Underlining loses its emphasis when every line is underlined...
Also fuck no to volks Shreks. It was actually removed from volks because a cheap 5 man Shrek squad that can also do... Everything is bad design. It was LITERALLY removed because it's bad design. It's not coming back.
5 man rak with adjusted abilities sounds good though. I'd like to see that in testing. |
So yes if we look at the Ostheer Pz4, unless you can reach close range with your sherman where you're still losing by a close margin but have a chance to win thanks to your superior moving accuracy, 80% of fights which are occurring at mid and long range are at your disadvantage. That's the problem and reason you rarely see more than one sherman on the field and much more Jacksons.
And its become even worst vs OKW pz4.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not calling for nerf or whatsoever, just stating a fact.
Its not terribly unreasonavlble either given the price points.
Thebost p4 is slightly more expensive and also has a slight edge in tank combat. That said all the other allied mediums have advantages that manage to balance that out with a slight micro requirement. Sherman has its great moving modifier, cromwell is zippy as fuck, T34 is cheap....
Its not like the p4 wins by a huge margin. It's got an edge and that can be overcome by a better allied player. Seems reasonable. |
I think it would a cool feature for Grens to get a passive ability once upgraded with MG42.
When behind cover, the bursts are longer and shoots more frequently. Only applied to the user of the MG42. Since they are defensive unit, they should get some form of defensive passive ability. Would suit them.
I do not think a gren shooting with MG42 on the move is a good idea. Realistically, that guy would shoot up the clouds.
Ideally behind cover, should shoot more often and frequently. No accuracy bonuses.
I'd floated the idea in the past of the fren lmg imhave a bonus vs suppressed units at vet 1 to reinforce their defensive synergy with the mg42 as well as give them a bit more (albeit restricted) bite. |
=============
The Jackson used to do better dmg (200 dmg basic ~240 dmg w ammo) and 125 fuel 12 pop
The fuel went up to ~140 fu, 16 pop and now does less dmg (160 basic, 200 w ammo) I think.
The STUG has better armor and a stun unit ability.
The Firefly has better armor and a stun unit ability.
The Jackson doesn't have this ability it also doesn't have an MG
It's been hard-nerfed since it's early beginnings.
If you insist on it being further nerfed, like most of the players
who insist all allied AT assets being removed from the game, well...
Sherman 76 spam?
The do better damage, have 3x MGs and are cheaper
Also, further nerfs to allied AT assets will simply result in yet another nerf to
all axis armor like last time the allied TDs were nerfed (Panther lost armor, hulldown
was nerfed, Command Pz4 was nerfed...)
Why don't you see for yourself?
Play USF and tell us if you can achieve 20+ win streaks by using Jacksons alone.
You are forgetting the GIANT pen buff the Jackson got when it's damage was reduced. It was a reliability buff not a flat nerf.
Also Jackson is the quickest allied TD, who also has usf moving accuracy and a fast turret... Too bad it doesn't have an MG tho? |
After evaluating that well put out and elaborated argument, I'll default to no.
I'll admit, I was skeptical but after reading your post I reread the OP and am inclined to agree. |
Removing too, also broken. ^^
No, simply give the crew only a critical repair.
OK but.. Mnow hear me out... Why? It's a neat and unique feature. Axe it just cuz? |
I actually really like the new commander. It let's you pump out infantry and pay those MP savings into the supply drop. It's also pretty strong for supplying okw in team games if you chose to do so. With the new quicker pgrens I think it's going to be quite a bit stronger too. |
Strange question here: the kv series has a damage reduction so that they repair more quickly.... Is it possible to adjust received damage to the Jackson so that it simply takes longer to repair? (adjusting hard HP so that EHP remains the same) |
Moving the m10 into stock leaves the issues of: now the captain has an entire extra unit AND what do we replace the m10 with in its doctrine? |
That approach will not solve the issue that allied TD are very effective vs ALL vehicles.
Imo one should be more creative. One should test creating 2 set of rounds similar to Sherman 76 and use them to balance Super heavy tank and medium tanks separately. Unit meant to Counter Super heavies could have access to "AP rounds" with range, accuracy, penetration and ROF design vs those units , while normal round with characteristics better suited vs mediums tanks.
One could ever take a bit further increasing the target size of Super heavies (maybe decreasing of other vehicles also) so that thing become easier to balance. Finally one can create more interesting profile for vehicles and create a "flanker" clash that would benefit the most from engaging enemy units close.
Wouldn't it simply be easier to give allied TDs deflection damage and lower their pen? You get the best of both worlds the-armour makes units more durable without being trivialized but intended counters are always effective.
I'd like to see some tweaking with targer sizes as well but as a strictly minimum extra work maximum effect I think deflection damage really is the way to go forward. |