Login

russian armor

M4 Sherman needs cost decrease

24 Jul 2015, 22:06 PM
#1
avatar of OrionHunter88

Posts: 141

With the increased tech cost of Major the M4 Sherman feels really over priced. By the time it hits the field now German will have well established and possibly even vetted AT. Before it was possible to "rush" Sherman and get one out early enough to start picking away at AT. By the time it arrives there are layers of German AT - not just 1 or 2 schreck squads.

Now I know the timing comparisons will be tossed around with Panzer 4, but you really have to remember that German AT is far superior to allied AT and especially USF AT options. Sherman was much more viable before because it could hit the field early enough to get ahead of some of that. Now there is little reason to get it over the Scott/EZ8/Jackson for the various roles it performs. Better to get a Jackson/M8 and or EZ8 combo than multiple 75m Shermans.


I suggest a cost decrease to 90FU.
22 Aug 2021, 15:53 PM
#2
avatar of DonnieChan

Posts: 2067 | Subs: 1

22 Aug 2021, 17:27 PM
#3
avatar of Lady Xenarra

Posts: 797

Would you also like to loose the HE shells ability in order to compensate your T-34/76 price tag? Can't deny that sometimes the M4 feels like target practice (from both sides), but then I get mangled by the HE shells and I have to rethink my stance for the 10th time.
22 Aug 2021, 23:45 PM
#4
avatar of MassaDerek

Posts: 89

USF has dogshit teching, only getting medium armor at T4, whilst OST has medium armor by T3 BP2.
MMX
23 Aug 2021, 02:10 AM
#5
avatar of MMX

Posts: 952 | Subs: 1

one word:

2015

/t
23 Aug 2021, 02:36 AM
#6
avatar of Mittens
Donator 11

Posts: 1276

The P4 does the job of a Sherman better than a Sherman, I'd rather pay the prices for a p4 than a Sherman. Additionally the p4 comes out earlier than the Sherman often times and by default has better pen and with vet armor than the Sherman, ironically the unit its historically supposed to beat.

The pintle Mg + Coax + main gun of the p4 makes it an all around better medium tank both for AT and AI, the moving accuracy differences (which IIRC) is the major factor for the sherman which is offset by the p4's vet . Factor in the vet 2 armor (or pre installed for OKW) and you simply get a better unit that scales better with team games and later game.

The Sherman for its cost I'd say hedges 10 fuel too expensive but its not THAT bad but not really outstanding or remarkable, just mediocre leading you to go for more reliable units > Jackson, E8, 105 or holding for Pershing.
23 Aug 2021, 03:33 AM
#7
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 547

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Aug 2021, 02:36 AMMittens
The P4 does the job of a Sherman better than a Sherman, I'd rather pay the prices for a p4 than a Sherman. Additionally the p4 comes out earlier than the Sherman often times and by default has better pen and with vet armor than the Sherman, ironically the unit its historically supposed to beat.

The pintle Mg + Coax + main gun of the p4 makes it an all around better medium tank both for AT and AI, the moving accuracy differences (which IIRC) is the major factor for the sherman which is offset by the p4's vet . Factor in the vet 2 armor (or pre installed for OKW) and you simply get a better unit that scales better with team games and later game.

The Sherman for its cost I'd say hedges 10 fuel too expensive but its not THAT bad but not really outstanding or remarkable, just mediocre leading you to go for more reliable units > Jackson, E8, 105 or holding for Pershing.


Sherman ap vs p4 pen is 140 vs 125.
23 Aug 2021, 05:31 AM
#8
avatar of RintFosk

Posts: 52

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Aug 2021, 03:33 AMKoRneY


Sherman ap vs p4 pen is 140 vs 125.


Sherman
- armor: 160
- near: 140
- mid: 120
- far: 100
- deterioration per meter (near to far): 1


P4
- armor: 180
- armor (asuf.J): 234
- near: 125
- mid: 115
- far: 110
- deterioration per meter (near to mid): 0.5
- deterioration per meter (mid to far): 0.25

Only within range of 24m sherman has higher penetration than P4

From all range P4 has higher penetration rate vs sherman armor

Sherman vs P4 (default)
- near pen rate: 77%
- far pen rate: 55%

Sherman vs P4 asuf.J
- near pen rate: 59%
- far pen rate 42%

P4 (all variant) vs Sherman
- near pen rate: 78%
- far pen rate 68%
23 Aug 2021, 07:01 AM
#9
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Aug 2021, 03:33 AMKoRneY


Sherman ap vs p4 pen is 140 vs 125.


Thats for near range only. At Max P4 has better pen and armor.
23 Aug 2021, 07:02 AM
#10
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

Would you also like to loose the HE shells ability in order to compensate your T-34/76 price tag? Can't deny that sometimes the M4 feels like target practice (from both sides), but then I get mangled by the HE shells and I have to rethink my stance for the 10th time.


HE shells have a smaller OHK radius than either P-4.

Dont get me started on the mess they made of the Cromwell.
23 Aug 2021, 08:12 AM
#11
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 708



HE shells have a smaller OHK radius than either P-4.

Dont get me started on the mess they made of the Cromwell.

the AOE profile of sherman is one of the best. Yes, it has lower OHT radius, but it kills infantry faster and much more reliably thanks to rather tight for a medium scatter and great overall AOE profile.

USF has dogshit teching, only getting medium armor at T4, whilst OST has medium armor by T3 BP2.

I'm sure that you posted this after looking up the actual teching costs.


this is a great tank. You people are smoking something weird :D
23 Aug 2021, 08:25 AM
#12
avatar of MassaDerek

Posts: 89


the AOE profile of sherman is one of the best. Yes, it has lower OHT radius, but it kills infantry faster and much more reliably thanks to rather tight for a medium scatter and great overall AOE profile.


I'm sure that you posted this after looking up the actual teching costs.


this is a great tank. You people are smoking something weird :D

The USF tech tree is a gigantic pile of doghsit compared to OST, AT guns and HMGs sit in two separate tiers.
Meanwhile OST gets a HMG in T0, mortar,sniper and grens in T1.
T2 gives you two LVs to apply bleed for minimal investement unlike allied LVs and the best AT gun in the game, this isn't a sidetech either, you basically always get T2 so you will always have easy access to an AT gun.To achieve a similiar result, you'd need USF to pick airborne.
In T3, OST gets a specialized AI/AA tank(they already technically have AA with the 222), an all around amazing tank in the P4 and the cancerous STUG.
Oh and it's not uncommon to have the P4 come out 1-2 minutes earlier than the M4, despite being costlier in fuel.What's also not uncommon is RAK/PAK-40 walls 12 minutes in that completely zone out your already late medium, forgot to tell you that you have NO stock rocket arty or sniper to dislodge those AT guns, good luck.
23 Aug 2021, 16:10 PM
#13
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486


the AOE profile of sherman is one of the best. Yes, it has lower OHT radius, but it kills infantry faster and much more reliably thanks to rather tight for a medium scatter and great overall AOE profile.


I'm sure that you posted this after looking up the actual teching costs.


this is a great tank. You people are smoking something weird :D


The problem is, it has great HE shells and alright AP. But the P-4... just gets both in a single shell type with more armor and more survivable vet. The Sherman might wipe faster, but so does the Cromwell which has great AoE but absolutely garbage OHK radius. I consistently see 2-3 model drops on my conscripts to an initial P-4 shot. That's not just bad luck, that's the great stats of the P-4. I've not seen that on the Cromwell since its AoE was nerfed to hell. Not killing with first shot results in the infantry not actually losing fighting power. That huge OHK radius is why KV-1s felt really oppressive vs all kinds of infantry. I've been rocking a lot of T-34s because they also have 1.13 OHK radius, which slaughters Obers and infantry blobs. Its been my only solid solution to blobs.

If it aint dead it aint bled.

Tech... is complicated. Not gonna start that.
23 Aug 2021, 19:01 PM
#14
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 708


The USF tech tree is a gigantic pile of doghsit compared to OST, AT guns and HMGs sit in two separate tiers.
Meanwhile OST gets a HMG in T0, mortar,sniper and grens in T1.
orgot to tell you that you have NO stock rocket arty or sniper to dislodge those AT guns, good luck.


My guy, you said "USF has dogshit teching, only getting medium armor at T4, whilst OST has medium armor by T3 BP2." which is a rather shortsighted view of teching.



The problem is, it has great HE shells and alright AP. But the P-4... just gets both in a single shell type with more armor and more survivable vet. The Sherman might wipe faster, but so does the Cromwell which has great AoE but absolutely garbage OHK radius. ....


Imo Sherman is okay, you need to be cautious about duels vs P4H, but it is far from a toothless in this regard like t34/76 is. Imo I'd rather have AOE of Sherman then that of P4's.
23 Aug 2021, 20:05 PM
#15
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4071 | Subs: 3

Sherman is fine. 110F for best HE shells of any medium, MG upgrade, best moving accuracy modifier, versatile smoke dispenser and gets decrew. Go urban assault and buy dozer upgrade and you get 215 armor and 720 HP. Can trade handily with OKW p4s with that upgrade for cheaper fuel price.

Something that needs to be repeated continuously is that medium tanks are largely rng fiestas. Sometimes p4s dump on opposing squads, sometimes they miss continuously. Same goes for the sherman, the t34, and the cromwell. Play safe with them and you can save your units from bad engagements.

Don't like HE sherman? Try one of the multiple other sherman variants who are all great in their own right.
23 Aug 2021, 20:10 PM
#16
avatar of Kurobane

Posts: 487

The only thing the Sherman Needs is better pathing. It easily is one the worst in the game with how it loves to spin in circles instead of going backwards. Easy 8 probably being the only tank worse. There could be a crater on the ground and the Sherman will spin in place compared to the Jackson which glides gracefully across the map.
23 Aug 2021, 20:58 PM
#17
avatar of Esxile

Posts: 3310 | Subs: 1

Sherman is fine. 110F for best HE shells of any medium, MG upgrade, best moving accuracy modifier, versatile smoke dispenser and gets decrew. Go urban assault and buy dozer upgrade and you get 215 armor and 720 HP. Can trade handily with OKW p4s with that upgrade for cheaper fuel price.

Something that needs to be repeated continuously is that medium tanks are largely rng fiestas. Sometimes p4s dump on opposing squads, sometimes they miss continuously. Same goes for the sherman, the t34, and the cromwell. Play safe with them and you can save your units from bad engagements.

Don't like HE sherman? Try one of the multiple other sherman variants who are all great in their own right.


The best HE shell is the shell that also do AT damage.
23 Aug 2021, 21:17 PM
#18
avatar of ShadowLinkX37
Director of Moderation Badge

Posts: 4071 | Subs: 3

jump backJump back to quoted post23 Aug 2021, 20:58 PMEsxile


The best HE shell is the shell that also do AT damage.


Use the AP then. Sherman AP shell has better AoE profile than the cromwell.
23 Aug 2021, 21:35 PM
#19
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 708

P4H
Scatter angle 7.5 Distance max6.4
AOE Radius 2.5
Distance near 0.75 Damage near 160
Distance mid 1.25 Damage mid 56
Distance far 1.875 Damage far 8
80 DMG distance 1.13

Sherman
Scatter angle 6 Distance max 5.5
AOE Radius 4
Distance near 0.5 Damage near 160
Distance mid 1.25 Damage mid 56
Distance far 2.25 Damage far 16
80 DMG distance 1.08

Honestly it is a good tank and I'll go that far saying that if SOV Land Lease had this tank in its disposal, it would be a S+ doctrine right now, especially after 76mm ROF nerf. Just because it dies easily in 4v4 and can't reliably 1v1 other tanks, does not mean it is bad, just saying.
23 Aug 2021, 22:12 PM
#20
avatar of Descolata

Posts: 486

Sherman HE is not bad. Just still kinda iffy, compared to an All-in-one. 8% less OHK Radius. The difference is the Sherman round needs a follow up to really kill, while the P-4 just kills.

If you think large AoE chip damage is a great stat, check the Cromwell's shell. And tell me Cromwell has great AI with a straight face. Crommy has fantastic TTK for whole squads, but can't bleed SHIT. It has the same 2.5 max AoE radius of the P4, but with a .88 OHK radius THAT'S 40% LESS AREA. WITH EXACTLY THE SAME SCATTER. WHAT THE HELL. Its similar to the 76mm or E8. Anyway, I'll get back on topic.

The P-4 gets its GREAT AI statistics with 0 down time between shell types, AND more armor. The Vet is pretty comparable except for the 30% armor on P-4 which really makes the Sherman inconsistent. It goes from a far bounce rate of 45% to 57% with Vet 2. Jesus. That's bouncy. P-4 has 110 pen, shooting at 160 armor. 31.25% bounce chance. It sticks a supermajority of the time.

And that's the AT shell.

The P-4 is 10 mp, 10 fuel, and 1 pop more expensive. The Shell Swap flaw is entirely to pay for the vehicle crew. Otherwise the Sherman would just be bad.

The Sherman is at least playable. The Crommy is 10 MP less, and has just worse AI, AT, and survivability. After the fat nerfs, its just brutally out-classed for... reasons.
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

90 users are online: 90 guests
37 posts in the last 24h
169 posts in the last week
625 posts in the last month
Registered members: 28663
Welcome our newest member, arabella.foster75
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM