The state of Medium Armor
Posts: 15
Bear in mind this thread will be mostly concerning the mainline non-doctrinal mediums in the frame of 1v1, I welcome the discussion of doctrinal mediums, but please understand the focus of the conversation. For the sake of the big picture I will include the doctrinal mediums.
The Soviet T-34-76:
The T-34 has found an odd niche of a flanker and support vehicle that is usually ignored for soviet doctrinal heavies that have more survivability. Everything Axis used to counter your T-70 will also counter your T-34, so there will already be counters by the time it hits the field. It will absolutely get policed by a P4 or even a puma, but has a nice suicide ability to drive home its expendability. This vehicle is usually purchased last after a heavy is built for holding a line, an SU-85 for policing armor, and a katy for countering team weapons are purchased. I'm not sure what to make of this unit, as soviet player seem to have made due without them, but they seem a bit too easily countered before they even hit the field. I would like to see them used more for such a staple unit of the Soviet army.
Overall it is lacking survivability, which I believe is intentional, as well as AT ability with other mediums, which I believe is also intentional. This may be the one mainline medium that I feel is in an okay place, but that would probably change if heavy tanks ever have their timings adjusted.
the T-34-85
I seldom use it so I will divert to players with more knowledge on it than me. I mostly see it passed up for Soviet heavies and then purchased in a supporting role that can scare infantry and police p4s.
The USF M4:
A controversial vehicle to propose buffs to due to its first in show anti-infantry capability, a unique trait shared by every other unit in the USF roster, making it add nothing that the faction needs at the point at which it becomes available. Everything that countered your stuart will counter your M4, raketens, paks, shreks, pumas, and the p4 will all police your M4, leading most players to ignore this unit and get a jackson to actually deal with enemy medium armor, or a scott to deal with infantry without risking the unit. The usual times I see effective M4 purchases is when there is a large fuel income difference, however even then, the M4 is very vulnerable whereas a p4 would easily close out a game.
The smoke ability of the M4 is often sighted as a survivability tool, which I believe to be untrue, due to the long "casting" time, and the fact it makes the unit immobile when used. It seems to me that it is an offensive/utility ability meant to help the USF player make pushes rather than save a stricken m4, though of course there are situations where it could be used in such a manner, this is usually not the case.
The crew mechanic is one of it's saving graces, while it doesn't give the tank survivability it at least allows it to get back to the fight quicker than most mediums.
Overall its issues are an inability to compete with axis mediums, a vulnerability to all Axis AT options, and general lack of survivability.
There are a few doctrinal varients which seek to address these options, some of which I'm very fond of, such as the dozer blade raising the front armor from 160 to 200, which is still less than the P4, but it's at a point when you may start bouncing the once in a blue moon hit.
another varient is the M4A3(76), which seeks to address the AT ability of the vehicle, however the cost seems to not be worth what you get when it still retains the 160 armor, and still has penetration issues with some axis meium armor. The standard round has a pitiful penetration of 160/130/120, meaning you will probably be using the HVAP of 220/180/165 being the only one to relaibly penetrate the p4 (of 234 armor) at close range. This also makes rushing a p4 harder, as the ROF is reduced with HVAP, and of course, makes the anti-infantry capability pitiful.
The M4A3E8 boasts 215 armor, less than that of the p4, but the most for USF mediums. It's only downsides are one of the worst mediums in anti infantry capability and being in a fairly non-useful doctrine. The extra armor allows it to handily defeat a P4, though that may be after a bounce-fest, making it a king maker until heavy tanks arrive. I would like to see what spot this is in if it's doctrine ever gets another re-work.
The UKF Cromwell:
Used to be a kingmaker on the field that could just rush down a p4 due to its speed. I'm at a loss for the cromwell. It's the mobility the UKF needs but seems to be passed up for heavies as the valentine seems to fill its role for cheaper What the Axis used to beat that valentine will still beat a cromwell, so it's no wonder it's usually skipped nowadays. It gets phos shells as a strange utility I believe was meant proactively meant to improve survivability by shooting at AT crews, but it doesn't seem to help it too much.
The OKW p4:
The jack of all trades master of some. boasting 234 armor means whatever the Allies used to beat up your luchs will have trouble with this thing. The USF in particular has a hard time dealing with the unit, as the M1 atgun is pitiful, resulting in your opponent needing to spend valuable muni just to push a p4 away, and rear ech/lieutenant bazookas will more often than not bounce harmlessly. The p4 performs very well against infantry, allowing it to terrorize any allied elites that may have been pushing around Axis core infantry. While its penetration is fairly low, The large armor difference between it and the other mainline mediums lets it police them fairly easily, causing most Allied players to ignore their mediums and to go for tank destroyers. In fact, TDs are pretty much the only thing the p4 needs to fear, however even then, it gets a blitz ability to leave sticky situations, and its armor will likely hold out as TDs use their far penetration values trying to keep up. The one exception I would make would be the new USF bazooka experts, however they have a harder time penetrating a p4 than a shrek would an m4, but they still get a mention because I know they will be brought up.
Because of its great survivability and general purpose usefulness, the P4 is almost always taken over Axis TDs in the same tier. Which makes sense, why have yet another counter to something all of your other AT options already deal with? Unfortunately it seems they exist in an attempt to counter the doctrinal mediums the P4 may struggle to penetrate, however they are usually held off on to go for the more desirable panther.
The OST p4:
Starting with less armor than it's OKW brother but still ahead of the pack at 180 with more gained from veterancy, The problems with OST's p4 is pretty much the same as OKWs with the exception that it's a little easier to kill early on and to offset that it could very well be rolling with panzer tactician for extra survivability stacked onto it's blitz and already high armor.
There are a lot of options we have to try and solve the gap in ability between the mediums and allow more units to be useful. We could adjust Allied surviability, such as axis AT options, or Maybe increased armor with vet like the p4. (sandbags on shermans like coh1, as an example) another option is to lower P4 survivability (of course, dropping it's price to match). I sought to make this discussion with all the talks of the jackson, which I believe is unfair to criticize without first addressing the monsters that created it. I would very much welcome other perspectives and ideas, please let me know what your opinion is, or what I got wrong.
Posts: 3053
I think the cromwell is kind of unnecessarily bad though. It could use the t34 treatment with its mgs considering it doesn't really stand out at anything and is more expensive than t34s.
Posts: 4474
armor
okw p4 234 cost 140 fuel
p4 180 cost 120 fuel
Cromwell/Sherman 160 cost 110 fuel
t-34/76 150 armor 90 fuel (almost the cost of a light tank)
AI in order of power
shemran heat + cal 50 upgrade
Sherman heat
okw p4 with mg upgrade
p4 with mg upgrade
shrmean no heat with cal 50 (unless tanks are moving, in that case Sherman > okw p4 has it has less scatter on the move)
t 34/76
okw p4 with no mg upgarde
p4 with no mg upgrade
Sherman no heat no mg upgrade (unless moving)
Cromwell (but it can crush more easily
AT power short/mid/long penetration
okw p4/ normal p4 125/115/110
Sherman 140/120/100
t 34-76 120/100/80
Cromwell 135/120/105 (arguably the best pen profile)
reload is similar around 5.5 and 6 for all 5
now for speed in order from 7,3 to 6
Cromwell
t 34 76
Sherman
p4
okw p4
for target size allied vehicle are generally smaller and so have lower target size (more chance to dodge shells)
over all Sherman is still the best cause ti has 0.75 moving acc instead of 0.5, self repairs, smoke, etc
i don't know why OP think p4 is so good as it has the worse price x stats and utility u get
Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2
just sop u knwo the differnce between all the medium is minimal
---Tank stats---
/shortened*Hannibal
Both P4s are good due to their armor, that's what makes them win engagements with other mediums. Also Blitzkrieg is a very decent utility, way better than ram and I use it also more often then the smoke shell.
But to adress OPs post:
I think the T34/76 could do with some rework. It feels like a weird mix of light and medium tank that does not really propel you into the midgame. But the Sherman is an all-round good tank that performs okay without and great with micro. The Cromwell is a bit quirky against infantry but it does its job.
Of all mediums, the T34/76 is the most "unique" one in the sense that it is way cheaper and overall AT performance is the worst of them. You either compensate that by amassing them in smaller modes. In larger modes its usually better to go SU85 + Katyusha. The rest is pretty much standardized and performs according to their cost.
Posts: 4183 | Subs: 4
Posts: 3588 | Subs: 3
Posts: 2358
I dont think mediums have to be addressed more than heavies and allied TDs that dominate mid game way too early in a match.
Posts: 379 | Subs: 1
Posts: 3260
The Cromwell is a bad Sherman. It could do with some sort of AT buff to distinguish it, although I'm not sure what.
The T-34/76 could stand to be 100 FU with Sherman penetration.
Posts: 2272 | Subs: 1
I'm not gonna write a wall of text here, but I think OPs descriptions of mediums is pretty skewed or missinformed. For example, cromwells don't have phos although its in their description here. OP also doesn't seem to factor in fuel cost of the unit to performance ratio.
But his playercard is a sign of enough experience... oh...
Posts: 2458 | Subs: 1
The only medium tank that I really don't like is the Cromwell. It just has no role at all at the moment. T34 is cheap, spammable, strong vs infantry and can ram to finish off tanks with off-map or in combination with SU-85. Sherman has HE rounds that rape infantry and the bulldozer upgrade that can turn it into a premium medium doctrinally. OKW P4 is a premium non-doctrinal medium tank with very reliable main-gun and high armour that makes it hard to take out with Cromwell, Sherman or T34. Ost P4 has the same extra armour at vet 2 and is a good all round tank. Cromwell has slightly better mobility but that's just not enough to compensate for how mediocre everything else is. It needs some sort of redeeming ability.
Posts: 1614 | Subs: 3
I personally don't feel rushing to heavy IWIN tanks adds to the game in a positive way.
Posts: 3260
Easy fix would be to make heavy tanks 11 CP again, instead of 9/10 CP. The AoE/scatter changes have already made heavies good enough to make it worth getting them after the tech lock.
I personally don't feel rushing to heavy IWIN tanks adds to the game in a positive way.
It's apparently for the benefit of teamgames.
In larger modes, CP13 heavies can't contend with the vetted tank destroyers that are around at that timing.
If blvckdream's idea of standardising TD penetration to the Firefly was implemented, you could probably move them back to CP13.
Posts: 8154 | Subs: 2
Posts: 1979
...
or ram being switched to HVAP ammunition ala jackson
the T-34-85 needs a totally new ability as ram is near useless for it...
cromwell can be less shitty aswell...
the Panzer 4 and sherman are quite balanced against each other...
Posts: 1527
Permanently BannedPosts: 810
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
Ez8 need HVAP swapping
Panzer J needs "heat rounds" swapping.
Posts: 810
Panzer J needs "heat rounds" swapping.
You dont know that nobody uses ez8
Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1
You dont know that nobody uses ez8
Great lets swamp that stat of the easy8 with Panzer J and see who will use the "new" easy8 who will use the new Panzer J.
The fact that Easy8 is not being used does really say much other that there are better commanders.
Easy8 is very cost efficient vehicles and one should buff it to make it more attractive, one should actually nerf the alternatives...
Livestreams
53 | |||||
10 | |||||
8 | |||||
1 | |||||
15 | |||||
12 | |||||
8 | |||||
7 | |||||
4 | |||||
4 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.842223.791+5
- 2.655231.739+15
- 3.1101405.731+6
- 4.943411.696-1
- 5.715.934+12
- 6.35659.858+2
- 7.275145.655+1
- 8.307114.729+3
- 9.10629.785+7
- 10.527.881+18
Replay highlight
- cblanco ★
- 보드카 중대
- VonManteuffel
- Heartless Jäger
Board Info
12 posts in the last week
37 posts in the last month
Welcome our newest member, Deski780
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM