axis fanboys will never give up, and agree with us ...
my hope is something new to usf when single player comes out.
Most requested unit in coh2 history...
22 Sep 2014, 00:44 AM
#181
Posts: 228
23 Sep 2014, 12:29 PM
#182
Posts: 747
After all I wouldn't mind the Pershing.
But for God's sake, relic, if you ever consider to implement a heavy vehicle for the USF please, please make it NON-DOCTRINAL.
But for God's sake, relic, if you ever consider to implement a heavy vehicle for the USF please, please make it NON-DOCTRINAL.
23 Sep 2014, 13:50 PM
#183
Posts: 824
Jumbo Sherman armor upgrade for regular Shermans to make them damage sponges? Wouldn't have to be doctrinal, keep their damage around the same, and just buff their armor and health.
Youtube Streaming: https://www.youtube.com/@broodwarjc1517/streams
23 Sep 2014, 14:01 PM
#184
Posts: 56
There is one thing I don'T get...
why are people arguing that the US need a heavy tank and think this means a M26.
The Pershing isn't a heavy tank. Its a medium. Allthough a undermotorised one.
The M26 is comparable to a Panther but slower and with a gun comparable to that of the Tiger E.
Personally I think a doctrine specific M26 wouldn't be much of a problem but it won't be what people argue for. A M26 even if a game balance centric laissez faire approach to histoic reality is chosen (wich is the case in CoH2) will never be able to go toe to toe to a KT or JT. Head on a Tiger is the best i can do. Head on against a Panther the latter is likely to win. A M26 should be more capable vs infantry compared to the Panther though.
The M4A3E2 Jumbo Sherman has better frontal armor than the M26 and comparable side and rear armor. The turret armor of the Jumbo is conciderable better.
Its power to weight ratio is similar. It only carries a less potent gun.
For a damage sponge type unit this is a far more intresting template.
why are people arguing that the US need a heavy tank and think this means a M26.
The Pershing isn't a heavy tank. Its a medium. Allthough a undermotorised one.
The M26 is comparable to a Panther but slower and with a gun comparable to that of the Tiger E.
Personally I think a doctrine specific M26 wouldn't be much of a problem but it won't be what people argue for. A M26 even if a game balance centric laissez faire approach to histoic reality is chosen (wich is the case in CoH2) will never be able to go toe to toe to a KT or JT. Head on a Tiger is the best i can do. Head on against a Panther the latter is likely to win. A M26 should be more capable vs infantry compared to the Panther though.
The M4A3E2 Jumbo Sherman has better frontal armor than the M26 and comparable side and rear armor. The turret armor of the Jumbo is conciderable better.
Its power to weight ratio is similar. It only carries a less potent gun.
For a damage sponge type unit this is a far more intresting template.
23 Sep 2014, 15:24 PM
#185
5 
Posts: 115
Jumbo Sherman armor upgrade for regular Shermans to make them damage sponges? Wouldn't have to be doctrinal, keep their damage around the same, and just buff their armor and health.
If a Sherman reaches Veterancy 1 it could improve it's armour with sandbags, half-tracks, tree logs and concrete like their crews did in WWII to improve their tanks armour versus for example Panzerfaust. It would be a more real way to improve the Sherman's armour ingame.
23 Sep 2014, 15:41 PM
#186
Posts: 467
that often had little effect and just slowed the tanks down
23 Sep 2014, 19:10 PM
#187
Posts: 1571
I miss pershing and 'allied war machine'.
23 Sep 2014, 19:50 PM
#188
14 
Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9
vCoH Experts nearly always went for Armor doctrine....it's hard to see what they might pick for their doctrine of choice, currently
23 Sep 2014, 19:55 PM
#189
Posts: 862
You do realize USF army are based on battle of bulge?
You do realize pershing arrived to Europe months after that, therefore its unrealistic to ask for it?
First 20 Pershings arrived in Antwerp in January of 1945.
That is more than all the Sturmtigers ever built.
23 Sep 2014, 19:55 PM
#190
14 Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9
After all I wouldn't mind the Pershing.
But for God's sake, relic, if you ever consider to implement a heavy vehicle for the USF please, please make it NON-DOCTRINAL.
Fair dos!
The OKW KT is also non-doctrinal
23 Sep 2014, 20:00 PM
#191
Posts: 4928
I'd rather the USF be worked around their Tank Destroyers and Artillery to kill Heavy Tanks. It's a neat concept that's barely even explored.
Also 76mm Shermans, although that would also mean some rebalancing of the Panzer IV / T-34/76 to better work with the new Tank.
Also 76mm Shermans, although that would also mean some rebalancing of the Panzer IV / T-34/76 to better work with the new Tank.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
23 Sep 2014, 20:02 PM
#192
Posts: 133
I like the idea of bringing back the sand bags on tanks. From what I remember in the first COH they had them on the front of Shermans. They would block one frontal shot, which helped a lot more then you would think.
23 Sep 2014, 20:02 PM
#193
14 Posts: 10665 | Subs: 9
^^ ^^
Whatever floats your boat
Whatever floats your boat
23 Sep 2014, 20:21 PM
#194
Posts: 862
Re: Jumbo Sherman
There were more than 260 of these built and used in combat in late 1944. That means more of these were fielded than Elephants, Ostwinds, sturmtigers and 50mm Pumas put together.
They were considered essentially impervious to any AT gun from the front.
Despite that, the allies didn't go forward with making more. They found them too limited in speed, maneuverability, and cross country ability.
The Sherman really did have values that aren't modeled in COH. They were very mechanically reliable. Performed well in their designed role (breakouts). Were easy to repair even after having been knocked out.
This helped make possible many of the breakneck chases of the US Army through France and at Remagen, and the complete turn of the 3rd Army front during the Battle of the Bulge. All of them were operations because of opportunity and not planning.
There were more than 260 of these built and used in combat in late 1944. That means more of these were fielded than Elephants, Ostwinds, sturmtigers and 50mm Pumas put together.
They were considered essentially impervious to any AT gun from the front.
Despite that, the allies didn't go forward with making more. They found them too limited in speed, maneuverability, and cross country ability.
The Sherman really did have values that aren't modeled in COH. They were very mechanically reliable. Performed well in their designed role (breakouts). Were easy to repair even after having been knocked out.
This helped make possible many of the breakneck chases of the US Army through France and at Remagen, and the complete turn of the 3rd Army front during the Battle of the Bulge. All of them were operations because of opportunity and not planning.
23 Sep 2014, 21:57 PM
#195
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
First 20 Pershings arrived in Antwerp in January of 1945.
That is more than all the Sturmtigers ever built.
All of the sturmtigers have actually seen combat.
Most of the pershings not, just two did(or I'm confusing it with super pershing? anyway normal ones in combat were even more rare then sturmtigers).
Maybe it's 'cause the Axis players aren't a bunch of forum crybabies, and they keep their cool and fight the uphill battle, unlike some of their "allied" counterparts.
23 Sep 2014, 22:20 PM
#196
Posts: 161
If I'm not mistaken the Tiger's 88 mm KwK 36 L/56 gun couldn't penetrate the Jumbos frontal armour (178 mm @ 30 degrees). Would have been fun to see it in-game as an Sherman who won't go full BBQ after a couple of hits.
For extra lols add the Pershing with armour upgrade and APCR ammo, yes please.
For extra lols add the Pershing with armour upgrade and APCR ammo, yes please.
23 Sep 2014, 23:03 PM
#197
Posts: 4928
There were more than 260 of these built and used in combat in late 1944. That means more of these were fielded than Elephants, Ostwinds, sturmtigers and 50mm Pumas put together.
They were considered essentially impervious to any AT gun from the front.
Despite that, the allies didn't go forward with making more. They found them too limited in speed, maneuverability, and cross country ability.
Some units that were not blessed with Jumbos made field modifications to some of their own. "Expedient Jumbos" were M4A3's modified with extra armour scavenged from the many wrecks laying around from the Battle of the Bulge.
The Sherman really did have values that aren't modeled in COH. They were very mechanically reliable. Performed well in their designed role (breakouts). Were easy to repair even after having been knocked out.
This helped make possible many of the breakneck chases of the US Army through France and at Remagen, and the complete turn of the 3rd Army front during the Battle of the Bulge. All of them were operations because of opportunity and not planning.
A lot of the benefits of Allied Tanks aren't portrayed in-game unfortunately. The ability for Tanks that were "KIA" to be salvaged and returned to combat, the ease of repairs, the lower costs and superior numbers, etc. A lot of these would be too hard to balance, but in it's current state, Allied tanks are underwhelming in the late to end-game (the period where everything is Vet 3/5 and the Super-Heavy tanks roll out).
All of the sturmtigers have actually seen combat.
Most of the pershings not, just two did(or I'm confusing it with super pershing? anyway normal ones in combat were even more rare then sturmtigers).
Nah there were more than 2 M26's used, but only the first batch saw any action, and it was in the final months of the war. There were 2 only Super Pershings, and only one saw light action.
If I'm not mistaken the Tiger's 88 mm KwK 36 L/56 gun couldn't penetrate the Jumbos frontal armour (178 mm @ 30 degrees). Would have been fun to see it in-game as an Sherman who won't go full BBQ after a couple of hits.
Yes, they could. That's one of the reasons it's being suggested as a viable alternative to an IS-2 clone.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
0 user is browsing this thread:
Livestreams
 |
|
|
6 | ||
 |
|
|
276 | ||
 |
|
|
18 | ||
|
|
|
|
7 | ||
 |
|
|
4 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.34957.860+14
- 3.589215.733+4
- 4.1101614.642+2
- 5.305114.728+1
- 6.916405.693-2
- 7.272108.716+23
- 8.721440.621+3
- 9.1041674.607-2
- 10.17146.788+1
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1233
Board Info
832 users are online:
832 guests
0 post in the last 24h
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
8 posts in the last week
38 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49084
Welcome our newest member, sunwingamescom1
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM
Welcome our newest member, sunwingamescom1
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM