- 222 and/or spotting scopes for recon
- Brummbär as a partner for AI
- better mobility in combat (where it actually matters)
- bigger gun traverse and faster tracking
- being able to shoot on the move
1 and 2 have nothing to do with the unit, like I said the ele cmdrs are better
Agreed on other 3, except maybe #4, I thought recent patch buffed tracking to be the same?
Its a trade-off though, Jagd has more armor and health, and a solid AI ability |
Not that I support the idea, but I think it would be possible to have a "stationary only" type buff. If we start by duplicate Spotting Scopes, but change it to give increased accuracy instead of sight, it would disable when moving, meaning that moving accuracy would stay the same. Then all that needs to be done is changing its name (to something like 'stationary sights'), and having it apply by default as a passive upgrade.
Good point! I didn't think about that way, i dont see why that couldnt be done |
Regarding the dominance of JTs that you claim: I can not remember having seen even ONE dominating JT since the big heavy TD nerf (mainly 300 damage per shot reduction). And that is in hundreds of 2v2s that I played around rank 50-150. Not one. Elefant and ISU dominate many 2v2s and are used frequently.
And what is it that makes the elefant so much better? That doesn't make any sense, Sander asked you the same question on the previous page with regards to your dual jackson scenario. JagD has more armor so it should only do better than elefant in your test scenario
I would argue its the commander it comes on that is so much better, not the unit. Both elefant options are great imo |
That's why I said I am talking about 2v2 btw, just to avoid 4 digit rank 4v4 players from feeling the need to educate on how good the JT is. But fine keep the JT as it is and enjoy Tiger gameplay every game.
I only agree its unusable in 1v1, idk why you think its unusable in 2v2. Dominates on a map like Rails |
You would have to combine the 2.
0.5 standard accuracy with no moving penalties is the same on the move as 1.0 accuracy with 50% moving penalties.
Right my point is that I dont think there's a problem with just buffing the standard accuracy values and keeping the moving multiplier the same, which is a net buff to both stationary and on-the-move
As opposed to OPs suggestion of just stationary, which requires what you're talking about
Is anyone going to mention how panther is only TD that has 960 health or 250+ armor, or AI DPS of gren squad?
Its also got 50 range? And costs 30+ more fuel than all the allied TDs? |
Sure, because you pay 270 fuel for a heavy TD and then sink more MP and pop cap into Raketenwerfer just to support your heavy TD from getting frontally raped by Jacksons on HVAP ![:D :D](/images/Smileys/biggrin.gif)
260 fuel and I dont think there's any tank you should be able to buy that suddenly allows you to ignore the importance of combined arms and planting mines
2 Jacksons is 30 more fuel btw, and it has no AI ability unlike the JagD. You also had no problem making the Jacksons spend extra muni on HVAP |
Katy is not effective since the racketens can retreat so quickly to avoid massive casualties.
If you position the katyusha well, it has the fastest first strike of any rocket arty in the game. So its actually very good at killing stuff like this, even if they can retreat. Just gotta move your Katy as close to minimum range as possible without risking it |
I dont think theres any way to just "buff" stationary accuracy. You can make the moving acc multiplier worse, but then that means your nerfing the unit on the move. If you buff the main accuracy values, thats a buff to both stationary AND on-the move, which is what vet bonuses do if I have this correct
I am fine with buffing the main accuracy values with vet, should be at 2 or 3 imo |
Not a fan of the fuel decrease for brace, I'd rather it be MP as it then simulates bleed via taking loses.
+1 I like this a lot |
The only thing it truly lacks is a 20-30% accuracy bonus at vet 3, that virtually every other vehicle gets.
Do you know what the reasoning is behind that? Or have an idea what it might be anyway |