Login

russian armor

Easy 8 is useless, should get some improvement.

19 Sep 2019, 13:12 PM
#21
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13757 | Subs: 7

so is the okw p4 even more trash ?

Nope, it simply isn't easy mode answer to all that P5 is.
19 Sep 2019, 13:20 PM
#22
avatar of Stug life

Posts: 3963

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Sep 2019, 13:12 PMKatitof

Nope, it simply isn't easy mode answer to all that P5 is.
but if the easay 8 is bad and it's a better p4 J then by logic that p4 is trash
19 Sep 2019, 13:24 PM
#23
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 13757 | Subs: 7

but if the easay 8 is bad and it's a better p4 J then by logic that p4 is trash

Well, I don't think e8 is bad.
Also, I don't know why ost was given okw P4 through doc either, its pointless to me.
19 Sep 2019, 13:45 PM
#24
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 6375 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Sep 2019, 12:52 PMddd


Balance team already nerfed jackson after months of brainstorming, case closed.

Easy8 was good unit only when it was no tech call in. After it was tied to tech it disappeared from the game. Meanwhile panther got reworked to better do its job and is now extremaly common. Solution still applies.

M36 performance is far from closed

Great since you seem to like the PzIV so much lets swap the PzIV J and Easy8 (clone stats) then everyone is happy.
19 Sep 2019, 13:47 PM
#25
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 447

Just give it increased penetration at vet 2 or something. It should be a tiny bit more reliable vs panthers. The easy 8 has more in common with the panther than a regular sherman or p4.
19 Sep 2019, 13:48 PM
#26
avatar of SkysTheLimit

Posts: 1511

but if the easay 8 is bad and it's a better p4 J then by logic that p4 is trash


*By Codguys logic. Please don't hold the rest of the forum to his logic....
19 Sep 2019, 13:57 PM
#27
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3211 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Sep 2019, 12:52 PMddd


Balance team already nerfed jackson after months of brainstorming, case closed.

Easy8 was good unit only when it was no tech call in. After it was tied to tech it disappeared from the game. Meanwhile panther got reworked to better do its job and is now extremaly common. Solution still applies.


Aaaaaaaand there's exactly what they half assed it. The "nerf" +5 fuel is so inconsequential that it might as well not have happened. It has no impact what so ever and the performance of the Jackson *gasp* is still too much.

The Jackson should be returned to its old squishy state and swapped with the m10.
The m10 fits the usf the usf design of mobility far better than a TD that is mobile but doesn't actually need it at all.
It would also allow doctrinal units the like 75mm and E8 have an attempt at a role instead of being absolutely made redundant by the Jackson.

The Jackson would fall into a glass cannon doctrinal role where those that can micro it are rewarded heavily with a beast of a TD, but without it holding the usf players hand and also allow the commander to bring something more unique to the table.
ddd
19 Sep 2019, 14:03 PM
#28
avatar of ddd

Posts: 519 | Subs: 1



Aaaaaaaand there's exactly what they half assed it. The "nerf" +5 fuel is so inconsequential that it might as well not have happened. It has no impact what so ever and the performance of the Jackson *gasp* is still too much.

The Jackson should be returned to its old squishy state and swapped with the m10.
The m10 fits the usf the usf design of mobility far better than a TD that is mobile but doesn't actually need it at all.
It would also allow doctrinal units the like 75mm and E8 have an attempt at a role instead of being absolutely made redundant by the Jackson.

The Jackson would fall into a glass cannon doctrinal role where those that can micro it are rewarded heavily with a beast of a TD, but without it holding the usf players hand and also allow the commander to bring something more unique to the table.


Ok, you and vipper seem really pasionate about jackson and both of you would do better job at balancing coh2 than current amateur team im sure. Why wont you go and make thread about jackson and how it should be nerfed more?

No, killing off jackson wont make easy8 or 76mm any more viable, it will just push usf back to garbage faction status.
19 Sep 2019, 15:03 PM
#29
avatar of pvtgooner

Posts: 143



Aaaaaaaand there's exactly what they half assed it. The "nerf" +5 fuel is so inconsequential that it might as well not have happened. It has no impact what so ever and the performance of the Jackson *gasp* is still too much.

The Jackson should be returned to its old squishy state and swapped with the m10.
The m10 fits the usf the usf design of mobility far better than a TD that is mobile but doesn't actually need it at all.
It would also allow doctrinal units the like 75mm and E8 have an attempt at a role instead of being absolutely made redundant by the Jackson.

The Jackson would fall into a glass cannon doctrinal role where those that can micro it are rewarded heavily with a beast of a TD, but without it holding the usf players hand and also allow the commander to bring something more unique to the table.


So basically that would be the only commander picked ever? The M10 cannot be used effectively against late game axis STOCK armor. Why are people so obsessed with kneecapping usf by removing the Jackson from Major? The Jackson is fine, if it gets nerfed, Axis late game armor has to see armor nerfs.
19 Sep 2019, 15:12 PM
#30
avatar of DerbyHat

Posts: 1026 | Subs: 1

Instead of the 5 fuel increase, Jackson should've had its moving accuracy decreased to 50%.

It already has the turret and high mobility to make it less vulnerable than other TD's, it shouldn't be able to hit every shot on chasing tanks aswell.
19 Sep 2019, 15:30 PM
#31
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3211 | Subs: 1



So basically that would be the only commander picked ever? The M10 cannot be used effectively against late game axis STOCK armor. Why are people so obsessed with kneecapping usf by removing the Jackson from Major? The Jackson is fine, if it gets nerfed, Axis late game armor has to see armor nerfs.

The entire point of high armour values is to not be countered frontally with no effort.
M10 HVAP could be tuned to allow for a good chance of frontally penning but there is no reason for a quick, 60 range, full health (640) turreted TD to be able to invalidate armour frontally if say the same damn thing if it was an Axis unit. Once you get into the finer details too like HVAP and self healing via crew it gets even more silly.


The m10s cheapness would allow for more representation of the usf industry. And highlight the mobility and superior numbers the usf is supposed to represent.

Additionally, as I said previously, taking the Jackson out of the stock equation you leave more room for the specialist Sherman's to actually be an option. You will NEVER need a 75mm or E8 as long as you can get a Jackson. You might pick it for the luls but it won't ever actually have a proper place in a lineup.
19 Sep 2019, 15:55 PM
#32
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 447


The entire point of high armour values is to not be countered frontally with no effort.
M10 HVAP could be tuned to allow for a good chance of frontally penning but there is no reason for a quick, 60 range, full health (640) turreted TD to be able to invalidate armour frontally if say the same damn thing if it was an Axis unit. Once you get into the finer details too like HVAP and self healing via crew it gets even more silly.


The m10s cheapness would allow for more representation of the usf industry. And highlight the mobility and superior numbers the usf is supposed to represent.

Additionally, as I said previously, taking the Jackson out of the stock equation you leave more room for the specialist Sherman's to actually be an option. You will NEVER need a 75mm or E8 as long as you can get a Jackson. You might pick it for the luls but it won't ever actually have a proper place in a lineup.


Frontal armour values would work if there was side armor in the game. That is why jacksons have to pen from the front. You can nerf the jakson but usf will need 76 Shermans. I think USF players would be happy if relic nerfed rof or accuracy on the move on the jakson as long as we get easy 8's in return. E8's pen values need to go up though.
19 Sep 2019, 16:04 PM
#33
avatar of gbem

Posts: 1341

i mean yeah the jackson is overperforming and overshadowing practically every other USF unit... but a total rework to doc isnt my fix... id just bump the jackson to 155 fuel and 17 popcap to prevent spam and lower its cost efficiency... another option is to lower its overall DPS
19 Sep 2019, 16:16 PM
#34
avatar of CODGUY

Posts: 573

jump backJump back to quoted post19 Sep 2019, 14:03 PMddd


Ok, you and vipper seem really pasionate about jackson and both of you would do better job at balancing coh2 than current amateur team im sure. Why wont you go and make thread about jackson and how it should be nerfed more?

No, killing off jackson wont make easy8 or 76mm any more viable, it will just push usf back to garbage faction status.


Well that's what the Wehraboo community here wants. They think they should be able to just roll out "muh Krupp Steel" and just run roughshod over everyone with their nondoc Tigers and Panthers because that's "historically accurate" to them and the Jackson gets in the way of that fantasy.
19 Sep 2019, 16:22 PM
#35
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 3211 | Subs: 1



Frontal armour values would work if there was side armor in the game. That is why jacksons have to pen from the front. You can nerf the jakson but usf will need 76 Shermans. I think USF players would be happy if relic nerfed rof or accuracy on the move on the jakson as long as we get easy 8's in return. E8's pen values need to go up though.


Deflection damage would also be an acceptable alternative to side armour (cause engine limitations) so that frontal armour means more than "use the same unit you use for the low armour units"
The answer for lower pen DEDICATED AT units would be to basicly batter the enemy into submission. Usf AT oriented vehicles also have HVAP (E8 aside iirc) so that can be a tool to allow for more reliability as well.

The current Jackson absolutely kills unit diversity in the usf match ups. Heavier armour doesn't bring much advantage due to a shut down mechanic in place via high pen values. Health and mobility make a more durable tank than armour does.

And I disagree that usf would NEED a 76mm, they have great tools but all have fallen by the way side as all balance points have looked at is the Jackson. I want combined arms man. 57mm is great with HAVP, Stuart could get some love, the sherman AP is above average for pen, an m10 would allow for easier adaption towards AT instead of the current all or nothing Jackson design, zooks could get a looksy...

There are optioms


Also the E8 is actually one of the best tanks out there statistically. The only thing the t34/85 has on it is health and main gun aoe. The E8 has more everything else iirc. We just never see it...


jump backJump back to quoted post19 Sep 2019, 16:04 PMgbem
i mean yeah the jackson is overperforming and overshadowing practically every other USF unit... but a total rework to doc isnt my fix... id just bump the jackson to 155 fuel and 17 popcap to prevent spam and lower its cost efficiency... another option is to lower its overall DPS

Oof. That's a nerf. If the Jackson is to stay as USF's only AT unit, I don't want to to be super expensive because then it HAS to be over powered, which is bad. If you do some how end up losing the most mobile TD in the game then you are completely dicked because replacing it is too expensive.

But I maintain, as long as all you need is a Jackson you won't ever find a workable and unique place for the sherman variants with an AT focus.
19 Sep 2019, 16:51 PM
#36
avatar of Mr.Flush

Posts: 447



Deflection damage would also be an acceptable alternative to side armour (cause engine limitations) so that frontal armour means more than "use the same unit you use for the low armour units"
The answer for lower pen DEDICATED AT units would be to basicly batter the enemy into submission. Usf AT oriented vehicles also have HVAP (E8 aside iirc) so that can be a tool to allow for more reliability as well.

The current Jackson absolutely kills unit diversity in the usf match ups. Heavier armour doesn't bring much advantage due to a shut down mechanic in place via high pen values. Health and mobility make a more durable tank than armour does.

And I disagree that usf would NEED a 76mm, they have great tools but all have fallen by the way side as all balance points have looked at is the Jackson. I want combined arms man. 57mm is great with HAVP, Stuart could get some love, the sherman AP is above average for pen, an m10 would allow for easier adaption towards AT instead of the current all or nothing Jackson design, zooks could get a looksy...

There are optioms


Also the E8 is actually one of the best tanks out there statistically. The only thing the t34/85 has on it is health and main gun aoe. The E8 has more everything else iirc. We just never see it...



Oof. That's a nerf. If the Jackson is to stay as USF's only AT unit, I don't want to to be super expensive because then it HAS to be over powered, which is bad. If you do some how end up losing the most mobile TD in the game then you are completely dicked because replacing it is too expensive.

But I maintain, as long as all you need is a Jackson you won't ever find a workable and unique place for the sherman variants with an AT focus.


Well, since their is no logical compensation for jakson nerfs the balance team is going to keep it the way it is. Have fun complaining about it for the rest of the games life. Usf just does not have options right now. The jakson does not really overshadow anything but the wolverine.
19 Sep 2019, 17:22 PM
#37
avatar of pvtgooner

Posts: 143



Deflection damage would also be an acceptable alternative to side armour (cause engine limitations) so that frontal armour means more than "use the same unit you use for the low armour units"
The answer for lower pen DEDICATED AT units would be to basicly batter the enemy into submission. Usf AT oriented vehicles also have HVAP (E8 aside iirc) so that can be a tool to allow for more reliability as well.

The current Jackson absolutely kills unit diversity in the usf match ups. Heavier armour doesn't bring much advantage due to a shut down mechanic in place via high pen values. Health and mobility make a more durable tank than armour does.

And I disagree that usf would NEED a 76mm, they have great tools but all have fallen by the way side as all balance points have looked at is the Jackson. I want combined arms man. 57mm is great with HAVP, Stuart could get some love, the sherman AP is above average for pen, an m10 would allow for easier adaption towards AT instead of the current all or nothing Jackson design, zooks could get a looksy...

There are optioms


Also the E8 is actually one of the best tanks out there statistically. The only thing the t34/85 has on it is health and main gun aoe. The E8 has more everything else iirc. We just never see it...



Oof. That's a nerf. If the Jackson is to stay as USF's only AT unit, I don't want to to be super expensive because then it HAS to be over powered, which is bad. If you do some how end up losing the most mobile TD in the game then you are completely dicked because replacing it is too expensive.

But I maintain, as long as all you need is a Jackson you won't ever find a workable and unique place for the sherman variants with an AT focus.


Most USF tanks get penned frontally by a panther no problem. Why is it an issue when a end game tank destroyer can effectively engage and kill axis tanks? Even then, good micro is required in the USF side when fighting even higher armored tanks like Tiger II. If Jackson needs to be toned down, so too does axis armor. Both have seen power creep to this point. Normally I like your balance suggestions but Jackson being doctrinal and making USF have to use m10s to fight axis armor is laughable man.
19 Sep 2019, 17:38 PM
#38
avatar of NorthFireZ

Posts: 134

I played a lot of RIfle Company lately so let me share my thoughts on the Ez8.

It's not the tank, it's still the doctrine. Let's compare it to a Top Teir USF doctrine Recon Support.


Recon support used to have many passive effects including rifleman sight bonus in cover. THat was all removed. Now, Recon Company has consistent impact in the game with its call in units, light vehicle timing, and even end game arty strike. This allows the player to wrestle control from early to mid game. Recon units work together and has various levels of viability on its own.

Rifle company is a mess of passive effects. There is no call in infantry because it is entirely dependent on base rifles. (Not even Cav rifles in this doctrine) None of Rifle Company's abilities have direct combat value except for the white phoros rounds which doesn't even kill models so it feels like a poor man's Butterfly bombs drop. There is no synergy in the doctrine as well. Rifle defenses contridicts sprint, and RE flamers is just not the meta. On top of that, there is nothing supporting the Ez8. Imagine if the Ez8 replaced the 76mm in the Mechnized doctrine. Calvary rifles charging with Ez8s with combined arms to boost the Ez8's (relatively slow compared to other shermans) firerate. That would be a sick combination. The Ez8 in any other doctrine will shine because it's the same price as a P4 J but has extra health and tons of utility. However, it cannot carry RIfle Company by itself. Rifle doctrine has too many passive effects and nothing to really make it stand out besides the Ez8. Therefore when people are playing the doctrine the only thing that's judged is Ez8.

On a side note, as a USF player I do notice the Ez8 doesn't pen as hard as Jacksons and can't AI as well as regular Shermans. In fact I'm pretty sure I'd perfer the regular sherman and Sherman 76 in most cases because the 76 actually has better performance vs armor with its faster reload. And regular HE shell Sherman with bulldozer upgrade has better performance vs infantry with simular amounts of survivability.

Tl dr : Rifle Company still sucks and not the Ez8


19 Sep 2019, 18:01 PM
#39
avatar of CODGUY

Posts: 573



Most USF tanks get penned frontally by a panther no problem. Why is it an issue when a end game tank destroyer can effectively engage and kill axis tanks? Even then, good micro is required in the USF side when fighting even higher armored tanks like Tiger II. If Jackson needs to be toned down, so too does axis armor. Both have seen power creep to this point. Normally I like your balance suggestions but Jackson being doctrinal and making USF have to use m10s to fight axis armor is laughable man.


LOL right? They want USF to fight OKW and OST with M10s while the latter two factions continue to get nondoc Panthers, King Tigers, Brumbars. LOL Wehraboo much? LOL the answer to the E8 problem is just improve it's anti-infantry abilities a little bit where it falls between a Sherman with AP and HE rounds. Or give it WP shells as an alternate ammunition type which would me more fun to play with.
19 Sep 2019, 18:04 PM
#40
avatar of blancat

Posts: 601

delete 76mm sherman and put Ez8 in mechanized company

Add HVAP swapping to Ez8

done
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
  • Oberkommando West flag N1cko
  • Oberkommando West flag Scotch1
  • Soviets flag Frosty
  • Soviets flag Beatricks Swire
uploaded by Frost

Board Info

186 users are online: 10 members and 176 guests
Tittendachs, thedarkarmadillo, Hannibal, Lefloreses3, blvckdream, Doomlord52, Cresc, sopamanxx, Smaug, afrrs
197 posts in the last 24h
997 posts in the last week
5582 posts in the last month
Registered members: 68141
Welcome our newest member, Lefloreses3
Most online: 918 users on 27 Oct 2019, 01:03 AM