Inf Doctrine 76mm Jumbo - Increase Limit to 2

[Consti255]

We did it back a few patches.

Wehraboos = NeRf ChUrChiLL Mk VII

[MEFISTO]

Why is it such a problem that the US receive a competent sorta heavy tank?
The german docs all have some armor beasts with firepower, nowadays even SE can use the Elephant.
And it's not like the Germans would even struggle to penetrate the Jumbo.. wink wink Panzerfaust. So a Jumbo being able to trade ammo for a single (isn't it just ONE shot?) penetrating hit. Nothing wrong with a little danger to german assets.

You are wrong about all axis have a heavy tank, BK panther is a joke with low HP that can’t stand one 90mm shot so you only use it to fight Sherman’s or Churchill “if you are lucky to penetrate them” lol

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

It is an exaggeration Mefisto. 90mm is like 5% of the allied army composition in the field, against everything else Panthers are still amazing. Especially given how cheap they are.

[Warhawks97]

Why is it such a problem that the US receive a competent sorta heavy tank?
The german docs all have some armor beasts with firepower, nowadays even SE can use the Elephant.
And it's not like the Germans would even struggle to penetrate the Jumbo.. wink wink Panzerfaust. So a Jumbo being able to trade ammo for a single (isn't it just ONE shot?) penetrating hit. Nothing wrong with a little danger to german assets.

1. Factions are designed differently and they started to mirror each other more and more (EG CW mortar emplacments got delayed, normal inf mortar added, PE mortar HT delayed and also normal mortar got added recently. Just to name one example). I would love to see that each faction would remain a differently. For allies and US in particular this means you get a bunch of good multirole medium tanks in combination with lower cost and supply yard to reduce upkeep. CW has either its big armor tanks or big gun tanks while axis have their big tanks with big cannons. The Jumbo was never supposed to become a pseudo pershing or pseudo "Heavy armor Heavy ass gun Tank". It should be a extremley well armored tank but at the downside only have average medicore firepower effective against medium tanks and just partly effective against heavies.

As for its armor i would rather make it a bit more effective against 88 guns and Panther guns to further henance its role as breakthrough tank. Its armor was designed to do exactly this and did so pretty well. It shouldnt have the option of an guranteed frontal pen shot vs Panthers and Tigers.


On the other hand Jacksons should be cheaper what players have been asking for in order to provide some anti tank options at proper cost.

[Diablo]

1. Factions are designed differently and they started to mirror each other more and more (EG CW mortar emplacments got delayed, normal inf mortar added, PE mortar HT delayed and also normal mortar got added recently. Just to name one example).

Well I guess the community leans more towards Age of Empires than they do Starcraft..

For allies and US in particular this means you get a bunch of good multirole medium tanks in combination with lower cost and supply yard to reduce upkeep. CW has either its big armor tanks or big gun tanks while axis have their big tanks with big cannons.

The quantity vs quality argument never works in my opinion, since the CoH engine really punishes formations and moving in groups.

[Warhawks97]

For allies and US in particular this means you get a bunch of good multirole medium tanks in combination with lower cost and supply yard to reduce upkeep. CW has either its big armor tanks or big gun tanks while axis have their big tanks with big cannons.

The quantity vs quality argument never works in my opinion, since the CoH engine really punishes formations and moving in groups.

What have numbers to do with moving in groups? Fielding a larger, more mobile army with good multirole units that can push on one side while defending another area at once. I didnt mention blobbing your units. And i am aware that quantity vs quality has its limits. We saw that from the early days of BK mod when quantity just fed quality. But thats not the point

What i am saying is that the tanks or how each faction uses its tanks dont have to mirror each other. Just because the Jumbo is a heavy it doesnt need hard hitting anti tank capabilties just because its a heavy or just because Germans have stuff like Panther or Tigers. For the Same reason we dont have churchills equiped with heavy HEAT rounds. Its not their role.

And the argument: "We gave them HEAT rounds so that players use them more" is just stupid. Thats not a reason to simply turn a heavy breakthrough tank into a multirole heavy Tank with an ability to penetrate a Panther or Tiger under gurantee. Not even Comets and Fireflies have that kind of capabilties whos main task is to exactly take on such tanks.


Edit: Just took a closer look and i noticed neither the Jumbo nor M10 are labled "HEAT rounds" but APHE which stands for "Armor Piercing High Explosive". Thats basically what all standard AP shots are. Let it be Pzgr. 39 which contained 18 gram of HE or the US M62. Tgeir complete designation would actually be APCBC-HE-T (Armor Piercing Capped Balistic Capped High Explosve Tracer).

So we can now somehow fire a magic standard M62 shell with the power to penetrate a Panther once in a time. On top of that, if it would be a modifier M62 shot with even more HE filled in it, it would not increase the penetration and instead the damage dealed after the penetration.


Whats more frustrating is the fact that the 76 Jumbo lost its HVAP round. That sucks hard. I prefer to fire a number of HVAP rounds rather than a single shot that pens for sure but doesnt kill the enemie. Esspecially since HVAP is doing so well vs Panzer IV´s, Jagpanzer/Hetzers and being decently OK vs Tigers.

[MEFISTO]

It is an exaggeration Mefisto. 90mm is like 5% of the allied army composition in the field, against everything else Panthers are still amazing. Especially given how cheap they are.

You also forget the fact that axis have heavy tanks BUT allies have in 2 doctrines air strikes very effective vs any Tank, I had a game as RAF yesterday, destroy 2 tigers and a Panther G with just one click (of course avoiding the AA and waiting for the right moment to use the airstrike)

[Sukin-kot (SVT)]

It’s enough to build 2 AA pieces in order to keep the sky clear. Wirbelwind or Ostwind shoot the planes down almost at the same second they enter the map.

As for “I destroyed 2 Tigers and Panther G” well, lucky you. Apparently there was no AA and your enemies were noob enough to align all 3 tanks without noticing the rocket run coming.

Following the same logic I can provide my own example - this week I had a game where my Panther Ace killed 50 men and 14 vehicles scoring vet.4. Allies tried to attack it with Achilles and Comets, but my Panther was one shooting them all day long. Panther = OP.

[MEFISTO]

It’s enough to build 2 AA pieces in order to keep the sky clear. Wirbelwind or Ostwind shoot the planes down almost at the same second they enter the map.

As for “I destroyed 2 Tigers and Panther G” well, lucky you. Apparently there was no AA and your enemies were noob enough to align all 3 tanks without noticing the rocket run coming.

Following the same logic I can provide my own example - this week I had a game where my Panther Ace killed 50 men and 14 vehicles scoring vet.4. Allies tried to attack it with Achilles and Comets, but my Panther was one shooting them all day long. Panther = OP.

I did not kill all those tigers and panther just with 1 airstrike it was one for each one, also most powerful AA have 60 range( I think) if you are a bit of smart you can avoid them or at least wait for the right moment at the right spot to one click a heavy tank, about your panther I am 100% sure you did not face any 90mm gun if you would upload the replay I will love to check your OP panther and by the way my opponent in that game were not the best but still all of them friends and I respect that, all of them good players, greetings.

[Warhawks97]

Omg realism again...you said that HEAT is bullshit because the guns in reality didn't have them, but it was added as a "high penetration shot with shorter range". For all I care we can rename the original AP ability to "M62 ACP" and the current HEAT to HVAP because it will still be "high penetration, short range shot". But you're making a fuss here literally over a line of text.

Coming back to this.

I tried to get some informations about this APHE shot the M10 or the 3 inch gun had. I found one source only mentioning it. The 188 mm penetration being achieved was only possible at 100 meters, meaning literally point blank range. At 1000 meters it dropped to 157 mm. To compare that, the HVAP had 177 mm at 100 meters at 30 degree angle vs RHA armor and 133 at 1000 meters.

As for the M1, M1A1 and M1A2 guns mounted on shermans and hellcats i couldnt find anything suggesting they had an APHE round available. However their HVAP rounds had 192 mm of pen anyways at 100 meters and still 137 at 1000 Meters at 30 degree angle.


So this ability is one of these magic abilties for a weapon that never had this sort of ammo. Its like adding random weapons that never actually existed. That means that i would have simply sticked with the HVAP rounds and treated the sherman just as we treat any other sherman.

[MarKr]

Its like adding random weapons that never actually existed.

Cool, I think some dude was making a CoH1 conversion into some sort of Star Wars mod...I think he would share his weapon models with us...who should get the Stormtrooper blaster carbines? You were the one often saying tha Kar98s are like laser weapons so maybe we could replace Kar98s with them?

On a related note: I tried to get some more info about building processes and it seems that structures built from reinforced concrete usually took at least weeks to build but in the game Axis Pioneers have them finished within mere seconds. They must be using some kind of magic shovels because they are just swinging those and the building magically errects itself without adding any actual material into it. The buildings are also finished fully equipped with things to built tanks within a few seconds...that's some Voldemort level of magic right there.

TL;DR version: gameplay > realism

[Warhawks97]

Its like adding random weapons that never actually existed.

Cool, I think some dude was making a CoH1 conversion into some sort of Star Wars mod...I think he would share his weapon models with us...who should get the Stormtrooper blaster carbines? You were the one often saying tha Kar98s are like laser weapons so maybe we could replace Kar98s with them?

On a related note: I tried to get some more info about building processes and it seems that structures built from reinforced concrete usually took at least weeks to build but in the game Axis Pioneers have them finished within mere seconds. They must be using some kind of magic shovels because they are just swinging those and the building magically errects itself without adding any actual material into it. The buildings are also finished fully equipped with things to built tanks within a few seconds...that's some Voldemort level of magic right there.

TL;DR version: gameplay > realism

Dude, you are comparing a visiual effect with an cruical ability for a weapon that never existed.

It doesnt fit from a realistic point of view but also not from a gameplay perspective. your only argument is "Axis have lots of heavy armored Tanks with StRonK guns, so allies can have one as well". Funny enough you are the guy often saying "just because axis/allis have something, the other side doesnt need it as well". And now you are coming arround using this as an excuse to add an ability randomly to a unit that never had such capabilties nor was the role of this tank to do this in reality or in game.


There is no place for such an ability for such a tank. If the player wants something vs tanks, well they should use the Jackson. Thats the reason this Jackson exists in this doc. If he needs armor, well he will sacrafice firepower for more armor. The Jumbo shouldnt be in this doctrine in the first place. But adding randomly a capability this tank was never meant to fill is just over the Top.

[Consti255]

The whole game has so much flaws in terms of realism alone by its design. Even the discussion with Jagdpanther about weapon loadouts.

Kwok said it damn on spot.
"I could understand if people blaming stuff like this killing immersion. For example making the Tiger armor weaker as it used to be, sort of Panzer IV armor. But saying a round with a wrong name would kill immersion isnt a valid point where everyone freaks out about. You can simply rename to one used round and thats it."

Seriously, Tank combat ranges in this game are so flawed, that it would be dumb saying "this M62 round wouldve never been bounce on that range!!!!" for example. Just give that AP shot a proper name from a round which was actually used and everything is fine.
I guess Hawks in particular is just a guy who knows pretty much anything form guns,tanks,ammo types and weapons used. So instead of saying this thing was never used on that particular gun, just give the Devs some feedback which round name would be the most fitting.

Guys, its a game and it it does its best to be fun to play while beeing sort of accuarate.

[MEFISTO]

Why is it such a problem that the US receive a competent sorta heavy tank?
The german docs all have some armor beasts with firepower, nowadays even SE can use the Elephant.
And it's not like the Germans would even struggle to penetrate the Jumbo.. wink wink Panzerfaust. So a Jumbo being able to trade ammo for a single (isn't it just ONE shot?) penetrating hit. Nothing wrong with a little danger to german assets.

You can’t compare because axis have “armo beast” and allies doesn’t, allies have enough air support to one click any “armor beast”
I am not against HVAP, I like the idea, about 2 jumbos I am not sure.

[MarKr]

Dude, you are comparing a visiual effect with an cruical ability for a weapon that never existed.

Dude, a "visual effect" is a texture, tracer or an explosion animation, not construction speed of something...I'm pretty sure that if in reality a sturdy bunker could be built in 30 seconds it would have pretty crucial effect on the entire war. "Realism where it plays into my cards", right?

your only argument is "Axis have lots of heavy armored Tanks with StRonK guns, so allies can have one as well". Funny enough you are the guy often saying "just because axis/allis have something, the other side doesnt need it as well". And now you are coming arround using this as an excuse to add an ability randomly to a unit that never had such capabilties nor was the role of this tank to do this in reality or in game.

That's not what this has been about. Go through the topics that deal with this Jumbo/Jackson and you'll see (or should see) this "summary" doesn't fit.

There is no place for such an ability for such a tank.

I think the place is called "UI slot 9".

If the player wants something vs tanks, well they should use the Jackson. Thats the reason this Jackson exists in this doc. If he needs armor, well he will sacrafice firepower for more armor.

Yes, we had it set up this way and what was the outcome? Everyone used the Jackson because "the Jumbo cannot kill anything". The armor isn't worth much if its gun bounces off 10x in a row, while the target penetrates you with 2nd or 3rd shot. The "sci-fi magic shot" has shorter range than the Jackson, it has shorter range than Axis heavy tanks so trying to drive to the target to use the ability poses a significant risk so the range is still a tradeoff for the shot (+ you need to pay ammo for every shot).

The Jumbo shouldnt be in this doctrine in the first place.

Aaaand here we arrive to the real reason why you are willing to ignore other unrealistic things but are so much against this one - you want the Jumbo moved to Armor doc from the start...sooo...who's looking for excuses to get what they want?

[Warhawks97]

Dude, you are comparing a visiual effect with an cruical ability for a weapon that never existed.

Dude, a "visual effect" is a texture, tracer or an explosion animation, not construction speed of something...I'm pretty sure that if in reality a sturdy bunker could be built in 30 seconds it would have pretty crucial effect on the entire war. "Realism where it plays into my cards", right?

I wouldnt mind playing completely without Bunkers. In vcoh they were essentially just buildings with stuff inside. A Defensive position if you like it.
Idk why old devs decided to keep the Bunker stuff in the game... but nvm here.

That's not what this has been about. Go through the topics that deal with this Jumbo/Jackson and you'll see (or should see) this "summary" doesn't fit.

Right, the question was to add 2x Jumbo since it got HEAT rounds. And the only arguments why it got this APHE in the first place were "nobody uses Jackson and only Jumbos". Maybe at this point you should have realized that a Jumbo has no place in an armor doc. But you want to hammer it into it. I wonder if you work in a restaurant and someone says he doesnt want a certain thing to be part of his menu (let it be tomatos in the salad), what you gonna do? Strap him on his chair while forcing him to eat the Tomato while also trying to make the Tomato taste like a Paprika?

What kind of mental issues do you guys have that you try to keep forcing stuff into something nobody has aked for? And if you realize nobody uses this stuff, you come out with a "carrot and stick" tactics.

Nobody asked for 76 Jumbo to be in inf doc: yet here it is.
Nobody asked for APHE on Jumbo in inf doc or better anti tank power for this jumbo. No Topic was made, absolutely nothing: Still you add it.

People asked to have 76 Jumbo back in armor doc: You didnt do that
People asked for Jackson getting cheaper in inf doc: You didnt do that.
People asked for better accuracy on Jackson: It too a long way for you to somewhat increase it after long debates of why as you didnt want to believe that accuracy is a vital part of unit effectivness and damage output.

I think the place is called "UI slot 9".

Dont act as if you dont know what i mean.

Lets try it this way: The unit doesnt fit the doctrine theme. People have been asking to improve the Long Tom to be actually usefull to overcome defenses. Nothing changed to this day.
Recently people asked for the normal arty strike to be a bit better. I guess you didnt even think about it.

Aaaand here we arrive to the real reason why you are willing to ignore other unrealistic things but are so much against this one - you want the Jumbo moved to Armor doc from the start...sooo...who's looking for excuses to get what they want?

This doc has cheap inf, elite inf, off map arty, on map arty, infiltrating stuff. If the TD would get actually usefull, there wouldnt be anything left this doctrine lacks. This Jumbo APHE move looks more like "oh, lets repeat the same move with did with Elephant in SE doc."


Every doctrine except RAF and AB has some sort of heavy armored beast right now. At the end we will see only heavy armor beating the shit out of each other instead of keeping them to certain docs only. So it doesnt matter actually what doc you play against, all you know is that you have to rush heavy anti tank guns because you never know, every enemie can just jump out of the bushes with a heavy tank and you sit there with released pants.

Next time when someone is asking me in the early game what doctrine to pick i will just say: "One with a heavy armor tank" which translates into "i dont care". And if someone is asking me what to expect and what he should get i will say: "Heavy armor tanks with Heavy Guns to beat Heavy armored tanks".

I can just imagine how funny this is going to be. In the past i remember that i have said to the british players to get 17 pdr at some point to counter german tanks because they all had heavy armored tanks. Today i will tell my PE and Def doc buddies to rush Heavy Panther gun TD´s and heavy 88´s to counter allied heavy tanks which will come for sure at some point. Its really going to make the game so much more interesting when everybody rushes heavy armor/Anti heavy armor.

[MEFISTO]

I keep saying, improve Jackson accuracy, that will be enough.
Plus no body ask for a 76mm Jumbo in infantry doctrine (nobody uses it). Move the jumbo to armor doctrine and make 76mm jumbo like an upgrade to the 75mm cannon with a 20fuel cost so the 76mm jumbo will cost you 100fuel.
No body ask for a jumbo 76mm in infantry doctrine the same way nobody ask for an expensive Elephant in SE.
Jackson feed way better in infantry doctrine, powerful cannon and decent armor.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Personally i don't mind if 76 jumbo stays in inf doc, or moved to Armor doc or even AB doc.. i think it can fit in any of the 3 docs to be honest...Tho, either way; it should cost a 100 fuel and limit of 2 no matter where it is.

That being said.. jackson accuracy was already improved, thought i mentioned this before, so not sure why people keep bringing it up.

Also, i like Elefant in SE doc.

Last but not least, in my opinion... HEAT for 76 jumbo was a good idea.

[MEFISTO]

Personally i don't mind if 76 jumbo stays in inf doc, or moved to Armor doc or even AB doc.. i think it can fit in any of the 3 docs to be honest...Tho, either way; it should cost a 100 fuel and limit of 2 no matter where it is.

That being said.. jackson accuracy was already improved, thought i mentioned this before, so not sure why people keep bringing it up.

Also, i like Elefant in SE doc.

Last but not least, in my opinion... HEAT for 76 jumbo was a good idea.

Why I don’t like Elephant in SE? Simple, Elephant is an expensive unit and when you base a doctrine AT capability in only one expensive unit something is not right, this Elephant is easy to take down or immobilize ( one click airstrike or new lapa) Nashorn at the other hand is cheaper so you can make more if the enemies take one down.
At the other hand Defensive doctrine have a lot AT capability to offer and no just an expensive elephant, L70 TH, flack 88, L70 bunkers etc.. so if you expensive elephant got destroyed you still can survive, SE can’t afford another elephant to replace the one that got destroyed.

[MarKr]

I wouldnt mind playing completely without Bunkers. In vcoh they were essentially just buildings with stuff inside. A Defensive position if you like it.
Idk why old devs decided to keep the Bunker stuff in the game... but nvm here.

And what about WM and PE base buildings? Those are definitely made of concrete, hell, PE buildings are literal bunkers...What magic does Axis use to build these in mere seconds? The game text shouldn't say "Build Barracks" but "Summon magical infantry-spawning fingy"

Right, the question was to add 2x Jumbo since it got HEAT rounds. And the only arguments why it got this APHE in the first place were "nobody uses Jackson and only Jumbos". Maybe at this point you should have realized that a Jumbo has no place in an armor doc.

Wrong again. But I'm not gonna waste my time correcting your side of the story.

I wonder if you work in a restaurant and someone says he doesnt want a certain thing to be part of his menu (let it be tomatos in the salad), what you gonna do? Strap him on his chair while forcing him to eat the Tomato while also trying to make the Tomato taste like a Paprika?

No, if I worked in a restaurant, then my job would be to give to the paying customer whatever is on the menu and small changes to the offered dishes would be obviously allowed. You cannot risk forcing a tomato to a person who doesn't eat them...what if they are allergic, they would sue your ass if you forced them to eat it.

What kind of mental issues do you guys have that you try to keep forcing stuff into something nobody has aked for? And if you realize nobody uses this stuff, you come out with a "carrot and stick" tactics.

What kind of mental issues do you have that you keep pushing for a change that nobody (except for you and Mefisto) has a problem with? And when you realize that nobody cares if Jumbo having HEAT isn't historically accurate and some people even like it, you just double down on the push against it and bring in more "realism" arguments, supported by pseudo gameplay arguments.

Nobody asked for 76 Jumbo to be in inf doc: yet here it is.
Nobody asked for APHE on Jumbo in inf doc or better anti tank power for this jumbo. No Topic was made, absolutely nothing: Still you add it.

Yes, because the Jumbo/Jackson choice was added during the 5.2.0 reworks. We didn't want Armor doctrine to end up in "Jumbos+Pershing only" state, which it would have if the doc had 75mm, 76 mm Jumbo at the same time. We gave 75mm Jumbo to Armor doc because it lacks durable infantry to fight enemy elite infantry, and the Jumbo with HE is there also useful to clear AT guns which the doctrine will have to face. The Armor doc already has 76mm guns mounted on 2 types of Shermans and later the 90mm guns for fighting tanks so another 76mm gun was considered not very useful. At this point (since both types of Jumbos in Armor doc was and still is a definite NO), we could either leave the 76 Jumbo out of the game or add it somewhere. AB has planes to destroy tanks, while Infantry doc didn't have shit, apart from arty which didn't ensure that a tank would be destroyed, unless it is hit directly with the first shot, which you cannot count on. We didn't want to turn Longtom into rapid-shooting heavy arty similar to the 280mm rocket strike because people complained (I think it was you, even) that it is like "orbital strike". Therefore Infantry doc got the Jackson and 76mm Jumbo - they are support units to help fight tanks and the choice there was intended to be "weaker armor and strong gun (Jackson)" or "strong armor and weaker gun (Jumbo)". People almost always used the Jackson because they felt that chosing Jumbo is not worth it because the gun cannot counter heavy tanks but the german heavy tanks will sooner or later chew through the armor. So it's NOT that people didn't use because it "didn't fit" or whatever. Another reason might be that some people thought (and based on Mefisto's comment, I think some still think so) that the Jackson still has its old armor which can easily bounce off L48 guns and sometimes even Tiger shots. Therefore they thought the difference in armor between the two units was minimal but difference in firepower was substantial. Anyway, we didn't want the choice between the units to be a "Jackson every time" and as I said both Jumbos in Armor doc is a no-go, the choice was either to remove the Jumbo from the game, or to make it more appealing. And since people didn't have problem with its armor but with its capacity to fight heavier units, one of the options was to give to the tank some ability to deal with heavies, thus the HEAT. Yes, I thought the weapons of Jumbo and Wolverine were pretty much the same and so they could use similar ammo types and because Wolverine has HEAT, I thought that this could be a way. I didn't do my research to find out if the 76mm guns actually had HEAT shots and it turns out they didn't - not that it matters for the gameplay, just saying. You started going all nuclear about this because it was not historically accurate and what not. I said that the point was to give to the Jumbo a SHORT RANGE shot with high penetration and it can be renamed to HVAP or M93 or whatever which had quite good penetration at SHORTER RANGES, but that wasn't enough for you because you simply want the Jumbo in Armor doc.

And here it is...I said I wouldn't waste my time correcting your story and I did anyway.

People asked to have 76 Jumbo back in armor doc: You didnt do that

Correction: you and maybe Mefisto asked for it (maybe Sukin? don't remember, others really didn't care. Ofcourse, you two are people but you make it sound as if majority of players requested this.

People asked for Jackson getting cheaper in inf doc: You didnt do that.
People asked for better accuracy on Jackson: It too a long way for you to somewhat increase it after long debates of why as you didnt want to believe that accuracy is a vital part of unit effectivness and damage output.

Didn't get cheaper because it is not considered necessary to have this unit cheaper in a doctrine where it should serve as a support. It got the accuracy increase so I don't know why you keep bringing it up all the time. And yes, we want to hear logical and gameplay reasons for requested changes, ideally supported by replays, because the only alternative would be to just implement any suggestion that anybody comes up with - that approach would have been great when Panzerfater has his crusade here, right? I think we asked for replays a lot of time and the change came after someone finally posted one which demostrated the problem well enough.

Lets try it this way: The unit doesnt fit the doctrine theme. People have been asking to improve the Long Tom to be actually usefull to overcome defenses. Nothing changed to this day.
Recently people asked for the normal arty strike to be a bit better. I guess you didnt even think about it.

Why does it not fit the doctrine? What is the problem with ONE tank with stronger armor in a support role for infantry? We agree that two would not fit the doctrine because it would turn it into a pseudo-tank doc, and that's why we didn't increase the number to 2 even when players asked for it. I already talked about Longtom. I don't remember what was the suggestion about normal arty strike about.

This Jumbo APHE move looks more like "oh, lets repeat the same move with did with Elephant in SE doc."

You mean a change that some people actually like? Then yes, it was a similar move. The difference is that the ratio of people who prefered Nashorn to people who prefered the Elefant was roughly 50:50, while the ratio of people who dislike the HEAT ability for Jumbo to people who like or don't mind it is roughly 3:50

Every doctrine except RAF and AB has some sort of heavy armored beast right now. At the end we will see only heavy armor beating the shit out of each other instead of keeping them to certain docs only. So it doesnt matter actually what doc you play against, all you know is that you have to rush heavy anti tank guns because you never know, every enemie can just jump out of the bushes with a heavy tank and you sit there with released pants.

Oh yes, I fear the day when a player with a Tiger or Panther sees a 76mm Jumbo and immediately thinks "Oh crap! Shit just got real! I need to somehow smartly outplay the Jumbo before it gets to range to use its magic shot...it's quite risky but let's try just reverse and keep shooting it with standard ammo until it dies." and even more so for KT, JP or Elephant the thought process there will be pretty much:

Plus no body ask for a 76mm Jumbo in infantry doctrine (nobody uses it). Move the jumbo to armor doctrine and make 76mm jumbo like an upgrade to the 75mm cannon with a 20fuel cost so the 76mm jumbo will cost you 100fuel.

You shouldn't have said that because Warhawks will now tell you that it is a bullshit because nowhere in the history was a case where somebody would make a field modification in a middle of a fight where they would exchange a tank cannon for another one. It wouldn't be historical...this is not fairy tale where you can swing a magic wand and magicaly change shape and properties of things.

[MEFISTO]

Still it will be up to the players when make a jumbo if you want a 75mm jumbo just upgrade the HE if you want a 76mm just pay an extra 20 fuel right after the jumbo come out of the factory,

[kwok]

Whats more frustrating is the fact that the 76 Jumbo lost its HVAP round.

So what I'm hearing is just change the name of HEAT round to HVAP and we're okay? Let's just do that... not even a big deal. The whole point of giving the HEAT round wasn't just to "GiVe JuMbO fAnTaSy WeApOn". It was to give it the AP power to justify the opportunity cost of swapping out the Jackson... Like MarKr said, it could've been a Super Mario Bullet Bill for all we cared (though my favorite is still Tiger's suggestion of "pineapple"), as long as it provided the function intended for good gameplay. There. Historical realism resolved.


Now the big question WHY was the 76 jumbo put into inf doc instead of staying in armor. It goes back to doctrine philosophy. Just because a doctrine has a name doesn't mean it can and should ONLY have things related to the doctrine. Saying that all the jumbos should go to armor doctrine because it makes more sense there also implies that all tanks should go to armor doctrine because it's armor... why the hell would airborne have hellcats for example?
We put the 76 jumbo and the jackson into infantry doctrine instead of the 75mm because the 75mm was more oriented in dealing with soft targets than hard targets. Inf doc has PLENTY of alternatives in dealing with soft targets on the offense but nearly no way to deal with hard targets on the offense (except maybe praying long toms crit and kill something). Meanwhile, we moved the 75mm jumbo to armor doctrine because the opposite reason. Previously in old armor doctrine, your best hope in killing camo 75mm PAK was way too expensive in both micro and resource (spotter creeping, artying, praying for a missed shot, etc...). The well-rounded design of doctrines is focused on giving CAPABILITY to all doctrines to handle all situations. The notion that "Inf has no breakthrough tank now" is completely lost on me... you got the 76 jumbo that can tank and off map arty to deliver the punch. Boom. Breakthrough. Does the 75mm jumbo do it more effectively? Yes it does. But the additional micro tax to do the tactic with the new set of capabilities is marginal compared to the capability gained in being able to deal with shit like camo stug camp spamming. Will the jumbos be swapped back between inf and armor? Very very very likely not. Based on replays watched, we got the intended result there.

The original thread: Should inf doc have 2 jumbos?
Personally I say no. The 76 jumbo serves its purpose in being a "breakthrough" tank in certain scenarios. Addressing the reasonable original argument about it being outnumbered, thematically it will always be outnumbered because the theme of the doc is not meant to be so. Tigers and Panthers will out number Inf Doc tanks the same way Inf Doc infantry will outnumber Panzer Support or Blitz doc (I'll save my propaganda doc for the OTHER post...).
I'd recommend players to use the jumbo with combined arms and much more strategically in terms of choosing which front you want to put your special weapon. If you're having trouble against multiple heavy tanks then maybe your strat needs to be more of a probe, bait, and ambush move rather than trying to outnumber them with jumbos. If you want to outnumber them with tanks, then go armor doctrine.

What I'd hate to see is for infantry doctrine to turn into something that was complained about the early airborne doctrine (just about tanks and airstrikes). This is one of those decisions where it seems like a small change but probably has huge ripple effects in meta.
Is there an alternative way to give inf doc the capabilities needed instead of doubling the tank availability?

[Warhawks97]

I wouldnt mind playing completely without Bunkers. In vcoh they were essentially just buildings with stuff inside. A Defensive position if you like it.
Idk why old devs decided to keep the Bunker stuff in the game... but nvm here.

And what about WM and PE base buildings? Those are definitely made of concrete, hell, PE buildings are literal bunkers...What magic does Axis use to build these in mere seconds? The game text shouldn't say "Build Barracks" but "Summon magical infantry-spawning fingy" [/quote]

A Base building doesnt secure a territory like a Bunker does. Anyways. Its just a building in a base that dies by 5hots.

Wrong again. But I'm not gonna waste my time correcting your side of the story.

pls do... Nobody uses Jumbo so we add some random stuff to it.

No, if I worked in a restaurant, then my job would be to give to the paying customer whatever is on the menu and small changes to the offered dishes would be obviously allowed. You cannot risk forcing a tomato to a person who doesn't eat them...what if they are allergic, they would sue your ass if you forced them to eat it.

I am allergic with jumbos in inf doc.

What kind of mental issues do you have that you keep pushing for a change that nobody (except for you and Mefisto) has a problem with? And when you realize that nobody cares if Jumbo having HEAT isn't historically accurate and some people even like it, you just double down on the push against it and bring in more "realism" arguments, supported by pseudo gameplay arguments.

1. Nobody asked for jumbo in inf doc and suddenly it was there.
2. Nobody used it because its not needed.
3. The Majority has not even figured what this new AP actually is.

Yes, because the Jumbo/Jackson choice was added during the 5.2.0 reworks. We didn't want Armor doctrine to end up in "Jumbos+Pershing only" state, which it would have if the doc had 75mm, 76 mm Jumbo at the same time. We gave 75mm Jumbo to Armor doc because it lacks durable infantry to fight enemy elite infantry, and the Jumbo with HE is there also useful to clear AT guns which the doctrine will have to face. The Armor doc already has 76mm guns mounted on 2 types of Shermans and later the 90mm guns for fighting tanks so another 76mm gun was considered not very useful. At this point (since both types of Jumbos in Armor doc was and still is a definite NO), we could either leave the 76 Jumbo out of the game or add it somewhere. AB has planes to destroy tanks, while Infantry doc didn't have shit, apart from arty which didn't ensure that a tank would be destroyed, unless it is hit directly with the first shot, which you cannot count on. We didn't want to turn Longtom into rapid-shooting heavy arty similar to the 280mm rocket strike because people complained (I think it was you, even) that it is like "orbital strike". Therefore Infantry doc got the Jackson and 76mm Jumbo - they are support units to help fight tanks and the choice there was intended to be "weaker armor and strong gun (Jackson)" or "strong armor and weaker gun (Jumbo)". People almost always used the Jackson because they felt that chosing Jumbo is not worth it because the gun cannot counter heavy tanks but the german heavy tanks will sooner or later chew through the armor. So it's NOT that people didn't use because it "didn't fit" or whatever. Another reason might be that some people thought (and based on Mefisto's comment, I think some still think so) that the Jackson still has its old armor which can easily bounce off L48 guns and sometimes even Tiger shots. Therefore they thought the difference in armor between the two units was minimal but difference in firepower was substantial. Anyway, we didn't want the choice between the units to be a "Jackson every time" and as I said both Jumbos in Armor doc is a no-go, the choice was either to remove the Jumbo from the game, or to make it more appealing. And since people didn't have problem with its armor but with its capacity to fight heavier units, one of the options was to give to the tank some ability to deal with heavies, thus the HEAT. Yes, I thought the weapons of Jumbo and Wolverine were pretty much the same and so they could use similar ammo types and because Wolverine has HEAT, I thought that this could be a way. I didn't do my research to find out if the 76mm guns actually had HEAT shots and it turns out they didn't - not that it matters for the gameplay, just saying. You started going all nuclear about this because it was not historically accurate and what not. I said that the point was to give to the Jumbo a SHORT RANGE shot with high penetration and it can be renamed to HVAP or M93 or whatever which had quite good penetration at SHORTER RANGES, but that wasn't enough for you because you simply want the Jumbo in Armor doc.

1. The role of jumbo was not to beat german heavies. Hence it doesnt need this capacity.
2. I dont mind when the 76 jumbo gets removed completely. I dont really need a 76 jumbo. I dont need it in armor doc.
3. Make the Jumbo cost 100 fuel and it would prevent "Jumbo+Pershing doc" since they would deplete the entire fuel savings.

Correction: you and maybe Mefisto asked for it (maybe Sukin? don't remember, others really didn't care. Ofcourse, you two are people but you make it sound as if majority of players requested this.

show me where people requested inf doc in armor doc. Or the APHE shot.

Didn't get cheaper because it is not considered necessary to have this unit cheaper in a doctrine where it should serve as a support. It got the accuracy increase so I don't know why you keep bringing it up all the time. And yes, we want to hear logical and gameplay reasons for requested changes, ideally supported by replays, because the only alternative would be to just implement any suggestion that anybody comes up with - that approach would have been great when Panzerfater has his crusade here, right? I think we asked for replays a lot of time and the change came after someone finally posted one which demostrated the problem well enough.

M10 is also just support it doesnt cost as much as a Tank IV H or J, does it?

Why does it not fit the doctrine? What is the problem with ONE tank with stronger armor in a support role for infantry? We agree that two would not fit the doctrine because it would turn it into a pseudo-tank doc, and that's why we didn't increase the number to 2 even when players asked for it. I already talked about Longtom. I don't remember what was the suggestion about normal arty strike about.

what kind of support? Overcoming defenses? Then a 75 would fit. Helping with heavy armor? There is a Jackson.

You mean a change that some people actually like? Then yes, it was a similar move. The difference is that the ratio of people who prefered Nashorn to people who prefered the Elefant was roughly 50:50, while the ratio of people who dislike the HEAT ability for Jumbo to people who like or don't mind it is roughly 3:50

Again, show me where people asked for that kind of AP shot for a Jumbo. It got introducerd out of thin air. As said, most even dont know about it.

Oh yes, I fear the day when a player with a Tiger or Panther sees a 76mm Jumbo and immediately thinks "Oh crap! Shit just got real! I need to somehow smartly outplay the Jumbo before it gets to range to use its magic shot...it's quite risky but let's try just reverse and keep shooting it with standard ammo until it dies." and even more so for KT, JP or Elephant the thought process there will be pretty much:
jumbo1.jpg

Before both had to close in to each other for maximum effectivness. Now there is a certain "death line" you cant cross with anything smaller than a Tiger since only HP helps you to stay alive.

You shouldn't have said that because Warhawks will now tell you that it is a bullshit because nowhere in the history was a case where somebody would make a field modification in a middle of a fight where they would exchange a tank cannon for another one. It wouldn't be historical...this is not fairy tale where you can swing a magic wand and magicaly change shape and properties of things.

Make it as reward or an upgrade near the tank factory and the barrel changes instantly and not in the middle of a fight.

[MarKr]

A Base building doesnt secure a territory like a Bunker does. Anyways. Its just a building in a base that dies by 5hots.

Irrelevant. It is unrealistic and so you should have a problem with it.

I am allergic with jumbos in inf doc.

Physiologically impossible.

1. Nobody asked for jumbo in inf doc and suddenly it was there.
2. Nobody used it because its not needed.
3. The Majority has not even figured what this new AP actually is.

Not really a reaction to what you quoted but whatever...
1) First - we are the Devs and don't need to ask for your approval to implement anything. Second - this was explained by me in the longest paragraph of my post. Later also by kwok in his post. Did you even read it?
2) False. Explained in my post too. Maybe YOU didn't use it because YOU didn't feel it was needed/fitting but to automatically assume that your point of view is applicable to everyone is nonesensical.
3) Unless you've done some survey, this is a speculation based on your opinion and as such has no validity. If you've done a survey, please share the results.

1. The role of jumbo was not to beat german heavies. Hence it doesnt need this capacity.
2. I dont mind when the 76 jumbo gets removed completely. I dont really need a 76 jumbo. I dont need it in armor doc.
3. Make the Jumbo cost 100 fuel and it would prevent "Jumbo+Pershing doc" since they would deplete the entire fuel savings.

1) This is a game, role of any unit is what Devs say it is.
2) OK, your point of view. But again - it is not something that is wildely applicable to everyone.
3) No 76mm Jumbo in Armor doc.

show me where people requested inf doc in armor doc. Or the APHE shot.

This was explained by me in the longest paragraph of my post. Later also by kwok in his post. Seriously, did you read it?

M10 is also just support it doesnt cost as much as a Tank IV H or J, does it?

No it doesn't...what's your point?

what kind of support? Overcoming defenses? Then a 75 would fit. Helping with heavy armor? There is a Jackson.

I mean...seriously, did you read what I and kwok wrote?

Again, show me where people asked for that kind of AP shot for a Jumbo. It got introducerd out of thin air. As said, most even dont know about it.

Read what I and kwok wrote.

Before both had to close in to each other for maximum effectivness. Now there is a certain "death line" you cant cross with anything smaller than a Tiger since only HP helps you to stay alive.

From what you keep writing here it seems you think the Jumbo is now some super effective heavy tank killer. You know what? Show me a replay where the 76mm Jumbo keeps crushing Axis heavy tanks all day long. I don't even ask for the usual "at least 10 cases to rule out luck factor", at least 2 or 3 replays where this Jumbo managed to kill 2 or more heavy tanks.

Make it as reward or an upgrade near the tank factory and the barrel changes instantly and not in the middle of a fight.

To use your way of argumentantion:
Oh yeah, changing turrets and guns instantly during a combat operation. What a bullshit! What will come next? Upgrade for PIV F2 that turns it into the H version?

[Warhawks97]

1. Yes, i did read your posts multiple times. In your opinion the Jumbo in inf doc needs more anti tank power, saying people complained about it and never used the Jumbo because the Jacks was vital. But i would have simply told them that the Jumbos purpose is not to push heavily vs enemie heavies or that it is at least not its main task to destroy them. HVAP did give it the power needed sometimes to go vs Tigers or even Panthers and shooting several shots as well as having more range, esspecially as it could stand return fire better than normal shermans and hence increasing the number of shots fired back at them and thus the chance to score a penetration.

2. If you guys thought the Jumbo had a too tough stance against Tigers and Panthers, i would have simply improved its armor a bit instead of adding such a "short range single guranteed penetration shot" ability.

3. The HVAP is probably also cheaper (i didnt check what the APHE cost actually per shot but M10 pays 75 per shot). I am using M10 everytime as inf doc but i cant remember when i used the HVAP for the last time. It costs 100 ammo when i use it just once and 75 each further time and fire just one shot that likely doesnt kill the enemie unless its already damaged. 100 ammo to damage one Tank from closer range is a damn lot, esspecially when you have to use the ammo for other important stuff in such an ammo hungry doctrine.

4. When you get engaged by perhaps more than just one tank and instead by a few PZ IV or whatever, i find it generally more usefull to use HVAP that i can throw more often against several targets instead of just one round against one target for a lower cost.

5. The single APHE shot wont make the jumbo a better breakthrough tank anyways. Jagdpanzer IV/70, Nashorns etc will still have a relatively easy time to deal with them.

6. The APHE makes this tank only better vs Panthers and Tigers by a bit in exchange for high ammo cost, short range. And idk whats better: Being able to throw 3 times HVAP vs a Tiger or a single APHE round. If i should really manage to get close to a Tiger i would prefer to fire 3 HVAP rounds with good pen chances against it rather than just one guranteed pen shot.

7. You guys are also talking about doctrinal capabilties. Well, lets look for inf doc:
- Breakthrough defenses? Check. Infiltration units, Elite inf, Artillery of all sorts.
- Anti inf? Check.
- AA? Check.
- Anti Tank? Check. Even though Jumbo could cost a bit less like 600-650 MP and 100 fuel.
- Overall defenses? Check.

I never felt like the Jumbo gives me something i couldnt get elsewhere. In old Inf doc the 75 mm Jumbo was a good suprise unit as it came after just 2 CP and low cost. Considering i spend 5 CP for a jumbo i would argue that going for arty, cheaper inf or rangers is always a better choice to go first. Esspecially when you fight in teams the Jumbo/Jacks is the last thing to go since other mates will likely have some sort decent armor. The Jumbo is then just doubling already existing types of weapon systems on the field.