Forget the pershing, Jumbo 76 is where it's at

Jump back to quoted post29 Oct 2014, 09:04 AMaradim

A jumbo would be a worse easy eight, being better only in having slightly better armor, the easy eight was the last evolution of the sherman tank, a jumbo in the game would be a slightly worse KV1.

Jump back to quoted post29 Oct 2014, 17:51 PMMr. Someguy

How many times do I have to say this? The "E" meant "Experimental", it was not a linear progression of models. The E8 was also not "the last evolution of the sherman tank", there were many post-war variants made by other countries, most notably (imo) the Israeli M-50 and M-51 Shermans. Finally, the KV-1 was made in 1939 and could be penetrated frontally by the Panzer IV KwK 40, the M4A3E2 was made in 1944 and could not be frontally penetrated by the Tiger I KwK 36 except at point-blank range. Comparing both tanks defense to the Tiger I, the Jumbo is clearly superior.

Jump back to quoted post29 Oct 2014, 18:52 PMkafrion

so much fail in this thread ...

SRSLY who bases the fanction of a unit in coh2 to the actual stats ?

either a fat sherman or a pershing usf can use a decent heavy tank to bring parity against the other heavies , preferably both in different doctrines .

Another unit that could be made is the sherman grizzly in the form of a slightly better armored sherman with better movement in the snow , in an assault engies doctrine perhaps to make it more interesting

Jump back to quoted post29 Oct 2014, 18:53 PMZupadupadude

But the Sherman Grizzly was Canadian.

Jump back to quoted post29 Oct 2014, 17:22 PMAffe

OMG. M36 frontal armor was 60mm. 108mm(or 114) was the LOWER hull armor. These didnt Play any role because tanks can only shoot at the UPPER part of other tanks.Tanks from ww2 can not lower there gun enough to hit the lower hull.

lower hull is the level where the tracks are tanks dont aim at this low Level they aim the upper part or the turret.

http://i.imgur.com/CkADS2B.png