Why is AT so vulnerable to artillery? | Forums

[Commander672]

...Or to be more specific: WHAT IDIOT FORGOT TO GIVE THE JACKSON A ROOF!?!

I acually use Tanks with artillery a lot so it really doesn't concern me. But seriously, How hard is it to give your (anti)tank a bloody roof? What if it rains? Your ammo is screwed!

[that_frood]

the jackson... isn't very vulnerable to artillery. At least, certainly not to the same degree as regular AT.
They'd need a lot of arty to be significantly stopping a jackson attack...-son

[mcmlxx]

Try looking at the amount of armour they have...

[Bridger15]

It's one of the disadvantages of the americans...

[warshark4355]

people designing it was too stoned . Any way it better than the Italian. I got a truck. All that matter was U.S won WW2 so we get the write the history.

[Commander672]

When my Perishings encounter Jacksons, I often order up 3 of whatever Arty I have. If it's large or mixed with tanks I order 6 for good measure.

They rarely survive. Those that do get the bomber treatment.

[Iyer2009]

I have found that Assault Guns when massed (4-6) are fairly effective against Jacksons.

[namomo]

Overall jackson is still overpowered. Level 2 armor proved to be enough against artillery.

No artillery but US have armor (Assault gun not counted), and it's an easy job for m40 to hunt down enemy artillery,since artillery can't hurt m40.

[saminskip]

Jackson is balanced sweetly imo.

[hamody1991]

I wanted to make one thing clear Brits got armored art which is cheaper than us one by 5
"sexton"