Login

russian armor

M26 Pershing

PAGES (9)down
25 Jul 2014, 06:42 AM
#41
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

Don't worry, we have Nazi wunderwaffen like the IR HT and infra red scopes in daytime so we can have the SUPER PERSHING.

Men of War Assault Squad 2 has everything- including the super pershing.


I'm looking forward to that Panzer VIII Maus Commander!
25 Jul 2014, 06:45 AM
#42
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395



"We can have a weak commander to make it balanced"

*suggests commander with 5 extremely powerful abilities*


Are you serious?

You could discuss it instead of just bitching your opinion. I wouldn't call it extremely powerful though. 76mm shermans go down to panthers and you won't be able to field 76mm and weapon upgrades. The jumbo could be penned by the rakten, panther, ect. American tanks still suck even if they're good remember. Only the m26 would be that effective.

Bump the CP on the jumbo then or get rid of the Jumbo and throw in ass engineers or something
25 Jul 2014, 06:46 AM
#43
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395



From experience, it would be abused into teching into tier 1 or 2 (or both) into Pershing. Performance of callins vastly beat that of stock units, so its better to ignore the tank tiers and skip straight into the callin. The Pershing, probably being one of the only tough USF tanks (i can only think of a possible only 3), will suffer the same fate.

Variety is but an excuse.

Wrong. The m26 would come pretty late. Delaying for m26 will get you rolled before 10 CP
25 Jul 2014, 06:48 AM
#44
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053


Wrong. The m26 would come pretty late. Delaying for m26 will get you rolled before 10 CP


Those Ost and Soviet players doing exactly that sure must be wrong, then!
25 Jul 2014, 06:56 AM
#45
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395



Those Ost and Soviet players doing exactly that sure must be wrong, then!

No, different faction design. Although I am envisioning 1v1 and 2v2. In any case, USA thrives on attacking. Stopping your tech and defending doesn't seem like the best route. OKW players don't delay for the KT or JT now do they? You'll have a massive window where you need Jacksons to fight his panthers and you have no Jacksons
25 Jul 2014, 07:02 AM
#46
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053


No, different faction design. Although I am envisioning 1v1 and 2v2. In any case, USA thrives on attacking. Stopping your tech and defending doesn't seem like the best route. OKW players don't delay for the KT or JT now do they? You'll have a massive window where you need Jacksons to fight his panthers and you have no Jacksons


Did i list OKW? NO.

There was a real discussion arguing of the lack of teching soviet players are able to do into call in tanks.

Soviet t2 provides a mortar, a mg, and a AT gun.

I said USF can exploit both T1 and T2 to do the same. People are doing it with the E8, it isnt that hard at all.

Ostheer refuses to tech to t4, barely investing in t3, if at all, and instead getting Tiger.
25 Jul 2014, 07:16 AM
#47
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395



Did i list OKW? NO.

There was a real discussion arguing of the lack of teching soviet players are able to do into call in tanks.

Soviet t2 provides a mortar, a mg, and a AT gun.

I said USF can exploit both T1 and T2 to do the same. People are doing it with the E8, it isnt that hard at all.

Ostheer refuses to tech to t4, barely investing in t3, if at all, and instead getting Tiger.

I was using OKW to make my point, not refute yours.

Anyways, E8 comes at 9 CP. Of course you can delay for it.

Ostheer and Soviet are different faction design. They can get away with doing that. I'm at 9 CP, needing 3 more, and I'm fighting panthers with 57s and zooks. Good luck rofl walking stuka
25 Jul 2014, 07:23 AM
#48
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

So it sounds like a unit that wont even make it into the battle. Pretty historical. There are gaps in RTS. Its why the devs themselves said no to it.
25 Jul 2014, 07:25 AM
#49
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

You could discuss it instead of just bitching your opinion. I wouldn't call it extremely powerful though. 76mm shermans go down to panthers and you won't be able to field 76mm and weapon upgrades. The jumbo could be penned by the rakten, panther, ect. American tanks still suck even if they're good remember. Only the m26 would be that effective.


The 76mm Sherman is a very effective vehicle in the Soviet faction, I imagine this would hold true in the American faction as well. 76mm Shermans should be the staple of a Commander, not a 'filler' ability like you claim.

The claim to fame for the Jumbo Sherman was it's armour, why do you want the armour to be weak? The Jumbo, like the 76mm, would be another staple ability. It's strength would be his armour, and possibly a 76mm gun.

The M26 Pershing in this case would have to be the staple of this doctrine. Everything in the doctrine would be a lead-up to this unit. The unit would likely be weaker than the Tiger or IS-2 to make up for the fact that the US Faction comes with the M36 Jackson.


I don't have replacement suggestions, but I could tell you this wouldn't work. Rather, all 3 of these would do better in separate doctrines. One with 76mm Shermans, one with Sherman Assault Tanks, and one with the M26. Personally, I feel like the M4A3E2 Assault Tank could easily fill the role that M26 sequesters want, without breaking the faction rule of "No Heavy Tanks".
25 Jul 2014, 07:48 AM
#50
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395



The 76mm Sherman is a very effective vehicle in the Soviet faction, I imagine this would hold true in the American faction as well. 76mm Shermans should be the staple of a Commander, not a 'filler' ability like you claim.

The claim to fame for the Jumbo Sherman was it's armour, why do you want the armour to be weak? The Jumbo, like the 76mm, would be another staple ability. It's strength would be his armour, and possibly a 76mm gun.

The M26 Pershing in this case would have to be the staple of this doctrine. Everything in the doctrine would be a lead-up to this unit. The unit would likely be weaker than the Tiger or IS-2 to make up for the fact that the US Faction comes with the M36 Jackson.


I don't have replacement suggestions, but I could tell you this wouldn't work. Rather, all 3 of these would do better in separate doctrines. One with 76mm Shermans, one with Sherman Assault Tanks, and one with the M26. Personally, I feel like the M4A3E2 Assault Tank could easily fill the role that M26 sequesters want, without breaking the faction rule of "No Heavy Tanks".


Um, the Jumbo historically could be penned by panthers, raktens, ect. It will be almost impervious though to stugs and P4s

76mm upgrade requires you to go T4 to get the 75mm shermans to upgrade. 76 shermans can be a staple or a filler. Who says they have to be one or the other just because they're a staple with Soviets?
25 Jul 2014, 08:04 AM
#51
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053



Um, the Jumbo historically could be penned by panthers, raktens, ect. It will be almost impervious though to stugs and P4s

76mm upgrade requires you to go T4 to get the 75mm shermans to upgrade. 76 shermans can be a staple or a filler. Who says they have to be one or the other just because they're a staple with Soviets?


You are kidding, right? Are we even playing the same game? The E8 runs over raketenwerfers, and challenges the panther. It also demolishes the rest. You are saying that the Sherman jumbo, a sherman that would have a 76 mm gun, and even more armor than the e8 would have a problem with panthers and raketenwerfers? Sure. I was imagining it costing 190-230 fuel because of how tough it would be.

75mm Shermans are ONLY in T4. What you said about the upgrade requirement didnt have to be written. It would be a staple because you are making the standard tank badass. You fit 3 amazing aspects in one commander, when divided they can make 3 unique commanders. One commander being 76 shermans, one involving jumbos, and one, if Relic lies, the Pershing. But the Pershing did nothing for the war. Shermans deserve the spotlight. There are still a-ways to do with Shermans, and they provide more support to the overall theme of the faction.

A 75mm Jumbo (or the lack of the 76mm cannon on one) kind of sounds lackluster and reminds me of the 105 m4 sherman... why settle for less, sherman-wise, when you can have a battle tank capable of taking on heavies?
25 Jul 2014, 08:27 AM
#52
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395



You are kidding, right? Are we even playing the same game? The E8 runs over raketenwerfers, and challenges the panther. It also demolishes the rest. You are saying that the Sherman jumbo, a sherman that would have a 76 mm gun, and even more armor than the e8 would have a problem with panthers and raketenwerfers? Sure. I was imagining it costing 190-230 fuel because of how tough it would be.

75mm Shermans are ONLY in T4. What you said about the upgrade requirement didnt have to be written. It would be a staple because you are making the standard tank badass. You fit 3 amazing aspects in one commander, when divided they can make 3 unique commanders. One commander being 76 shermans, one involving jumbos, and one, if Relic lies, the Pershing. But the Pershing did nothing for the war. Shermans deserve the spotlight. There are still a-ways to do with Shermans, and they provide more support to the overall theme of the faction.

A 75mm Jumbo (or the lack of the 76mm cannon on one) kind of sounds lackluster and reminds me of the 105 m4 sherman... why settle for less, sherman-wise, when you can have a battle tank capable of taking on heavies?

I was responding to multiple people. Thanks for the cherry picking.

Anyways, a commander with the jumbo 75 and later the jumbo 76 as the final call in might be better then. 76mm shermans would be balanced with a high cost.

But in my original build, there is no 76mm Jumbo Sherman. I have no clue where you got that from. It would be a 75mm Jumbo that could deflect most shots but would have sherman 75 (bad) penetration itself. A rakten probably would get rolled because it couldn't put out enough DPS. A panther would bounce every shot it takes, but pen have the shots it dishes out. The Jumbo 75 is like a KV1. It's not meant to fight heavy tanks. It's meant to soak ATG and crush infantry

The Easy 8 is still inferior to the panther remember. It's a good all around tank, but nothing special. It just seems special because it's the best the USA has
25 Jul 2014, 08:33 AM
#53
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053


I was responding to multiple people. Thanks for the cherry picking.

Anyways, a commander with the jumbo 75 and later the jumbo 76 as the final call in might be better then. 76mm shermans would be balanced with a high cost.

But in my original build, there is no 76mm Jumbo Sherman. I have no clue where you got that from. It would be a 75mm Jumbo that could deflect most shots but would have sherman 75 (bad) penetration itself. A rakten probably would get rolled because it couldn't put out enough DPS. A panther would bounce every shot it takes, but pen have the shots it dishes out. The Jumbo 75 is like a KV1. It's not meant to fight heavy tanks. It's meant to soak ATG and crush infantry

The Easy 8 is still inferior to the panther remember. It's a good all around tank, but nothing special. It just seems special because it's the best the USA has


Like i was going to let you off suggesting that.

Jumbo isnt crap. Why are you portraying it as that? It is meant to do many things. Its still a sherman. Just... why?

Easy 8 is nearly the panther's match. Good armor, amazing AI, great penetration, and the most important of all: RoF. That alone scares the panther.

Those suggestions... arent well thought out. Thats why I disagree and you rambling on isnt doing anything.

Also, your description of the "Jumbo" seems to be very similar to the current 105 sherman - thatll do.
25 Jul 2014, 08:45 AM
#54
avatar of All Aces

Posts: 29

I don't understand why so many of you are saying the devs aren't into supplying the Pershing. What about the US Forces in CoH2 is different than that of vCoH? Well, their base mechanics and how they tech is ultimately very different, but does that constitute that they shouldn't get a heavy in CoH2 because they certainly had one in vCoH. So they initially gave off the notion that they aren't planning on putting a heavy into the game for the US, that doesn't immediately say "No, there will never be one" to me.

Look at the tank variety they had in vCoH. Why is it so hard to imagine that they may add more things like that in the future. Do you really think that they are going to keep the same structure for the US for the rest of the this game's life?

I understand it may be months down the line, but many of you guys simply believe US would never get a heavy, or at least some type of variety in their armor platform. To me, if they kept the same armor arsenal that they have now, with only adding commanders that offered no real variety in terms of armor support, it would become a pretty bland faction, pretty quickly.

I'm just looking at this from an entertainment standpoint. So they want to maintain the "mobility" of the US Forces. Adding one commander that utilizes a strong, slow-moving force doesn't automatically negate that goal. The US is still the most mobile faction, they just have other avenues they can pursue (i.e. a Pershing commander) if they so choose.
25 Jul 2014, 09:13 AM
#55
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395



Like i was going to let you off suggesting that.

Jumbo isnt crap. Why are you portraying it as that? It is meant to do many things. Its still a sherman. Just... why?

Easy 8 is nearly the panther's match. Good armor, amazing AI, great penetration, and the most important of all: RoF. That alone scares the panther.

Those suggestions... arent well thought out. Thats why I disagree and you rambling on isnt doing anything.

Also, your description of the "Jumbo" seems to be very similar to the current 105 sherman - thatll do.

Who said the Jumbo was crap? I didn't. It's an assault tank not meant for tank on tank.

Panthers should be scared of Easy 8s but Easy 8s should be more scared of panthers. Fair? Panther is superior. Indeed my thoughts aren't well thought out. Your point?
25 Jul 2014, 09:13 AM
#56
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395

I don't understand why so many of you are saying the devs aren't into supplying the Pershing. What about the US Forces in CoH2 is different than that of vCoH? Well, their base mechanics and how they tech is ultimately very different, but does that constitute that they shouldn't get a heavy in CoH2 because they certainly had one in vCoH. So they initially gave off the notion that they aren't planning on putting a heavy into the game for the US, that doesn't immediately say "No, there will never be one" to me.

Look at the tank variety they had in vCoH. Why is it so hard to imagine that they may add more things like that in the future. Do you really think that they are going to keep the same structure for the US for the rest of the this game's life?

I understand it may be months down the line, but many of you guys simply believe US would never get a heavy, or at least some type of variety in their armor platform. To me, if they kept the same armor arsenal that they have now, with only adding commanders that offered no real variety in terms of armor support, it would become a pretty bland faction, pretty quickly.

I'm just looking at this from an entertainment standpoint. So they want to maintain the "mobility" of the US Forces. Adding one commander that utilizes a strong, slow-moving force doesn't automatically negate that goal. The US is still the most mobile faction, they just have other avenues they can pursue (i.e. a Pershing commander) if they so choose.

Finally a well thought out voice of reason
25 Jul 2014, 09:14 AM
#57
avatar of Zupadupadude

Posts: 618

I'm all for a M4A3E2 Assault Tank (Jumbo). It would go into some kind of armored spearhead commander I think, as the Jumbo was designed to be a spearhead tank.
25 Jul 2014, 09:24 AM
#58
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

Tank on tank combat was precisely what the Jumbo crews were expecting. Even with a 75 mm gun, itll beat anything lower than a panther. With a 76, its going to take a lot more to bring it down.
25 Jul 2014, 09:41 AM
#59
avatar of theblitz6794

Posts: 395

Tank on tank combat was precisely what the Jumbo crews were expecting.

Not true at all. The Jumbo was made to lead columns, draw AT fire, and assault positions. It was NOT made for tank to tank combat. The 76mm sherman was a stopgag for tank to tank combat and the Easy 8 was an all around tank. The 76mm Jumbo could be thought of as an uparmored Easy 8, but we're not discussing the 76 on the Jumbo.

Anyways, source it

The jumbo would be similar to the 105 sherman with 2 key differences. 1 is worse gun. 2 is much stronger armor
25 Jul 2014, 09:47 AM
#60
avatar of braciszek

Posts: 2053

So the 75 jumbo would take out anything under a panther, bar a ranged tank destroyer like the jagdpanzer, yet have the same AI as any other 75 sherman. Except it has tons of armor and slower speed. And of course, be expensive...
PAGES (9)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

Board Info

122 users are online: 9 members and 113 guests
Protos Angelus, general_gawain, aerafield, the_onion_man, DSM, Vipper, Hannibal, Crecer13, wuff
104 posts in the last 24h
735 posts in the last week
2574 posts in the last month
Registered members: 25011
Welcome our newest member, amir_roberts_64
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM