Login

russian armor

Commander Update Beta 2021 - Soviet Feedback

PAGES (40)down
18 May 2021, 16:58 PM
#661
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3102 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 16:49 PMVipper


1. The post you quoted is about the 75mm (normal) Sherman, not the 76mm.
2. How often do I have to point out that penetration values alone do not mean anything?
3. Could you also give some backup to your claim that the AI capability of the AT rounds is "average"? Because they are not.


18 May 2021, 17:07 PM
#662
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


1. The post you quoted is about the 75mm (normal) Sherman, not the 76mm.

Not really. User Urist mentioned my name and my point was always that 76mm does not have to switch rounds before firing on vehicles as general gwain claimed.
(his post actually makes little sense)


2. How often do I have to point out that penetration values alone do not mean anything?

It really depends on what is one looking and comparing.

76mm sherman still has a better better DPS vs ostheer PzIV

PzIV vs Sherman 76mm has 21.7/19.2/15.8/12.8/10.0 DPS
Sherman 76mm AP vs PzIV has 27.4/23.1/19.0/15.3/11.7 DPS
(feel free to use any metric or comparison you prefer)

Sherman 76mm AP are good/great rounds.


3. Could you also give some backup to your claim that the AI capability of the AT rounds is "average"? Because they are not.

Call them what you like I don't mind. One can use vs soft target unlike the HAVP rounds.

18 May 2021, 17:14 PM
#663
avatar of pvtgooner

Posts: 359

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 15:33 PMUrist
In a few years we will find out that the Vipper account was just part of a social experiment: "How long will people continue to talk to you if you choose to ignore their argument and instead try to disprove single sentences without the context?"

Having the 75mm-HE AI-capabilities and the 75mm-AP AT-capabilities in one shell would be stronger than having to switch between the two shell types to fight specific targets, right? Thats what was meant with "shell switch is a disadvantage". But because there is no medium tank shell that has as good AI as the 75mm-HE AND as good AT as the 75mm-AP that makes up for the disadvantage of having to switch to the correct shell. This makes the performance of the 75mm sherman balanced and switching between the shell types an interesting choice. How this can be misunderstood is beyond me and has to be purposeful derailing of the actual discussion.


Its purposeful gish gallop. He doesnt do this in OKW/OST feedback threads, but he will derail discussions in allied feedback threads doing exactly what you said, context-less, pedantic arguments around singular sentences and asking you to prove negatives constantly. Its tiring and really ruins the forum tbh.

Also I think its more than one person, or else he purposefully messes up his typing at times.
18 May 2021, 17:18 PM
#664
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3102 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 17:07 PMVipper

Not really. User Urist mentioned my name and my point was always that 76mm does not have to switch rounds before firing on vehicles as general gwain claimed.
(his post actually makes little sense)


It really depends on what is one looking and comparing.

76mm sherman still has a better better DPS vs ostheer PzIV

PzIV vs Sherman 76mm has 21.7/19.2/15.8/12.8/10.0 DPS
Sherman 76mm AP vs PzIV has 27.4/23.1/19.0/15.3/11.7 DPS
(feel free to use any metric or comparison you prefer)

Sherman 76mm AP are good/great rounds.


Call them what you like I don't mind. One can use vs soft target unlike the HAVP rounds.

Urist clearly spoke about the normal Sherman, not the doctrinal one. Any comparison to the doctrinal one does not make sense when quoting him. He was not involved in the discussion prior to this so what you discussed before with others does also not matter.

If you make comparative claims and say things are equal, back it up and don't resort to "call them what you like". Their AI is not on par with the AI shells of other medium tanks.

I'll leave it at that to not derail the discussion further.
18 May 2021, 17:20 PM
#665
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 919

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 15:33 PMUrist
Having the 75mm-HE AI-capabilities and the 75mm-AP AT-capabilities in one shell would be stronger than having to switch between the two shell types to fight specific targets, right? Thats what was meant with "shell switch is a disadvantage". But because there is no medium tank shell that has as good AI as the 75mm-HE AND as good AT as the 75mm-AP that makes up for the disadvantage of having to switch to the correct shell. This makes the performance of the 75mm sherman balanced and switching between the shell types an interesting choice. How this can be misunderstood is beyond me and has to be purposeful derailing of the actual discussion.


Pretty good summarized. Thx :-)
18 May 2021, 17:37 PM
#666
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 919

I want to correct some wrong data that got posted here. Since we are talking about the beta (thread title) we are talking about 5,3 seconds reload for RoF of 76mm AP shells, not 4,55 seconds. Because of that the posted DPS data is also wrong.
18 May 2021, 18:06 PM
#667
avatar of elchino7
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2

And DPS is a horrible metric to compare vehicles with, although i can't think of 5 people who actually use it.
18 May 2021, 18:26 PM
#668
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1


Urist clearly spoke about the normal Sherman, not the doctrinal one. Any comparison to the doctrinal one does not make sense when quoting him. He was not involved in the discussion prior to this so what you discussed before with others does also not matter.

If you make comparative claims and say things are equal, back it up and don't resort to "call them what you like". Their AI is not on par with the AI shells of other medium tanks.

I'll leave it at that to not derail the discussion further.

Allow me to bring this back to origin point.

Sherman are good Tanks one could argue that 75mm is one of the most cost efficient stock medium Tanks and the 76mm is also very good (even op according to some).

To me claiming:

"The shell switch alone (6 seconds) is already a big disadvantage at fighting different targets, so this surely would not be op."
is grasping at straws.

It is like reading a claim that SU-76 has the disadvantage of having a HE barrage because one's opponent can attack with vehicle during the barrage.

If one find himself in disadvantage using the the 76mm AP/HVAP rounds that is simply his bad play and not a "big disadvantage" of the unit.

If in you agree with general_gawain and in opinion the option to choose between AP/HVAP or (AP/HE) is a disadvantage of the 76mm Sherman (or the Sherman) feel free to provide your argument.
18 May 2021, 18:30 PM
#669
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

And DPS is a horrible metric to compare vehicles with, although i can't think of 5 people who actually use it.

As I have already posted feel free to any metric you prefer, because I am not willing to spend time providing the stat each one prefers for something that besides my original point.

DPS is actually easily accessible to me and it proves the point that even if one factor in the difference in armor the 76mm is still ahead of the Ostheer PzIV even with only AP rounds.

More to the point in your opinion is the claim:
"The shell switch alone (6 seconds) is already a big disadvantage at fighting different targets, so this surely would not be op."

accurate or not?
18 May 2021, 18:59 PM
#670
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 919

Since my sentence...

"The shell switch alone (6 seconds) is already a big disadvantage at fighting different targets, so this surely would not be op."

...seems to be used out of context over and over again I'll post an additional statement that I made after this sentence which made clear how it was meant to anybody who takes the time to read it.


Post #648:
"1. Obviously having to switch between two shell modes to get good AI or good AT is a disadvantage compared to a tank who has the same AI and AT values combined in one standard shell. I do think this is out of question."

That should clear things up. So ignore the first sentence please, the second one describes it better.
18 May 2021, 19:07 PM
#671
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

Since my sentence...

"The shell switch alone (6 seconds) is already a big disadvantage at fighting different targets, so this surely would not be op."

...seems to be used out of context over and over again I'll post an additional statement that I made after this sentence which made clear how it was meant to anybody who takes the time to read it.


Post #648:
"1. Obviously having to switch between two shell modes to get good AI or good AT is a disadvantage compared to a tank who has the same AI and AT values combined in one standard shell. I do think this is out of question."

That should clear things up. So please ignore the other sentence, the second describes it better.

That is also misleading, the argument could only hold some water if the switchable shell where only AI or only AT (similar to ISU) and at the same power level as the all around shells .

When Sherman 75mm switches to HE it does not get "good AI" it get one of the best AI shells and punches above its cost/class, the same goes for 76mm HAVP in AT.

What you are painting it misleading picture.
Both 75mm and 76mm Sherman are very good tanks and the fact the they can switch shell does not make them under perform. It part of their strength, not part their weakness. A single shell combining those properties would be simply be broken.
Pip
18 May 2021, 19:16 PM
#672
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 19:07 PMVipper

That is also misleading, the argument could only hold some water if the switchable shell where only AI or only AT and at the same power level as the all around shells (similar to ISU).

When Sherman 75mm switches to HE it does not get "good AI" it get one of the best AI shells and punches above its cost/class, the same goes for 76mm HAVP in AT.

What you are painting it misleading picture. Both 75mm and 76mm Sherman are very good tanks and the fact the they can switch shell does not make them under perform. It part of their strength, not part their weakness. A single shell combining those properties would be simply be broken.


The fact that they have to switch shells at all is a disadvantage, regardless of how strong either shell is. That's the entire argument. The Sherman's AP and HE shells are both extremely good, but the fact there's a delay between being able to use one or the other (and the mere fact you have to manually switch) is undeniably a disadvantage. This disadvantage is counteracted by the fact that the HE and AP shells are stronger than average, but it's still a present disadvantage.

If they switched instantly, and were switched automatically dependent on the target then this would be a buff to the unit, wouldn't you agree? If you do agree, then you agree that manual shell switching is, in fact, disadvantageous.

What you're stating is rather more misleading than what Gawain was stating to begin with. This really didnt need to go on for quite so long.
18 May 2021, 19:30 PM
#673
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 919

Since my statement seems to be misleading to 0,1% of the people around here, I'll change it again to make clear what I meant:

Post #648:
"1. Obviously having to switch between two shell modes to get better AI or better AT in comparison to the other shell mode is a disadvantage compared to a tank who has the better AI and AT values of both shells combined in one standard shell. I do think this is out of question."

Glad I could help.
18 May 2021, 19:32 PM
#674
avatar of general_gawain

Posts: 919

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 19:16 PMPip


The fact that they have to switch shells at all is a disadvantage, regardless of how strong either shell is. That's the entire argument. The Sherman's AP and HE shells are both extremely good, but the fact there's a delay between being able to use one or the other (and the mere fact you have to manually switch) is undeniably a disadvantage. This disadvantage is counteracted by the fact that the HE and AP shells are stronger than average, but it's still a present disadvantage.

If they switched instantly, and were switched automatically dependent on the target then this would be a buff to the unit, wouldn't you agree? If you do agree, then you agree that manual shell switching is, in fact, disadvantageous.

What you're stating is rather more misleading than what Gawain was stating to begin with. This really didnt need to go on for quite so long.


Thats a good point indeed.
18 May 2021, 19:33 PM
#675
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 19:16 PMPip


The fact that they have to switch shells at all is a disadvantage, regardless of how strong either shell is.

Nope, that does not make sense. If that was the case then adding Sherman's HE to the Easy8 would be a nerf.

It simply would not be a nerf it would be a buff.

Sherman 75mm gives the player the option to use the best AI shell than any medium has, Sherman 76mm has the option to use the very powerful HAVP round AT round.

That is simply not a disadvantage since it allow these units to punch above level.

Finnaly there is even less logic to use the existence of HAVP rounds a reason to buff the AOE of AP rounds as general_gawain has done.
18 May 2021, 19:48 PM
#676
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 1273

You can turn this off-topic content as much as you want, but switching shells is undeniably a massive disadvantage.
18 May 2021, 20:30 PM
#677
avatar of donofsandiego

Posts: 1287

It really is a disadvantage when having to change targets quickly. For example, a sherman and Pz.iv run into an identical situation. You use the tank on a less defended flank to attack some engineers, say. All of a sudden, a wild enemy tank appears, and lucky you, it was passing by and due to user error it exposed its side armor to you. Now the panzer 4 can immediately take advantage of this situation by switching to prioritize vehicles and fire at the tank as soon as it reloads. Meanwhile the Sherman has to take the time to switch rounds.

It's a disadvantage in scenarios like this.

Now, as far as it being a disadvantage with all things considered, that argument is definitely harder to make. If you have the time to switch shells before engaging a target it's much less of a disadvantage.

I haven't really tested the M4C AP rounds against infantry so I don't know how effective it is, so I can't comment on that, but I do think it's important to note that the M4C comes with mobile smoke which is quite nice for Soviets.
Pip
18 May 2021, 20:35 PM
#678
avatar of Pip

Posts: 1594

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 19:33 PMVipper

Nope, that does not make sense. If that was the case then adding Sherman's HE to the Easy8 would be a nerf.

It simply would not be a nerf it would be a buff.

Sherman 75mm gives the player the option to use the best AI shell than any medium has, Sherman 76mm has the option to use the very powerful HAVP round AT round.

That is simply not a disadvantage since it allow these units to punch above level.

Finnaly there is even less logic to use the existence of HAVP rounds a reason to buff the AOE of AP rounds as general_gawain has done.


You are misunderstanding the point entirely, and I'm not sure why.

Having to switch between different shells (With the associated delay) before you can use them is clearly a disadvantage. Please answer my question:

Would the Sherman be stronger if it retained both its shell types, but automatically switched (instantly) between them dependent on what would be optimal in a given situation? Yes Or No.


Nobody is saying that the Sherman is underpowered due to this, the shell-switching disadvantage is included as part of the tank's balance, due to it having two exceedingly good shell types. The two strong shell types are an advantage, the fact you have to manually switch between them is a disadvantage.

"Nope, that does not make sense. If that was the case then adding Sherman's HE to the Easy8 would be a nerf. " is a non sequitur and has absolutely nothing to do with the argument. You seem to not quite understand what is meant by "disadvantage", perhaps this is a language-barrier issue.

Example: The Sherman having lower armour than, say, the PIV, is also a disadvantage, even if both tanks are balanced. Relative strength isnt important.
18 May 2021, 20:41 PM
#679
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

It really is a disadvantage when having to change targets quickly. For example, a sherman and Pz.iv run into an identical situation. You use the tank on a less defended flank to attack some engineers, say. All of a sudden, a wild enemy tank appears, and lucky you, it was passing by and due to user error it exposed its side armor to you. Now the panzer 4 can immediately take advantage of this situation by switching to prioritize vehicles and fire at the tank as soon as it reloads. Meanwhile the Sherman has to take the time to switch rounds.

It's a disadvantage in scenarios like this.

Now, as far as it being a disadvantage with all things considered, that argument is definitely harder to make. If you have the time to switch shells before engaging a target it's much less of a disadvantage.

I haven't really tested the M4C AP rounds against infantry so I don't know how effective it is, so I can't comment on that, but I do think it's important to note that the M4C comes with mobile smoke which is quite nice for Soviets.

Not really.

If it is a 75mm Sherman the player can engage the engineers with AP rounds just fine, he has the option to decimate them with HE if he want to. He can then switch after firing adding a slight delay to the reload (that might even be lower than the time required to fire on the new target).
In sort the player used little more micro and got more from his units.

In a similar manner the the player using the 76mm can swamp to HAVP after firing. The difference in performance vs an ostheer PzIV is only substantial at max range. The AP round is even better at point blank.

In sort little micro allows users to get more out of their vehicle.
18 May 2021, 21:28 PM
#680
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13476 | Subs: 1

jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 20:35 PMPip


You are misunderstanding the point entirely, and I'm not sure why.

Having to switch between different shells (With the associated delay) before you can use them is clearly a disadvantage. Please answer my question:

Would the Sherman be stronger if it retained both its shell types, but automatically switched (instantly) between them dependent on what would be optimal in a given situation? Yes Or No.


Depends on the skill of the user, in the hands a noob it would made difference ,in the hands of pro, one might not even notice it.

But that is besides the point.
jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 20:35 PMPip

Nobody is saying that the Sherman is underpowered due to this, the shell-switching disadvantage is included as part of the tank's balance, due to it having two exceedingly good shell types. The two strong shell types are an advantage, the fact you have to manually switch between them is a disadvantage.

Yes they do, just read post 635 and my response 636:

"I always said M4C standard shells need AOE damage profile of Cromwell. The shell switch alone (6 seconds) is already a big disadvantage at fighting different targets, so this surely would not be op."

"1. Obviously having to switch between two shell modes to get good AI or good AT is a disadvantage compared to a tank who has the same AI and AT values combined in one standard shell. I do think this is out of question."

the shell switch is even been used as an argument to buff the 76mm's round AOE.

And that is my point and it seem that you agree with me so the rest is unnecessary.


jump backJump back to quoted post18 May 2021, 20:35 PMPip

"Nope, that does not make sense. If that was the case then adding Sherman's HE to the Easy8 would be a nerf. " is a non sequitur and has absolutely nothing to do with the argument. You seem to not quite understand what is meant by "disadvantage", perhaps this is a language-barrier issue.

Example: The Sherman having lower armour than, say, the PIV, is also a disadvantage, even if both tanks are balanced. Relative strength isnt important.


PAGES (40)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

302 users are online: 302 guests
0 post in the last 24h
21 posts in the last week
72 posts in the last month
Registered members: 44182
Welcome our newest member, raphaela4
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM