Home
Forum
Search
Login
Register
Account
Welcome,
Guest
. Please
login
or
register
.
Did you miss your
activation email?
November 26, 2024, 06:30:52 am
1 Hour
1 Day
1 Week
1 Month
Forever
Login with username, password and session length
Resources
Leaderboards
Unit Price Lists
Map List
Launcher status:
Players in chat: 0
Battles in progress: 0
Battles waiting: 5
Download the mod from Steam
Join our Discord server
Recent posts
Please don’t open this th...
by
Olazaika1
[November 01, 2024, 12:46:37 pm]
Required age ratings for ...
by
Unkn0wn
[October 05, 2024, 07:29:20 am]
50 minutes cap victory
by
Olazaika1
[September 05, 2024, 01:54:13 pm]
Feedback
by
Olazaika1
[July 16, 2024, 11:30:34 pm]
Anyone here still alive?
by
Olazaika1
[June 22, 2024, 06:49:40 am]
very glad to be signing u...
by
Olazaika1
[March 08, 2024, 12:13:38 am]
EiR:R ACA (Art Credits Ar...
by
Olazaika1
[March 08, 2024, 12:12:54 am]
Hello, New guy in the mod
by
Olazaika1
[March 08, 2024, 12:09:37 am]
CoH 3 Old Guard
by
chefarzt
[December 30, 2023, 08:00:58 pm]
KT got buffs, Rug stop hi...
by
LittleJoe
[February 04, 2023, 11:46:41 am]
Awards
2007
Mod of the Year
Editor's Choice
2008
Most Innovative Multiplayer
Nominee
Want to help promote Europe In Ruins? It's as easy as clicking here once a day!
Why?
COH: Europe In Ruins
>
Forum
>
EIR Main Forums
>
Balance & Design
>
[US] Jumbo
Pages:
1
2
3
[
4
]
5
6
...
8
Go Down
Print
Author
Topic: [US] Jumbo (Read 37673 times)
0 Members and 11 Guests are viewing this topic.
Demon767
Warmap Betatester
EIR Veteran
Posts: 6190
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #60 on:
April 04, 2011, 02:40:26 am »
Don't post on EIR then.
Logged
Generalleutnant of The Reichs Wolves
Nevergetsputonlistguy767
DarkSoldierX
EIR Veteran
Posts: 3015
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #61 on:
April 04, 2011, 05:24:59 am »
Like I said earlier, The only thing I dislike is the pak38 vs rear modifiers fail and the fact that it gets free skirts.
Other than that its food for my AT based companies.
Logged
Quote from: nugnugx on June 03, 2011, 11:42:22 am
two words
atgs and fireflies
Looks who's butthurt
Quote from: BigDick on January 08, 2012, 06:47:44 am
*waiting* 4 DarkSoldierNoobiX pops up to prove how much shit the T17 is penetrating KTs back and Jagd front and how much better the ac/puma is penetrating m10 rear
8thRifleRegiment
EIR Veteran
Posts: 2210
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #62 on:
April 04, 2011, 06:20:10 am »
Quote
Don't post on EIR then
+1 lmao
Logged
I will never forget the rage we enduced together
Quote from: brn4meplz on March 08, 2013, 12:46:54 pm
Ohh Good, AmPm can pay in Doubloons.
DarkSoldierX
EIR Veteran
Posts: 3015
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #63 on:
April 04, 2011, 09:07:33 pm »
1. I swear both demon and tym are nubs
2. Get the fuck on topic
_____________________________
What do you think about jumbo loosing skirts?
Maybe it could pay for it, but how would you symbolize that on the model?
Logged
Tymathee
Donator
Posts: 9741
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #64 on:
April 04, 2011, 10:10:51 pm »
i'm against changing it, it's a t3 unlock, it's slow and its only good vs infantry, its only saving grace IS that it can bounce shots.
and its not free skirts, its just panther_skirt armor, which gives it a 10% dmg buff vs schrecks, which is nothing tbh, thats 135 on a clean hit and 108 on a scattered hit.
Logged
Quote from: nikomas on October 04, 2012, 09:26:33 pm
"I want proof!"
"I have proof!"
"Whatever, I'm still right"
Dafuq man, don't ask for proof if you'll refuse it if it's not in your favor, logic fallacy for the bloody win.
Malgoroth
Donator
Posts: 960
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #65 on:
April 04, 2011, 10:25:41 pm »
The only thing wrong with the Jumbo is the doctrine it's unlocked in. Should be in armor tbh. Give armor the option of either heavy ass rape pershings, or cheaper ass rape resistant shermans. ...or a queer mix of both should they want to.
Having what basically amounts to a heavy tank in the infantry doctrine doesn't make all that much sense to me.
Logged
RikiRude
Donator
Posts: 4376
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #66 on:
April 04, 2011, 10:33:56 pm »
could you imagine how sexy a jumbo with armor buffs would be?
but jumbo works for infantry because it's an awesome infantry support tank.
Logged
Quote from: Killer344
Killer344: "Repent: sory no joke i just had savage diorea"
Quote from: Malgoroth on October 10, 2011, 05:03:49 pm
... or a fat ass cock sucking churchill being stupid
Malgoroth
Donator
Posts: 960
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #67 on:
April 04, 2011, 11:04:55 pm »
Armor doesn't have many buffs that increase survivability save Urban Survival Kit's 12% less received damage, so I don't think the Jumbo would become 'too much' to handle. But yeah, I suppose the other buffs armor gives would make it "sexy". Not OP but "sexy" for sure.
Still, it's basically a heavy tank. It can be used for infantry support in the Armor doctrine. Having a tough ass Jumbo supporting infantry doctrine buffed rangers and support weapons seems a little extreme. Regular shermans could do that job and not be so (I don't want to say "overwhelming"... but) overwhelming.
Logged
Tymathee
Donator
Posts: 9741
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #68 on:
April 04, 2011, 11:33:03 pm »
its not in armor cuz they have the pershing and callie already.
the Jumbo is and was (realistically) an infantry support tank, not an MBT. Which in EIRR is so true as well, it sux without any type of infantry support, it gets raped rather fast.
overwhelming? really Mal? the only overwhelming thing about it is it can bounce shots, other than that it's a 75mm Sherman with a .50 cal
Logged
nugnugx
Donator
Posts: 4051
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #69 on:
April 05, 2011, 12:47:50 am »
Quote from: Tymathee on April 04, 2011, 10:10:51 pm
its only saving grace IS that it can bounce shots.
yes thats the reason, relic didn't make uber armor medium us tank for a reason
Logged
Tymathee
Donator
Posts: 9741
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #70 on:
April 05, 2011, 01:24:00 am »
Quote from: nugnugx on April 05, 2011, 12:47:50 am
yes thats the reason, relic didn't make uber armor medium us tank for a reason
Yes, and neither did they make a sniper that can fire and suppress and not have the "sniped" icon
Nor did they make an axis atgun that can penetration any allied armor
Nor did they make a support weapon that rapes infantry
Nor did they make a mobile pak on wheels
Nor did they make ist's, stukas and hummels have flame rounds
Nor did they make it so IST's and move while locked down
So what's your point? I can come up with more.
The point is, this is a design decision and it's no where near OP. But of course, only you and demon are the ones attacking me on this so its obvious you're trolling me and can't come up with any better argument other than "I'm too effin stupid to come up with a way to counter it"
Logged
NightRain
EIR Veteran
Posts: 3908
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #71 on:
April 05, 2011, 01:27:44 am »
Quote from: Tymathee on April 05, 2011, 01:24:00 am
Yes, and neither did they make a sniper that can fire and suppress and not have the "sniped" icon
Nor did they make an axis atgun that can penetration any allied armor
PAK38 penetrates all allied armor with its first shot, + 88 penetrates all allied vehicles as well. Point invalid
Nor did they make a support weapon that rapes infantry
Mortar?
Nor did they make a mobile pak on wheels
Did you...think when you...
Logged
Quote from: Unkn0wn on June 05, 2011, 04:01:40 am
Because a forum post should be like a woman's skirt. Long enough to cover the subject material, but short enough to keep things interesting.
brn4meplz
Misinformation Officer
Posts: 6952
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #72 on:
April 05, 2011, 01:30:27 am »
The holy trinity for tank design is Mobility, Firepower, Protection. The Jumbo only has 1 side of the triangle and pays a high price for it.
Logged
He thinks Tactics is a breath mint
Quote from: Unkn0wn on July 31, 2012, 03:50:15 am
Wow I think that was the nicest thing brn ever posted!
Quote from: Bear on June 19, 2013, 01:24:59 pm
the pussy of a prostitute is not tight enough for destroy a condom
nugnugx
Donator
Posts: 4051
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #73 on:
April 05, 2011, 01:37:22 am »
The only great armor tanks were always axis heavies (excluding pershing which was small exception from start) , giving a good protection to allied tank ( and a MEDIUM on top of it all) is just meh, it should be either firepower or mobility like the whole factions tank metagameplay.
It would be more logical to give a medium good armored tank to axis than to allies going with metagameplay. (that's why allies have AP rounds)
«
Last Edit: April 05, 2011, 01:42:18 am by nugnugx
»
Logged
Tymathee
Donator
Posts: 9741
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #74 on:
April 05, 2011, 01:52:21 am »
like axis needs more heavy armor. Allies already have issues vs pathers, tigers, king tigers, jagds, hetzers, stugs, and stuhs, why would they need another? The allies only have teh churchill, pershing and now jumbo.
With the m-18 being more effective, theres no need to give another hard hitting or fast unit.
Logged
AmPM
Community Mapper
Posts: 7978
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #75 on:
April 05, 2011, 01:53:34 am »
Meanwhile, Tym would scream and cry if we got 2 KT's in Terror.
Logged
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
PonySlaystation
EIR Veteran
Posts: 4136
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #76 on:
April 05, 2011, 01:54:48 am »
The m18 is more effective? I think not!
Logged
Sharks are not monsters Henley, they are cute, cuddly and misunderstood. They love humans. sometimes they love TOO much. They love people so much that sometimes their kisses separate people into two flailing pieces which are consumed by other sharks in a frenzy of peace and joy.
nugnugx
Donator
Posts: 4051
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #77 on:
April 05, 2011, 01:55:52 am »
Quote
like axis needs more heavy armor.
With this sentence you are contradicting the basic gameplay which is in eir and coh since 4 years.
If heavy armor was not intended, relic would not make jagpanther nor different variations of tiger.
They did not make a tank like jumbo beacause it is absolutely not needed, and as proven, breaks gameplay
Why allies need good armor AT ALL if axis don't have dedicated counter dictated by metagameplay which are AP rounds.
Quote
With the m-18 being more effective, theres no need to give another hard hitting or fast unit.
Then there is no need for jumbo then, because allies got the units they need with speed and firepower, they don't need a medium tiger.
«
Last Edit: April 05, 2011, 01:58:38 am by nugnugx
»
Logged
Tymathee
Donator
Posts: 9741
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #78 on:
April 05, 2011, 02:06:01 am »
Quote from: nugnugx on April 05, 2011, 01:55:52 am
With this sentence you are contradicting the basic gameplay which is in eir and coh since 4 years.
If heavy armor was not intended, relic would not make jagpanther nor different variations of tiger.
They did not make a tank like jumbo beacause it is absolutely not needed, and as proven, breaks gameplay
Why allies need good armor AT ALL if axis don't have dedicated counter dictated by metagameplay which are AP rounds.
Then there is no need for jumbo then, because allies got the units they need with speed and firepower, they don't need a medium tiger.
dude, like i said before, then they dont need mobile freakin paks, mobile ists, snipers that can hit without u knowing where they are and many other things that are made for EIRR through doctrines and additions, so that argument is totally invalid.
Lol medium tiger? 87.5 vs 120 dmg and 736 health weaker armored sherman vs a faster 1064 health tiger. a panther easily beats a jumbo 1 v 1, how is it a weaker tiger? it's more of a stronger sherman than a weaker tiger, especially since Tigers can penetrate all allied armor and the 75 has issues penetrating freakin p4's. Just shut up already.
Logged
nugnugx
Donator
Posts: 4051
Re: [US] Jumbo
«
Reply #79 on:
April 05, 2011, 02:14:32 am »
Quote from: Tymathee on April 05, 2011, 02:06:01 am
dude, like i said before, then they dont need mobile freakin paks,
paks were always mobile and before they could move under cloak
Quote
mobile ists, snipers that can hit without u knowing where they are and many other things
This is different because allies have means to kill a ist or sniper, you do it normaly like you always have done. While when a jumbo with its armor attacks you , 80% of shots bounce off and there is nothing you can do about it.
Quote
Lol medium tiger? 87.5 vs 120 dmg and 736 health weaker armored sherman vs a faster 1064 health tiger. a panther easily beats a jumbo 1 v 1, how is it a weaker tiger? it's more of a stronger sherman than a weaker tiger, especially since Tigers can penetrate all allied armor and the 75 has issues penetrating freakin p4's. Just shut up already.
Stronger sherman, weaker tiger = different naming , same thing. It does the purpose like tiger does, kill infantry with ease, got good frontal armor which is more effective than tigers because axis don't have AP rounds, can kill all pe vehicles hts ists, it cannot kill only p4 and heavies, what would you expect , to kill a tiger with a sherman? Tym pls.
There is a easy way to fix this tho.
Give AP rounds to paks and 50mm hts and everyone will be happy.
Logged
Pages:
1
2
3
[
4
]
5
6
...
8
Go Up
Print
Jump to:
Please select a destination:
-----------------------------
News & Introductions
-----------------------------
=> Updates & Announcements
=> EIR Boot Camp
===> In Other Languages
=====> In Chinese
=====> In German
=====> In Spanish
=====> In Polish
=====> In French
=====> In Norwegian
=> New Players
-----------------------------
EIR Main Forums
-----------------------------
=> General Discussion
=> Tactics & Strategy
=> Balance & Design
=> Broadcasts & Replays
=> Projects & Mapping
=> Technical Support
===> Bug Reporting
-----------------------------
General Forums
-----------------------------
=> General Discussion
=> Other Games
TinyPortal v1.0 beta 4 ©
Bloc
Loading...