Profile of Katitof

You are entitled to your opinion but pls do not state as a fact.

Not all dual roles units are Soviets, hardly. Ostwind has a dual role of AI and AA.

And they do not, actually they can prove problematic even they are average in both roles if the like the M-42.

(disagreeing with my every post is non constrictive, try giving it rest. Have you decided if the Sherman is the most cost efficient medium yet? )

You want facts?
Here are facts:

Dual role units in the past who were incapable of performing both their roles well:

SU-76
KV-2
ZiS-3
ISU-152

Steps taken to make the secondary role viable:

SU-76 - increasing base pen(its main role was irrelevant, it used to be alright mini arty with free barrage)
KV-2 - tank mode was made viable by adjusting penetration, deflection damage, projectile being changed from low arc slow "mortar" into actual tank shell, health was buffed to justify using it IN tank mode AS actual tank.
ZiS-3 - barrage was buffed to be efficient
ISU-152 - it didn't performed at all in anti tank role, so it was split between switchable ammo and penetration was massively buffed so that secondary TD role is viable.

M-42 was problematic exclusively due to bad implementation of canister shot, not its existence all together.
It should be canister shots for X seconds for X muni, which would prevent literally all the problems past and future as
1) Gun would still be spammable, but its AI part wouldn't overperform as it wouldn't be constantly on
2) If you really did wanted to use canister often, you wouldn't be able to use other muni things and soviets are pretty muni heavy already with all their abilities costing muni and having muni cost increased in the past
3) Upcoming nerfs that'll very likely lead to units death, because why should anyone get ATG that performs 50% worse then ZiS but costs 2/3rds of ZiS? Its better to wait these 20 secs and just get ZiS or penal PTRS upgrade(which will actually help late game due to AT satchel).

And now M-42 is having canister shot soft removed from the game while getting massive 20% cost increase, because throwing multiple random nerfs is always better then pinpointing the problem and addressing it.

Oh, and while your ostwind example isn't really incorrect, its a complete stretch and grasping at straws, by that logic all axis tanks are dual role units because they can also shoot planes down, but fuck it, lets pull that ostwind example further - looksie look! Its secondary role of anti infantry unit is now getting buffed with the patch! What a coincidence! I thought you were going against my argument, while in fact, you are reinforcing it! Thank you!

Hm... why not? But only it T34 hull-MG gets a hard nerf, it is bugged and has way too muj dps.

I'll share a secret with you:
Show Spoiler

That's not a bug, that's how the game works.

I'd rather the ability to barrage be kept as an ability, but a cost was made less prohibitive.

SU-76 is a unit that doesn't work well unless you have at least 2 and when you do have 2 and want to barrage, you're not going to be able to due to muni attrition they possess.

Switchable fire modes would be overstepping on cost efficiency compared to both StuGs.

Regardless, my point was that the Jackson doesn't need some special Jackson-specific weakness added when tank destroyer counters work fine on it. Surely you don't disagree with that?

That I can stand behind as well.

There are some really exceptional units that require different approach to counter them then rest of the archetype units, but jackson isn't one of them.