Jackson over buff?

#1
1 week ago

Normally take destroyer always have some weakness such as no turrent low mobility or low health for other player to counter play.Jackson once have low health but now it have health buff cause it to lose all weakness in this unit.There is no counter play such as flanking or close distance to exploit it low health.

Don't come up and say "Jackson is tank destroyer it suppose to counter tank"
All of tank destroyer have some weakness to exploit.
Su 85 no turret allow flanking.
m10 have short range and limit turret rotation allow it to be hit from out range or flanking.
puma have low health allows enemy to close distance and exploit this weakness.

But jackson have non of that.

Panzer 4 stand no chance Vs jackson. Low accuracy on the move cause it to miss almost every-time.Jackson have great range and accrucy.It can keep snipe panzer 4 from range with out problem.But the reason that i consider jackson OP is it does not reward any counter play such as flanking or closing distance to the enemy that manage to out play it.

So i suggest to neft jackson health or range to allown it to have some weakness or have less impact on the game.

right now with the current range it can create AT cover bubble that cover one quarter of the map plus great mobility cause it to moving around very quickly make almost shutdown enemy medium tank play.

«1

Comments

  • #2
    1 week ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,117
    I do agree it was over buffed. 60 range highly mobile highly accurate and a slugger? Too much
  • #3
    1 week ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,273

    I'll share a little secret on what hardcounters jacksons, but promise not to tell anyone ok?

    (its AT infantry and ATGs)

  • #4
    1 week ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,117
    And thats fine and all, but for a single unit i think its too much, hell, swap it with the m10 and bring it back to its previous state. Want a slugger? Got it. Want something a bit stronger but squishier? Pick a doctrine. The current jackson leaves absolutely 100% no reason to EVER consider getting the new tech locked m10 anyways.
  • #5
    1 week ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,557

    On top of everything else it kept it superior vision and sight bonus with vet.

  • #6
    1 week ago
    TeekavuTeekavu Posts: 24

    @Katitof said:
    I'll share a little secret on what hardcounters jacksons, but promise not to tell anyone ok?

    (its AT infantry and ATGs)

    Oh dear let me tell you something too.
    Your tactic that you use to beat noob does not work vs high tier player.

    Do you Know why high tier player rarely upgread shreak on stompioneer or Pgren?
    because it have limited range and end up get focus fire by enemy infantry screen before they can shoot their rocket.So they end up become MP bleed squad more than AT squad.

    If you every kill jackson by raketwafer alone before.That is mean your enemy are noob that play jackson with no infantry screen or support

    Yes Raketwafer can HOLDBACK Jackson from chase down and kill your P4.But it does not fix the problem that Jackson
    can take free hit on p4 every time try to support infantry.Your raket might get a shot off while clock but in order to hit jackson which is secend line unit you have to move in the range of enemy front line unit which is mean enemy infantry will focus fire at you then you will have 2 option left which is retreat or try to get secend shot off and most likely die.And even jackson wounded you still cant chase it down because your p4 will miss 1/3 of it shot while moving.while jackson got guarantee hit every shot.

    The idea of panzer 4 is to use mobility to suppress enemy movement around the map if it can force p4 stop doing their job and hide behide raketwafer all the time it is basicly jackson win already.

    Yeah refer from above that is what TD suppose to do.But the problem is every TD have weakness to exploit in order to out play and kill it.But jackson have non of it.If you have to rely on your opponent to miss play by step on your mine or get ramdom snare then that does not call "BALANCE".

  • #7
    1 week ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 1,835
    edited January 10

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    The current jackson leaves absolutely 100% no reason to EVER consider getting the new tech locked m10 anyways.

    Well I disagree there, the m10 is 50 fuel cheaper and much better at flanking (faster max speed, faster accel, lower cooldown between shots). If there's a heavy TD on the field, and there often is in 2v2s, I want m10s waaay more than Jacksons. 3 m10s are cheaper than 2 Jacksons, that's a damn good reason if you ask me.

    I don't understand how anyone can say the Jackson has no weaknesses. What the hell is 130 armor exactly? Then there's its target size of 24; by way of example some units with a target size of 22 include: P4, Brumbaar, Cromwell, Comet both T34 variants, etc.

    24 on the other hand is the same size as the KV-1, KV-8 and Panther (the average of those 3 units armor is almost 300....). NOT complaining about any of that, but I do not see how 140 fuel isn't enough for it given how it has ZERO defensive capability besides running away. I think I've seen it ping a max range p4 shot once in my entire time in company of heroes.

  • #8
    1 week ago
    TeekavuTeekavu Posts: 24

    @SkysTheLimit said:

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    The current jackson leaves absolutely 100% no reason to EVER consider getting the new tech locked m10 anyways.

    Well I disagree there, the m10 is 50 fuel cheaper and much better at flanking (faster max speed, faster accel, lower cooldown between shots). If there's a heavy TD on the field, and there often is in 2v2s, I want m10s waaay more than Jacksons. 3 m10s are cheaper than 2 Jacksons, that's a damn good reason if you ask me.

    I don't understand how anyone can say the Jackson has no weaknesses. What the hell is 130 armor exactly? Then there's its target size of 24; by way of example some units with a target size of 22 include: P4, Brumbaar, Cromwell, Comet both T34 variants, etc.

    24 on the other hand is the same size as the KV-1, KV-8 and Panther (the average of those 3 units armor is almost 300....). NOT complaining about any of that, but I do not see how 140 fuel isn't enough for it given how it has ZERO defensive capability besides running away. I think I've seen it ping a max range p4 shot once in my entire time in company of heroes.

    most of the allies medium tank have shitty armor that most axis tank can pen reliblelly anyway too so that number not count as long as it can bouce 20mm cannon.

    What matter is it have no weakness such as slow turret rotation low mobility or low health to exploit.

    go look at similar TD that other allies have.

    su85 have no turrent
    su76 have low health
    firefly have slow turrent rotation and limited mobility
    jackson have non of that.

    Yeah you might right about a bit bigger target size but what happening is p4(main battle tank) constantly miss the shot that fire on the move to jackson even in mid range.

    And want to ask where have you been?
    high mobility and accurate shot is the best defensive capability because you can kitting enemy tank and it will never touch you because you hit enemy tank from max range.In the theory you can even kill kingtiger and take no dammage if you keep sight on.

  • #9
    1 week ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 1,835
    edited January 10

    @Teekavu said:
    high mobility and accurate shot is the best defensive capability because you can kitting enemy tank and it will never touch you because you hit enemy tank from max range. In the theory you can even kill kingtiger and take no dammage if you keep sight on.

    Yeah let's just reduce the entire gameplay of company of heroes to a big open field with no LOS blockers, no terrain, and then see what happens when nothing but numbers take over in a controlled environment. Your theory is nice, however in most cases there's tree-lines, buildings, walls, etc. to crush and navigate.

    @Teekavu said:
    most of the allies medium tank have shitty armor that most axis tank can pen reliblelly anyway too so that number not count as long as it can bouce 20mm cannon.

    Most of the allied medium tanks are not 140 fuel, and NONE of them have as large a target size as 24, which you did not address whatsoever. The Jacksons outgoing accuracy is matched by being easier to hit than any other unit like it. All the other ones with a size of 24 have 270+ armor and 800 health (at least).

  • #10
    1 week ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,117
    @SkysTheLimit none of those 300 armoured units can outrange an enemy tank by half again. Nor can they see the enemy as far as the enemy can shoot them from. Compare to a firefly for another example of a 60 range turreted TD. the jackson still has all the survival traits of being squishy AF but with the added advantage of being...not.
  • #11
    1 week ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 1,835

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    none of those 300 armoured units can outrange an enemy tank by half again. Nor can they see the enemy as far as the enemy can shoot them from. Compare to a firefly for another example of a 60 range turreted TD. the jackson still has all the survival traits of being squishy AF but with the added advantage of being...not.

    That's very true but they can also shrug of infantry AT with relative ease. I 100% understand how much a Jackson dominates tanks in tank v. tank scenario. I'm just getting tired of talking about the unit like that when literally any infantry being in the area will scare it off. A snared Jackson is usually a dead Jackson, and because of its larger target size it almost never dodges a shreck either.

    Only change I can see being too much was the reload buff. But when you're cost is increased 15 fuel and 50 manpower and your main gun damage goes down, I don't really know what people can ask to be made worse besides that.

  • #12
    1 week ago
    TeekavuTeekavu Posts: 24

    @SkysTheLimit said:

    @Teekavu said:
    high mobility and accurate shot is the best defensive capability because you can kitting enemy tank and it will never touch you because you hit enemy tank from max range. In the theory you can even kill kingtiger and take no dammage if you keep sight on.

    Yeah let's just reduce the entire gameplay of company of heroes to a big open field with no LOS blockers, no terrain, and then see what happens when nothing but numbers take over in a controlled environment. Your theory is nice, however in most cases there's tree-lines, buildings, walls, etc. to crush and navigate.

    so you expect your enemy to hide behide shot blocker all the time?
    most of the time when the tank have to do some job it have to fight in the open which bring back to range of the gun.In order to achieve TD gold which is suppress enemy tank from their job which is support infantry.Most of the time you dont have to kill it but you just need to put 1-2 shot off in order force enemy tank to pull back.So If you can force your enemy tank to hide behide shot blocker or los blocker then that TD have achieve it perpose already.

    @Teekavu said:
    most of the allies medium tank have shitty armor that most axis tank can pen reliblelly anyway too so that number not count as long as it can bouce 20mm cannon.

    Most of the allied medium tanks are not 140 fuel, and NONE of them have as large a target size as 24, which you did not address whatsoever. The Jacksons outgoing accuracy is matched by being easier to hit than any other unit like it. All the other ones with a size of 24 have 270+ armor and 800 health (at least).

    Being slightly easier to hit tread with all advantage that i said above is like achilles heel.That you have to sacrifice you self to have only 1 very small weak spot and tread with your whole body become invincible.If you dont understand i will make it short."the advantage that jackson gain overwhelming the very small disadvantage that jackson have"

    other unti with same target size have more price worst gun or have lower mobility it call "tread off"
    if you expect unit that have same target size to get same armor or health.than you better go fix your logical mind.

  • #13
    1 week ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 1,835
    > @Teekavu said:
    > if you expect unit that have same target size to get same armor or health.than you better go fix your logical mind.

    How about you fix your grammar first so I can actually understand what you're trying to say.

    No I do not expect my enemy to hide behind a shot blocker all the time. Where the eff did I say anything like that. Your expectation that a US player can take out a KT without taking any damage would require a wide open field with no Los blockers. That is my only point about that.

    If you lose your KT without dealing any damage to a Jackson then you are terrible at Coh. How the hell do they keep vision on the KT AND stay out of range of every single source of AT on the map? All you need is one cloaked raketen and the Jackson is running away...
  • #14
    1 week ago
    TeekavuTeekavu Posts: 24
    edited January 10
    > @SkysTheLimit said:
    > > @Teekavu said:
    > > if you expect unit that have same target size to get same armor or health.than you better go fix your logical mind.
    >
    > How about you fix your grammar first so I can actually understand what you're trying to say.
    >
    > No I do not expect my enemy to hide behind a shot blocker all the time. Where the eff did I say anything like that. Your expectation that a US player can take out a KT without taking any damage would require a wide open field with no Los blockers. That is my only point about that.
    >
    > If you lose your KT without dealing any damage to a Jackson then you are terrible at Coh. How the hell do they keep vision on the KT AND stay out of range of every single source of AT on the map? All you need is one cloaked raketen and the Jackson is running away...

    > @SkysTheLimit said:
    > > @Teekavu said:
    > > if you expect unit that have same target size to get same armor or health.than you better go fix your logical mind.
    >
    > How about you fix your grammar first so I can actually understand what you're trying to say.
    >
    > No I do not expect my enemy to hide behind a shot blocker all the time. Where the eff did I say anything like that. Your expectation that a US player can take out a KT without taking any damage would require a wide open field with no Los blockers. That is my only point about that.
    >
    > If you lose your KT without dealing any damage to a Jackson then you are terrible at Coh. How the hell do they keep vision on the KT AND stay out of range of every single source of AT on the map? All you need is one cloaked raketen and the Jackson is running away...

    THE reason i said about kt is to show power of range and mobility i never said that you need to kill it inorder to win.
    What you have to do is bring enemy down to half health to force retreat.

    I Never lose king like that But i told you that it can happen.

    Did you read that i write about TD perpose?

    Go read it again

    (removed)
  • #15
    1 week ago
    TeekavuTeekavu Posts: 24
    edited January 10
    (removed)
  • #16
    1 week ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 1,835
    edited January 10

    @Teekavu said:
    THE reason i said about kt is to show power of range and mobility i never said that you need to kill it inorder to win.
    What you have to do is bring enemy down to half health to force retreat.

    And all you need is 1 cloaked raketen to do the exact same thing to a Jackson... The jackson can't fight back to the rak, and it has to maintain distance from the KT and that rak unit at the same time (while maintaining vision on the KT with something else) if it wants to "fight a KT without taking any damage".

    270mp counters 400mp and 140 fu, but its unfair that the 400mp and 140 fu can counter a 720mp and 280 fu unit which is good against literally every other class of unit except the type the Jackson happens to be?

    @Teekavu said:
    I Never lose king like that But i told you that it can happen.

    .....

  • #17
    1 week ago
    TeekavuTeekavu Posts: 24
    edited January 10
    Raket is exist to hold back any armor that move in to it's range.

    I never said some thing like "jackson chase down my p4 and kill it help"

    What i said is jackson have no weakness to expoilt.So it is too effective and hard to kill.

    Before you say anything you have to understand the idea of tank frist.

    Idea of tank is to use mobility supress enemy infantry around the map.

    From that idea you will know that if we follow the idea of vehicle mobility then you cant follow you tank with raket every where they go.

    And even you manage to do that your clock raket will stay behide you tank which mean jackson can hit your tank out of range of your raket.

    Yes if jackson manage to chase your tank then your raket then your raket might have a chance to get a shot off.
    (removed)
  • #18
    1 week ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,557

    Looking simply at target size does not say much...

    A PzIV firing at M36 at max range (40) chance to hit 60%, on the move 30%.

    A M36 firing on PzIv at max range (60) chance to hit 77%, on the move 58%.

  • #19
    1 week ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 1,835
    edited January 10

    @Vipper said:
    Looking simply at target size does not say much...

    A PzIV firing at M36 at max range (40) chance to hit 60%, on the move 30%.

    A M36 firing on PzIv at max range (60) chance to hit 77%, on the move 58%.

    For the love of God can we stop analyzing the Jackson in 1v1 tank scenarios? What does looking at target sizes do when we compare the US AT gun trying to hit a P4 to the Pak40 trying to hit a Jackson? Or bazookas vs p4 and shrecks vs Jackson?

    My entire point is that if you actually use the dedicated counters that are designed to fight the Jackson (infantry AT and AT guns) both will perform better against it than they will against literally any other type of tank. It has low armor, and its easier to hit than all other medium class vehicles......

  • #20
    1 week ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,557
    edited January 10

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    For the love of God can we stop analyzing the Jackson in 1v1 tank scenarios? What does looking at target sizes do when we compare the US AT gun trying to hit a P4 to the Pak40 trying to hit a Jackson? Or bazookas vs p4 and shrecks vs Jackson?

    My entire point is that if you actually use the dedicated counters that are designed to fight the Jackson (infantry AT and AT guns) both will perform better against it than they will against literally any other type of tank. It has low armor, and its easier to hit than all other medium class vehicles......

    I did not analyze anything in a 1vs1 scenario, simply explain what the effect of that target size is.

    M-36 has the highest mobility of 60 range TD, has a turret, one of the highest moving modifier, a high penetration and 360 sight radius bonus.

    Its target size being 9% bigger than a PzIV hardly put it in serious disadvantage.

    Panther has target size of 24 also and the Firefly of 23.

  • #21
    1 week ago
    KatitofKatitof Posts: 6,273

    @Vipper said:

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    For the love of God can we stop analyzing the Jackson in 1v1 tank scenarios? What does looking at target sizes do when we compare the US AT gun trying to hit a P4 to the Pak40 trying to hit a Jackson? Or bazookas vs p4 and shrecks vs Jackson?

    My entire point is that if you actually use the dedicated counters that are designed to fight the Jackson (infantry AT and AT guns) both will perform better against it than they will against literally any other type of tank. It has low armor, and its easier to hit than all other medium class vehicles......

    I did not analyze anything in a 1vs1 scenario, simply explain what the effect of that target size is.

    M-36 has the highest mobility of 60 range TD, has a turret, one of the highest moving modifier, a high penetration and 360 sight radius bonus.

    Its target size being 9% bigger than a PzIV hardly put it in serious disadvantage.

    Panther has target size of 24 also and the Firefly of 23.

    You're still looking only at 1v1 scenario, because you're still completely ignoring zook and ATG differences, both performing much worse to axis counterparts and since USF needs to fight heavier armor then they themselves got, that gap needs to be closed somewhere.

  • #22
    1 week ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,557
    edited January 10

    Contrary to what some people say I am not looking at any scenario. The point I made is that a target of 24 as hardly an serious disadvantage for the M36.

    In addition the AT of allies is not "much worse" than that of axis. Actually the majority of axis AT got nerfed in the last patch while certain allied AT asset got buffed.

  • #23
    1 week ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 1,835
    edited January 10
    @Vipper Comparing the chance of a Jackson to hit a p4 vs. a p4 to hit a Jackson is a 1v1 scenario. I brought up target sizes to point out that every single type of AT has a higher chance to hit it than other 640hp tanks and even some 800s. That is not insignificant by any means....

    It's not just the target size but the armor and size together. It never deflects anything AND things rarely miss it.

    I'm well aware of the Panthers target size, it is a heavy armored tank. The Jackson is the only medium at 24.
  • #24
    1 week ago
    XlossXloss Posts: 62
    edited January 11

    Well use smoke during engagement and rush P4 or Panther. USF dont have mines so don't be afraid to rush in.
    The only thing Im frustrated vs Allies is soviet sniper spam. It does not have any counter at all at the first min to 15min till you get Pzr Werfer. Still at the sound they scram to base

  • #25
    1 week ago
    ReichsgardeReichsgar… Bad Tolz, Bayern, GermanyPosts: 96

    I fully agree with the OP's concern here and this does call for a revision to the Panther for both WM and OKW.

    The only way to ensure that the Panther can reliably compete against the Jackson is to give it 55 range at Vet 0 and 60 range at Vet 2.

    Alternatively, the Panther should have a faster reload speed so that it can close in the distance with the Jackson.

  • #26
    1 week ago
    VipperVipper Posts: 3,557
    edited January 11

    @SkysTheLimit said:
    @Vipper Comparing the chance of a Jackson to hit a p4 vs. a p4 to hit a Jackson is a 1v1 scenario.

    It is not. It is simply explaining target size and accuracy.

    I brought up target sizes to point out that every single type of AT has a higher chance to hit it than other 640hp tanks and even some 800s. That is not insignificant by any means....

    A tank has a range 40 so I order to fire need to go to at least that range in which case those AT weapon you mention will be firing at it with better accuracy.

    M-36 can fire from range 60 and it is extremely mobile which means which mean that those AT weapon will be firing at it with less accuracy and if it get hit it can simply move out of range.

    It's not just the target size but the armor and size together. It never deflects anything AND things rarely miss it.

    The m10 and SU-76 have even less armor. While the armor of SU-85, FF, Stug hardly make any difference against ATGs.

    The chance of pak scoring a "natural" hit and penetrating a M-36 at max range 96%, while a M4A3 92%. The difference goes down at closer range and become the same at around range 50. And that is without counting collision hits.

    The target of 24 is not insignificant but it no major draw back either.

    I'm well aware of the Panthers target size, it is a heavy armored tank. The Jackson is the only medium at 24.

    And the M36 has a 78% chance to penetrate the frontal/side armor from range 60 (HVAP), while most weapon will penetrate the side rear.

    The M-36 is more cost efficient TD than Panther

    I also did mention the firefly with target size of 23, and armor slightly better than M-36 while being far less mobile.

  • #27
    1 week ago
    SkysTheLimitSkysTheLi… At TenagraPosts: 1,835
    edited January 11

    @Vipper said:
    The M-36 is more cost efficient TD than Panther

    How can you compare their cost efficiency? Part of the Panther's role is drawing attention and being a frontline tank, something the Jackson takes no part in at all. The panther is a balance of offense and defense, the Jackson's offense IS its defense, and using its range advantage against the panther requires another unit to spot it.

    The jackson is 35 fuel less than the panther, and cannot attack infantry whatsoever while also being 100% vulnerable to any and all attacks from them besides small arms. Meanwhile the panther not only can upgrade to MG for AA and AI, it is only vulnerable to infantry AT if on its rear, OR to be snared like anyone else.

    I agree that the Jackson is more efficient at destroying tanks. Too bad the panthers job isn't to just destroy tanks...

  • #28
    1 week ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 723
    edited January 11

    Jackson is now the least vulnerable TD in the game. It is the easiest TD to kite with now with all the perks it has. The thing that puts it over the top is its 60 range self spot. The Jackson should have another unit to spot for it. Heavy TDs were supposed to be better against heavies and worse vs mediums however the Jackson doesn't fear any medium armor due to always being able to alpha strike most armor it and being slightly faster than all axis mediums. Even if you catch the Jackson in an ambush with a p4, you will no longer guarantee that you can finish it off due the more health and higher RoF. A 200 dmg Jackson still needs 4 shots to kill p4. So changing the dmg to 160 does nothing for mediums. Before due to the low health of the Jackson, there was some counterplay by ambushing it, but now that counterplay is largely gone since the Jackson is not scared of mediums at all anymore. The Jackson is a better firefly now. The firefly has selfspot due to being slower. SUs have self spot at a speed/muni/vet cost. JP4 also has a vet cost. Only Jackson gets it for free. The best solution to change Jackson is to remove self spot. Or at least it should only be available at vet2/3. Right now USF players are using the Jackson like a panther since it has self spot it can operate alone and the 60 range and great speed and extra health allow it to take minimal return fire.

    TDs should NEVER operate alone yet the buffs allow USF players to do exactly that.

  • #29
    1 week ago
    1ncendiary_Rounds1ncendiar… Posts: 723
    edited January 11

    @SkysTheLimit said:

    @thedarkarmadillo said:
    none of those 300 armoured units can outrange an enemy tank by half again. Nor can they see the enemy as far as the enemy can shoot them from. Compare to a firefly for another example of a 60 range turreted TD. the jackson still has all the survival traits of being squishy AF but with the added advantage of being...not.

    That's very true but they can also shrug of infantry AT with relative ease. I 100% understand how much a Jackson dominates tanks in tank v. tank scenario. I'm just getting tired of talking about the unit like that when literally any infantry being in the area will scare it off. A snared Jackson is usually a dead Jackson, and because of its larger target size it almost never dodges a shreck either.

    When the Jackson has 60 range self spot, allowing it to be fausted is your problem. If your trying to respond to some Axis armor threat, you need to take into consideration the path your Jackson takes, same as any other TD in the game. The Jackson especially has an easy time spotting and maneuvering so if you get ambushed on the way to destination, either the Axis player made a great read/prediction of the situation or USF player was taking too big a risk on sending the Jackson there without infantry screen.

  • #30
    1 week ago

    @Vipper said:
    Looking simply at target size does not say much...

    A PzIV firing at M36 at max range (40) chance to hit 60%, on the move 30%.

    A M36 firing on PzIv at max range (60) chance to hit 77%, on the move 58%.

    Not sure why people are disliking the objective statements you're making here. Jacksons operate on their own all the time now (due to hp buff) so comparing these tank duels in a vacuum is completely justified.

  • #31
    1 week ago
    thedarkarmadillothedarkar… Posts: 5,117
    I think my problem with it is that it still has all the tools that it needed to keep it alive when it was squishy without the same level of squishy. Its a 60 ranged speedster that is better off in chase than any other AT unit in the game. Its got too much going for it especially when compared to its counterparts of similar cost. Its only drawbacks are that its expensive and cant fight infantry, but that can be said about all allied TDs, but you wont be chasing or running with an su85, nor a firefly. You want to see the enemy before they see you you need spotters or focus sight (which itself has drawbacks) its too much for a single unit, especially one with riflemen as its support.
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

  • © SEGA. SEGA, the SEGA logo, Relic Entertainment, the Relic Entertainment logo, Company of Heroes and the Company of Heroes logo are either trademarks or registered trademarks of SEGA Holdings Co., Ltd. or its affiliates. All rights reserved. SEGA is registered in the US Patent and Trademark Office. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.