pop to AT is simply flawed as I have explained.

The point is that a USF player can built a single M36 that can counter the majority of enemy vehicles from Kubel to KT and if the does opponent does not make tanks he can still disembark the vehicle and use the crew for repairs, for capping or even for fighting if they have Thompson and have only 4 pop upkeep.

In addition one can relay on riflemen to beat enemy infantry or even built the Scott which is extremely hard to counter without vehicles.

Ostheer especially have a very hard time attacking if not support by vehicles.


100% this
8 Feb 2019, 14:11 PM
#107
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1563 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2019, 13:09 PMVipper

The theory that one have invested 40% of pop to AT is simply flawed as I have explained.

The point is that a USF player can built a single M36 that can counter the majority of enemy vehicles from Kubel to KT and if the does opponent does not make tanks he can still disembark the vehicle and use the crew for repairs, for capping or even for fighting if they have Thompson and have only 4 pop upkeep.

In addition one can relay on riflemen to beat enemy infantry or even built the Scott which is extremely hard to counter without vehicles.

Ostheer especially have a very hard time attacking if not support by vehicles.

Building Pz.IV when Jackson is on the field is perfectly fine as you can still infilct drain on enemy MP (althouhg limited by Jackson), while Jackson can do nothing to your infantry.

I don't understand what we are arguing about anymore.

You think that Tiger is fine and the only problem with it is Jackson? But then it is also SU-85 and Firefly.
What do you suggest? Nerf them all? Do you remember why they were buffed in the first place - the state of balance in big game modes?
8 Feb 2019, 14:19 PM
#108
avatar of WingZero

Posts: 1176


Building Pz.IV when Jackson is on the field is perfectly fine as you can still infilct drain on enemy MP (althouhg limited by Jackson), while Jackson can do nothing to your infantry.

I don't understand what we are arguing about anymore.

You think that Tiger is fine and the only problem with it is Jackson? But then it is also SU-85 and Firefly.
What do you suggest? Nerf them all? Do you remember why they were buffed in the first place - the state of balance in big game modes?


I agree 100%. The topic went from Tiger needs a buff to nerfing Jackson and Allied TDs because they do their jobs? I also agree where players invest in heavy tanks when enemy already has 2 TDs on the field. OKW player can get JP instead and fight AI battle and Wher can get 2 PGs with Shreks and stug support (2 Panthers can work too). Its all theory crafting here.
8 Feb 2019, 14:25 PM
#109
avatar of SupremeStefan

Posts: 687

Omg this noobs still talking about jackson lol because my poor tiger :'( is not win button (hilfe) If we want jackson to be a hardcouter to only heavy tanks then we need non doc wolverine to hardcounter mediums exaclty like in situation when u have su76 and su85 . Without this change u can cry and cry but nothing will change because design is meh . Or maybe non doc e8 and then nerf jackson
8 Feb 2019, 14:27 PM
#110
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 11715 | Subs: 6



Thats what i want to tell u. The Jackson is too good in what he is doing. There is no reason to go for any heavy Tank play against USF. Because there is always the "free out of jail card"

And it will remain so, because its end game tank destroyer for USF that NEEDS to be able to kill ALL armor axis can throw at them, because again, its end game tank destroyer for USF, there is nothing above it, no panther, no elephant, nothing.

Its not really a hard concept to comprehend, reread it as many times as you need and take all the time in the world to let it sink.
8 Feb 2019, 14:41 PM
#111
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4200 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2019, 13:49 PMLago
Why are you ignoring everything he said and quoting back an error from another post? He said nothing about popcap.

Why you are jumping into a debate with actually following what has been said?


...
I'm sorry, I don't get it -
...

Elslayer clearly asked for clarification why your theory that: "A double Jackson build has thrown ~40% of its popcap into vehicular anti-tank" is wrong which I provided.

8 Feb 2019, 14:45 PM
#112
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4200 | Subs: 1


Building Pz.IV when Jackson is on the field is perfectly fine as you can still infilct drain on enemy MP (althouhg limited by Jackson), while Jackson can do nothing to your infantry.

I don't understand what we are arguing about anymore.

You think that Tiger is fine and the only problem with it is Jackson? But then it is also SU-85 and Firefly.
What do you suggest? Nerf them all? Do you remember why they were buffed in the first place - the state of balance in big game modes?

If you ask me yes I do believe that M36, Su-85 and FF have too high change to hit and penetrate all axis vehicles from a Kubel to KT and things get even worse when these units are vetted since not only they have OP base stats but they also get OP vet bonuses.

The current state creates a stale meta where allies can simply spam infantry and TD and be pretty much covered while axis have to used a combination of units and still find themselves in trouble.
8 Feb 2019, 14:45 PM
#113
avatar of Lago

Posts: 1333

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2019, 14:41 PMVipper

Why are jumping into a debate with actually following what has been said?


Elslayer clearly asked for clarification why your theory that: "A double Jackson build has thrown ~40% of its popcap into vehicular anti-tank" is wrong which I provided.


No, he didn't. He very clearly brought up the resource cost of two Jacksons.

You criticize people all the time for ignoring everything that doesn't fit your argument. Might want to look in the mirror sometime.
8 Feb 2019, 14:46 PM
#114
avatar of ElSlayer

Posts: 1563 | Subs: 2

alright guys eslayer gave his solution! dont build tanks vs USF and hope ur volks or grens will beat fully vetted/dual equipped riflemen lol. god forbid if usf builds a scott its g fkin g

Alright smartass, I know it is fun to nitpick some stuff other guy said and turn it around in order to support your argument (I do it sometimes too), but this stuff don't really contribute to discussion.

My argument was applied to the scenario provided by other forum member where USF player have 2 Jacksons against his Tiger. Don't sit on your fuel for whole game just to build Tiger if you see your opponent already have Jackson (and probably can have second one) - this is quite reasonable thing to suggest, don't you think?

I suggest to make a new poll on which buffs Tiger needs with these options:
- ...but allied TDs!
- ...but muh 4-man grens!
- ...but dual equip!

There are lots of shitty whiners on both sides - mostly-allies and mostly-axis players, but DAMN! Players, who favors Wehrmacht faction go over the roof just as always.


Allright, back to the topic -

As SupremeStefan pointed out it is very hard to find good balance on single TD of a faction without overbuffing/nerfing it performance against meds or heavies. Best solution is to split it in two - anti-medium TD and anti-heavy TD, but I don't think we'll se that happening.

The other option I see here is to make it so Jackson by default would be good against meds and only be good against heavies with HVAP. I'm not a modder and not sure if it is possible, but it would be good to cut some range on default shells and add it back for HVAP.

Also IIRC HVAP still does more damage than default shell. Well, this is nonsense and may be cut to standard 160 damage.

8 Feb 2019, 14:54 PM
#115
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4200 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2019, 14:45 PMLago


No, he didn't. He very clearly brought up the resource cost of two Jacksons.

You criticize people all the time for ignoring everything that doesn't fit your argument. Might want to look in the mirror sometime.

Why are you continuing down this pointless route?



Now PLS accept that what you wrote about pop is wrong and move on.

In addition pls cut down on the personal comments, for me this is not a personal vendetta. I criticize what others write not the persons, actually you are the one turning a balance issue into a personal issue.
8 Feb 2019, 15:04 PM
#116
avatar of Lago

Posts: 1333

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2019, 14:54 PMVipper

Why are you continuing down this pointless route?



Now PLS accept that what you wrote about pop is wrong and move on.


I was wrong about the population cap: it's apparently 16 and I thought it was 19. The resource cost of getting two Jacksons you aren't using isn't changed by that.

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2019, 14:54 PMVipper
In addition pls cut down on the personal comments, for me this is not a personal vendetta. I criticize what others write not the persons, actually you are the one turning a balance issue into a personal issue.

Vipper, you need to start practicing what you preach. Your desire to clean up the forums is commendable, but your words hold little weight when you're just as bad as everyone else the rest of the time.
8 Feb 2019, 15:07 PM
#117
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 4200 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2019, 15:04 PMLago

I was wrong about the population cap: it's apparently 16 and I thought it was 19. The resource cost of getting two Jacksons you aren't using isn't changed by that.

Again USf players have the option to have only 8 pop invested in 2 Jackson if three not using them, not 40% of their pop. The theory is simply wrong.

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2019, 15:04 PMLago

Vipper, you need to start practicing what you preach. Your desire to clean up the forums is commendable, but your words hold little weight when you're just as bad as everyone else the rest of the time.

You have chosen to continue this in personal level and I have not intention of following down that path or derailing a thread.

Have a nice day. Bye bye
8 Feb 2019, 16:03 PM
#118
avatar of Alphrum

Posts: 459


Alright smartass, I know it is fun to nitpick some stuff other guy said and turn it around in order to support your argument (I do it sometimes too), but this stuff don't really contribute to discussion.

My argument was applied to the scenario provided by other forum member where USF player have 2 Jacksons against his Tiger. Don't sit on your fuel for whole game just to build Tiger if you see your opponent already have Jackson (and probably can have second one) - this is quite reasonable thing to suggest, don't you think?

I suggest to make a new poll on which buffs Tiger needs with these options:
- ...but allied TDs!
- ...but muh 4-man grens!
- ...but dual equip!

There are lots of shitty whiners on both sides - mostly-allies and mostly-axis players, but DAMN! Players, who favors Wehrmacht faction go over the roof just as always.


Allright, back to the topic -

As SupremeStefan pointed out it is very hard to find good balance on single TD of a faction without overbuffing/nerfing it performance against meds or heavies. Best solution is to split it in two - anti-medium TD and anti-heavy TD, but I don't think we'll se that happening.

The other option I see here is to make it so Jackson by default would be good against meds and only be good against heavies with HVAP. I'm not a modder and not sure if it is possible, but it would be good to cut some range on default shells and add it back for HVAP.

Also IIRC HVAP still does more damage than default shell. Well, this is nonsense and may be cut to standard 160 damage.


What else is he guna build, whats he supposed to spend his fuel on then? that's the point Jacksons, shut down EVERY axis tank COMFORTABLY, they outrage, out speed, out flank them all with ease. Every other 60 range TD has glaring weaknesses whilst the Jackson weaknesses is easily covered by its strengths

Jackson should be nerfed just how JLI are being nerfed, with very small changes at a time, all i suggested so far was a moving ACC nerf, thats all it will still counter every axis tank just less so on the move and more venerable when getting flanked.

8 Feb 2019, 17:02 PM
#119
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 242

jump backJump back to quoted post8 Feb 2019, 14:41 PMVipper

Why you are jumping into a debate with actually following what has been said?


Elslayer clearly asked for clarification why your theory that: "A double Jackson build has thrown ~40% of its popcap into vehicular anti-tank" is wrong which I provided.



You are also wrong thinking that pro players are going to leave their jaksons without their crew.
You are way out of touch with in-game strats.
8 Feb 2019, 17:09 PM
#120
avatar of distrofio

Posts: 565

In order to fix this jacksons problem, i give you:
PAGES (10)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
  • Soviets flag Talisman
  • U.S. Forces flag |GB| The HS H[oo]ligan
  • Soviets flag VonAsten
  • The British Forces flag RedT3rror
  • Ostheer flag Dzaraa
  • Oberkommando West flag RUKAclNoggano
  • Oberkommando West flag Insane DevM
  • Ostheer flag Luvnest
uploaded by Sturmpanther

Board Info

147 users are online: 6 members and 141 guests
SweetrollNearTheDoor, Sturmpanther, Farlon, Crecer13, empirescurropt, ltaustinpowers
353 posts in the last 24h
1818 posts in the last week
6153 posts in the last month
Registered members: 29939
Welcome our newest member, Steffaniaq6
Most online: 805 users on 28 Oct 2018, 01:04 AM