Login

russian armor

M4A3 76mm Sherman V E8 Sherman

27 Jul 2020, 13:20 PM
#41
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515



I think the main issue is not the bazookas and the lack of availability for elite bazookas, but the ATG.

SOV and UKF have two high penetration units: Their ATG and the heavy TD. To counter mediums, these factions can rely on their ATGs which allows to make their heavy TDs more vulnerable in some regards (casemate, slow ROF and movement). Against Panthers and heavier units, both units work absolutely fine.
But USF does not have that. Additionally, the mediums of the Axis factions are quite different in armor. Bazookas and especially elite ones work okay against the OST P4, not so much though against OKW's P4. Similarly, they are unreliable against Panthers, a fact which is also true for their ATG. So in the end to reliably counter a Panther, USF relies on building a vehicle themselves, the Jackson. All other factions could get another PaK to defend against a Panther after loosing their heavy TD or simply already having invested into a Sherman. USF still can't, even if officers get elite bazookas. The combo of Cromwell/6-Pounder or T34/ZiS can work against Panthers and OKW P4, Sherman/57mm does not work that great.

And before anyone mentions it: Yes, you can dump munitions into your ATG to make it really good against heavies, but in the end this only get's you so far in a faction that lacks mines and can lose snares in the late game after infantry wipes.

Jackson is the only unit holding USF's late game together. Any serious nerf - as reasonable as it might be from a design point of view - would probably kill this faction.


So in conclusion:
Touching the Jackson is a difficult unit, because USF relies on it to shut down heavy tanks. The current performance level of USF's late game AT capabilities seems mostly fine in my eyes. But heavier nerfs to the Jackson (especially it's potential against heavy units) probably cannot be compensated by having a bit better bazookas that work semi-reliably against mediums on 1-2 squads, because these bazookas could not fill the gap in the anti-heavy department. I think USF's anti medium power could stem a nerfed Jackson, but the anti-heavy department could not.


Thank you. Finally somebody that gets it. The whole faction is designed around the Jackson and people confuse that for "Being OP". Furthremore, you can't compare squads with zooks with vehicles. No matter how elite, werfer, stuka, MGs, mines can easily deny any infantry advance. Then there is also the zook range. It's not a far reaching AT rifle.

Nerf Jackson reload? A single panther can dive it (+ lack of reliable mines on USF)
Nerf penetration? Heavies roll over.
Nerf HP? LoL
Nerf Armour? It's already the lowest it can be for a tank so no point.
Nerf range? Elefant goes BRRRR even more. Panther goes BRRRR. Stug goes BRRR.

And to top all of that. Rifles need vet1 for a slow firing, long reload snare.

Whatever you nerf on Jackson, you kill the teamgame potential of USF and remember that teamgames are still all about heavy tanks, stukas, werfers and elite non doctrinal axis infantry and even mainlane infantry with MG42s (like cheap ostruppen which excel in cover, which is pretty much everywhere usually in teamgames).

You can't really expect to go vs Panther with a nerfed Jackson that can't keep it at range. An expensive tank, but still the best tank hunter in the game. Can solo take on any Ally heavy tank due to high armour, hp and penetration.
27 Jul 2020, 13:57 PM
#42
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 13496 | Subs: 1

Officer should lose their passive sprint before even one considers elite bazookas...
27 Jul 2020, 14:09 PM
#43
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

jump backJump back to quoted post27 Jul 2020, 12:48 PMSerrith


There's no doubt that for cost, the E8 is an excellent counter to medium armor and pretty much any other faction would be happy to have it in their roster, but both it and the M10 suffer from the same issue.

The elite zooks for officers is an interesting idea to compensate for de-tuning the Jackson, but I'm not sure what would be a reasonable trade off.
Perhaps rate of fire? Rate of fire is a weakness for the firefly as it also has poor mobility and turret traverse but the jackson suffers neither of these. Maybe a 1-2 second longer reload?

Perhaps correspondingly the E8 could have a half a second faster reload.

ROF imo is the only way to reasonably nerf its medium performance while maintaining its identity.

The elite zooks combined with other forms would be more than enough imo to make up for a weaker Jackson while also coming sooner meaning the Jackson isn't the be all end all for usf.


Also people like saying that the Jackson is all there is by design but by design usf is supposed to be more reliant on munitions than other factions for improved scaling. Both main AT units were supposed to have quite good potential output against medium targets at the cost of reliability against heavy targets but able to make that up with munitions which frankly is a better design than just fuel all the way.

USF AT does not lack, people just would rather dump their muni into BARs
27 Jul 2020, 14:10 PM
#44
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 3114 | Subs: 2

Nerf Jackson reload? A single panther can dive it (+ lack of reliable mines on USF)
Nerf penetration? Heavies roll over.
Nerf HP? LoL
Nerf Armour? It's already the lowest it can be for a tank so no point.
Nerf range? Elefant goes BRRRR even more. Panther goes BRRRR. Stug goes BRRR.

I mean you can nerf these but this should go hand in hand with buffs to the ATG.
Additional obstacle is that simple math á la "-20 far pen on Jackson, +20 far pen on ATG" does not work. But to be honest I'd leave it at that, I have actually talked too much about the Jackson again.

So back to topic:
Just judging from stats (I do not own the commander for the E8), I'd say the E8 lacks a role. Looks like it was supposed to be a anti medium tank brawler. It lacks the penetration against a Panther, even close range is unreliable. It just has quite a lot of armor, although even this is not enough to bounce Axis heavy AT, so it's also not really meant to soak up shots damage from these sources. The 76mm fulfills a similar anti medium role, but is more of a glass cannon approach compared to the E8. Given that USF lacks proper damage dealers against tanks apart from the (sorry) Jackson, the 76mm seems to work better in that regard. Also the switchable rounds let it scale against heavies.
27 Jul 2020, 14:51 PM
#45
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515


I mean you can nerf these but this should go hand in hand with buffs to the ATG.
Additional obstacle is that simple math á la "-20 far pen on Jackson, +20 far pen on ATG" does not work. But to be honest I'd leave it at that, I have actually talked too much about the Jackson again.

So back to topic:
Just judging from stats (I do not own the commander for the E8), I'd say the E8 lacks a role. Looks like it was supposed to be a anti medium tank brawler. It lacks the penetration against a Panther, even close range is unreliable. It just has quite a lot of armor, although even this is not enough to bounce Axis heavy AT, so it's also not really meant to soak up shots damage from these sources. The 76mm fulfills a similar anti medium role, but is more of a glass cannon approach compared to the E8. Given that USF lacks proper damage dealers against tanks apart from the (sorry) Jackson, the 76mm seems to work better in that regard. Also the switchable rounds let it scale against heavies.


IMHO, E8 should get a slight AI buff and (maybe) along with a price increase. It doesn't need to go toe to toe with Panther. It's unreliable at all ranges vs it but if it had the AI power to compensate, it would be ok. It would have a role. Medium brawler (something that USF lacks hard) with good enough AI to induce a bit of fear. Even if it's an itsy beatsy tiny fear. Furthremore, it doesn't necessarily need to bounce shots from pak or raketen. The whole design of E8 was around the suspension. Mobility + moving accuracy. If I'm not mistaken, the suspension on it was miles ahead of any other tank in WW2. Right now any infantry can just run around it without [any] fear of being bled. And alongside that it's not a cheap tank to begin with + it's doctrinal.
27 Jul 2020, 15:29 PM
#46
avatar of Selvy289

Posts: 366


The 76mm fulfills a similar anti medium role, but is more of a glass cannon approach compared to the E8.


Thats the impression the 76mm/M4C gives me hence why I think swapping its vet around would enforce its roll. To elaborate further, considering you get the 76mm/M4C Sherman for mainly for its At ability with alright ai, if you loose a vet 3 Sherman you would really dont want to pick the 76mm/m4C Sherman again because of it being somewhat glass cannon.

The E8 on the other hand...
27 Jul 2020, 17:46 PM
#47
avatar of Klement Pikhtura

Posts: 772

E8 is kind of ok, but I wish there was a thread about phosphorous smoke strike. It is extremely expensive and excessive. It looks like this ability was designed with 4v4 in mind.

And 76mm is awesome, partially because of the doctrine it is in. On the other hand, the situation with M4C is complete opposite, because of the weird and awkward Land-lease doctrine.
27 Jul 2020, 18:12 PM
#48
avatar of KiwiBirb

Posts: 789



E8 would still be useless as there would be no point in going for an AT gun next to Jackson. E8 in no universe can take on a Panther 1v1, no matter what range. Don't know about the bulldozer change since I don't play dozer much but E8 from my experience should get a slight increase in AOE to match closer to stock mediums and be a doctrinal premium jack of all trades which loses to Panther but can be useful when massed and preserved to reliably take on armour. With a corresponding price increase.


What do you mean, “E8 in no universe can take on a panther 1v1?” Are you saying we can’t buff the E8 because it would be historically inaccurate? In this game, I don’t think historical accuracy is a valid argument as there are many extremely inaccurate things already in the game.

Also, what do you mean, “there would be no point in going for an AT gun next to Jackson.” Nowhere in my post did I mention AT guns or the Jackson.
If the point you were trying to make was that no one would buy this reworked E8 over the Jackson, I don’t believe this is the case. This is because if we look at the example of OKW players, we don’t see them exclusively building either the Jadpanzer or the panther.
27 Jul 2020, 18:21 PM
#49
avatar of KiwiBirb

Posts: 789



IMHO, E8 should get a slight AI buff and (maybe) along with a price increase. It doesn't need to go toe to toe with Panther. It's unreliable at all ranges vs it but if it had the AI power to compensate, it would be ok. It would have a role. Medium brawler (something that USF lacks hard) with good enough AI to induce a bit of fear. Even if it's an itsy beatsy tiny fear. Furthremore, it doesn't necessarily need to bounce shots from pak or raketen. The whole design of E8 was around the suspension. Mobility + moving accuracy. If I'm not mistaken, the suspension on it was miles ahead of any other tank in WW2. Right now any infantry can just run around it without [any] fear of being bled. And alongside that it's not a cheap tank to begin with + it's doctrinal.


Why though? USF is not lacking in premium mediums with good anti inf, but what it does lack is an AT brawler that can match the Panther.

By changing the E8 to be an AT brawler, you add something new to USF’s lineup. However, If you buff it’s anti inf, all you get is another Sherman dozer/ 76mm Sherman alternative.
27 Jul 2020, 19:06 PM
#50
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279



What do you mean, “E8 in no universe can take on a panther 1v1?” Are you saying we can’t buff the E8 because it would be historically inaccurate? In this game, I don’t think historical accuracy is a valid argument as there are many extremely inaccurate things already in the game.

Also, what do you mean, “there would be no point in going for an AT gun next to Jackson.” Nowhere in my post did I mention AT guns or the Jackson.
If the point you were trying to make was that no one would buy this reworked E8 over the Jackson, I don’t believe this is the case. This is because if we look at the example of OKW players, we don’t see them exclusively building either the Jadpanzer or the panther.

You don't see okw going exclusively jp4 or Panther because those units are well designed... Jp4 will fail against heavier armour and can't chase but is great against mediums and especially allied TDS. the Panther on the other hand can chase (well... It's mobile enough to... And has a turret) and has great pen making it better against heavier armour AMD can contribute vs infantry.

The Jackson does not care if it's fighting medium armour or light armour which means an AT focused medium tank has no draw.

You won't see E8s because usf has enough AI they can double down on the best AT in the game. They don't need to dilute their AT in favor of more AI unless they feel like it and even then, Scott's or even an HE m4 would do better.

It needs refined and it needs a role of its own. Being an optional variant in a faction with great stock specialist just doesn't blend. Especially not when you have to pay a premium for them. Let alone picking a commander just for the privilege.
27 Jul 2020, 21:09 PM
#51
avatar of KiwiBirb

Posts: 789

You won't see E8s because usf has enough AI they can double down on the best AT in the game. They don't need to dilute their AT in favor of more AI unless they feel like it and even then, Scott's or even an HE m4 would do better.

It needs refined and it needs a role of its own. Being an optional variant in a faction with great stock specialist just doesn't blend. Especially not when you have to pay a premium for them. Let alone picking a commander just for the privilege.


Does this mean you are for a rework like my proposal? Or is your point that you think people still wouldn’t buy it even with my proposed rework
28 Jul 2020, 04:57 AM
#52
avatar of Applejack

Posts: 359

Oh hey,

I made this same thread 3 months ago but didn't get much of a response.

https://www.coh2.org/topic/105224/winter-patch-current-state-of-doctrinal-armour/post/818268

Everything that has been mentioned over there has been mentioned here. One thing I want to bring over is the special HVSS suspension that the E8 has and only the E8 in the entire game.

The HVSS suspension bonus is supposedly no scatter penalty while moving. The only tank in the game to have that according to this post https://www.coh2.org/topic/36347/cruzz-s-the-more-you-know

The benefit is that the main gun is able to kill infantry better on the move but the gun on the E8 currently is garbage vs infantry so the bonus is insignificant.

Easy Eight has no scatter penalty on the move so it will be just as effective against infantry with the main gun standing still as moving


One thing I would also consider is just adding a switchable round (HE/AP) to the E8 so it's a directly improved Sherman at a higher cost. Its gimmick is the HVSS suspension but its insignificant and that should be addressed.

I know the days of E8 domination heralded a time of USF dominance and may trigger some folks but those days are long behind us and factions are much different than they were back then. Perhaps we should bring back the original idea of Rifle Company Commander (Vet 1 infantry at 300 req and E8 with higher splash).
28 Jul 2020, 07:01 AM
#53
avatar of Loren

Posts: 107

In my opinion, the E8 has an ambiguous role.
It's okay to deal with medium tanks, but it's difficult to prevent other medium tanks from passively battling with E8 and bleeding manpowers. If you compare the performance of the E8 with the P4 J-type, I think it will be more ambiguous.

It is also very difficult to expect the role of a tank destroyer; Because it is very difficult to fight Panther. In most cases, it seems that vanilla units are often more useful than E8. And since this is similar to other people, the E8 is rarely used on the battlefield.
28 Jul 2020, 09:16 AM
#54
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515



What do you mean, “E8 in no universe can take on a panther 1v1?” Are you saying we can’t buff the E8 because it would be historically inaccurate? In this game, I don’t think historical accuracy is a valid argument as there are many extremely inaccurate things already in the game.

Also, what do you mean, “there would be no point in going for an AT gun next to Jackson.” Nowhere in my post did I mention AT guns or the Jackson.
If the point you were trying to make was that no one would buy this reworked E8 over the Jackson, I don’t believe this is the case. This is because if we look at the example of OKW players, we don’t see them exclusively building either the Jadpanzer or the panther.


No no, not historical accuracy. This game is anything but historically accurate. I'm talking about the fact that it shouldn't counter it because of asymmetry. You are right that my point was "Why go E8 next to jackson".

My personal idea for an E8 would be just to buff it's AI power. It wouldn't be able to take on panther but would be good in combined arms with one jackson and you'd get a tank besides the dozer that can handle infantry.

So to sum up E8 would be able to:
- Take on infantry
- Take on mediums
- With it's good mobility take on forward positions and heavies

Right now it can take on medium and heavies.
You'd add power vs team weapons and infantry (with AI buff)

I don't think USF needs a tank to take on a Panther. That would in my opinion lead to symmetrical balancing which is not what COH2 is about. That's my point.

Also @Loren made a good point. How to achieve balance without detriment is now a good question.
Buff HP? Buff AI power? Buff both + price? Would that lead to an expensive but OP unit? I honestly do not know. In my view, AI buff would do the trick, but I could be wrong
28 Jul 2020, 12:42 PM
#55
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

If you are going to get an E8 for AI and a Jackson for AT well... You won't. There are better AI options available for cheaper. And if there are not then you have made the E8 OP due to its better mobility armour and AT stats. If it's better at AI we're back at E8s to the sunset.
28 Jul 2020, 13:43 PM
#56
avatar of Protos Angelus

Posts: 1515

If you are going to get an E8 for AI and a Jackson for AT well... You won't. There are better AI options available for cheaper. And if there are not then you have made the E8 OP due to its better mobility armour and AT stats. If it's better at AI we're back at E8s to the sunset.


You wouldn't go E8 for AI. You would go E8 for the front line tank that does not fall as easily as M4, and has the movement to flank. A tank which would be able to (unlike now) kill infantry and be good en masse (radio net). You'd need at least 2 E8s to kill a single panther and even then it's not 100% (conditions on BF are dynamic, you won't usually find a single panther in teamgames).

E8 in my view would be an excellent unit for big open maps. Keep current stats and slightly buff AI power and price. M4 would still be better AI, Jackson would be better AT but E8 would have the durability that these two lack. Again, I might be wrong and E8 could turn out OP.
29 Jul 2020, 00:23 AM
#57
avatar of KiwiBirb

Posts: 789

My personal idea for an E8 would be just to buff it's AI power. It wouldn't be able to take on panther but would be good in combined arms with one jackson and you'd get a tank besides the dozer that can handle infantry.


But, like I said, this would just make it even more similar to the M4(76).

Also, in my original post I said that I would:
Make it so the Easy eight can 1v1 the panther, where the Easy eight wins of it can get close while the panther wins at range


So, as you can see, it would be asymmetrical, but it would be the opposite of the tech tree asymmetry. This would introduce a new play style to USF instead of just creating another M4(76) duplicate.
29 Jul 2020, 00:38 AM
#58
avatar of thedarkarmadillo

Posts: 5279

So then you run into the issue where a Panther loses up close to an E8 and loses at range to a Jackson so you basically can not use any armour if the enemy fields both an E8 and a Jackson. so gg?
29 Jul 2020, 02:24 AM
#59
avatar of theekvn

Posts: 307


I mean you can nerf these but this should go hand in hand with buffs to the ATG.
Additional obstacle is that simple math á la "-20 far pen on Jackson, +20 far pen on ATG" does not work. But to be honest I'd leave it at that, I have actually talked too much about the Jackson again.

So back to topic:
Just judging from stats (I do not own the commander for the E8), I'd say the E8 lacks a role. Looks like it was supposed to be a anti medium tank brawler. It lacks the penetration against a Panther, even close range is unreliable. It just has quite a lot of armor, although even this is not enough to bounce Axis heavy AT, so it's also not really meant to soak up shots damage from these sources. The 76mm fulfills a similar anti medium role, but is more of a glass cannon approach compared to the E8. Given that USF lacks proper damage dealers against tanks apart from the (sorry) Jackson, the 76mm seems to work better in that regard. Also the switchable rounds let it scale against heavies.


> E8 should get 90% acc on move, not shitty 75% for it's price.
It can get +20 at close range for Cqc/ Diving attack as Med tank brawler. I also recommend E8 can have mark target ( + 10% dmg on enemy tank ) or passive effect from UKF Hammer tactic when radio net active. This changes could encourage USF Combine arm in theory.
29 Jul 2020, 06:12 AM
#60
avatar of Loren

Posts: 107

Well, maybe this is a good solution.
The E8 now has the slowest reload speed, the lowest AOE radius and the AOE decision radius among medium tanks.
(Let's classify Panthers as tank destroyers first.)
- Even Valentine and P4 commander tank has larger AOE radious(2.5) than E8(2.0)

In fact, the unit most similar to the E8 is the T-34/85. This T-34/85 also has an AOE radius of 2.5, better AOE decision radius and a slightly faster reload rate than the E8.

What these 3 means is that the E8's anti-infantry ability is not good enough to role as medium tank. The reason why the E8 is now ignored is because of the feeling of being unreliable on both the anti-infantry and anti-tank. So, how about speed up the reloading, or ease the AOE decision more than now and improve the anti-infantry a little?
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

1028 users are online: 1028 guests
0 post in the last 24h
10 posts in the last week
26 posts in the last month
Registered members: 50002
Welcome our newest member, rwintoday1
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM