USF needs this badly

Your right. Non stop air strikes would be boring. Also having 10 fuel Sherman's would get old.

Also being mauled from superdistance with a 17k18 wouldn't be fun. Or attacking a Tiger with 10 shermanns/t34s in order to be able to make it a scratch would be meh. Or whiping out an entire squad with an mg42 in 3 secs would be absolutly a no go. Or....

Also being mauled from superdistance with a 17k18 wouldn't be fun. Or attacking a Tiger with 10 shermanns/t34s in order to be able to make it a scratch would be meh. Or whiping out an entire squad with an mg42 in 3 secs would be absolutly a no go. Or....

The Average was 3 to 1 AT wasn't the Sherman's job. Good thing the U.S. Industry could produce soooo much it really wouldn't have mattered. Liberty Ships are a perfect example. Sure Uboats GO CRAZY we got more then your country can even produce torpedoes.

If that's not going to be modeled then not should the myth of the übermensch

Good thing the U.S. Industry could produce soooo much it really wouldn't have mattered.

I think that if an US tankman from that period would read this, he would kick your a.... until Berlin and back. Do you think they didn't prefer to have better tanks in order to keep pace with german armor? Don't you think that this did matter for them? Do you think the US generals and leaders enjoyed seeing burned boddies emerging from twisted carcases of their tanks? Of course they didn't.

But german technology was superior. And they just couldn't keep pace with it. So the only way to beat it was through numbers. The best tactics. Same in the case of soviets.

superior is debatable and people do it all the time. the US armour was the wrong kind for the fight they were facing though.

I think that if an US tankman from that period would read this, he would kick your a.... until Berlin and back. Do you think they didn't prefer to have better tanks in order to keep pace with german armor? Don't you think that this did matter for them? Do you think the US generals and leaders enjoyed seeing burned boddies emerging from twisted carcases of their tanks? Of course they didn't.

But german technology was superior. And they just couldn't keep pace with it. So the only way to beat it was through numbers. The best tactics. Same in the case of soviets.

Uh not really, it was a combination of US Tank Doctrine and the US Army's stubbornness. When the M4 Sherman was designed, it was superior to German Tanks at the time, it was better armoured, armed, more agile, and had a stabilization system that allowed accurate firing on the move, an uncommon feature for its time. When it was introduced in Africa, its opponents were the Panzer III with 37mm and 50mm guns, and Panzer IV with its stubby low velocity 75mm Gun. The Army decided the M4 was sufficient and no serious effort was put toward further development.

As the war progressed, the Army's stubbornness slowed any advancement in US Tank design, they only wanted the M4A3 with it's 75mm Guns, which were to be used for Infantry Support. Dedicated Tank Destroyers were kept for AT duties instead. Tanks decided where and when to attack, and for enemy Tanks, Tank Destroyers and other AT Weapons (AT Guns, Bazookas, Artillery, Aircraft, and Mines) were meant to deal with them. The M4 was still considered sufficient, and wasn't used to engage in unnecessary tank combat.

When the US Army invaded France, they expected to be facing down Panzer IV's and light vehicles, Panthers were assumed to be as rare as Tigers. When we ended up fighting large numbers of Panthers and stronger-than-anticipated Panzer IV's, 76mm Guns started appearing on some of our tanks. The Ardennes Counteroffensive was a wake-up call for the Army, it showed massive flaws in our doctrine, which lead to huge gains by the Germans. Many of our Anti-Tank emplacements were flanked and destroyed, our Tanks had difficulty holding back the blitz, we didn't have enough Tank Destroyers on-hand, and our aircraftwere grounded by bad weather.

After this, the Army finally caved and made the 76mm Gun standard on all front-line M4's, as well as deploying our first and only used Heavy Tank in history, the M26 Pershing. Fun Fact: After the war the Pershing was reclassified as a Medium Tank, and the concept was eventually developed into the Patton series of Main Battle Tanks.


That's all for today, tune for our next history lesson in US Army stubbornness: the M14 "Universal" Rifle and the M16 Assault Rifle.

Uh not really, it was a combination of US Tank Doctrine and the US Army's stubbornness. When the M4 Sherman was designed, it was superior to German Tanks at the time, it was better armoured, armed, more agile, and had a stabilization system that allowed firing on the move, an uncommon feature for its time. When it was introduced in Africa, its opponents were the Panzer III with 37mm and 50mm guns, and Panzer IV with its stubby low velocity 75mm Gun. The Army decided the M4 was sufficient and no serious effort was put toward further development.

Strange decision, because in Africa they surely met the PzIV ausf F2 and G models also, that were superior to M4 at least in firepower.

As the war progressed, the Army's stubbornness slowed any advancement in US Tank design, they only wanted the M4A3 with it's 75mm Guns, which were to be used for Infantry Support. Dedicated Tank Destroyers were kept for AT duties instead. Tanks decided where and when to attack, and for enemy Tanks, Tank Destroyers and other AT Weapons (AT Guns, Bazookas, Artillery, Aircraft, and Mines) were meant to deal with them. The M4 was still considered sufficient, and wasn't used to engage in unnecessary tank combat.

Not allways in a combat situation you chose your fight. If germans chosed their fight at Prokhorovka (kursk region)they would have won. So what a couple of M4s would have done if they surprisingly met a P4 ausf G or H? Or worst, a Tiger?

When the US Army invaded France, they expected to be facing down Panzer IV's and light vehicles, Panthers were assumed to be as rare as Tigers. When we ended up fighting large numbers of Panthers and stronger-than-anticipated Panzer IV's, 76mm Guns started appearing on our M4's. The Ardennes Counteroffensive was a wake-up call for the Army, and they finally caved and made the 76mm Gun standard on the M4, as well as deploying our first and only used Heavy Tank in history, the M26 Pershing.

Unfortunately not even better equiped shermans with 75 or 76 mm guns could not go toe to toe with a Panther or a Tiger. They were superior to all PIV models but that was it. Not talking about dedicated AT self propelled guns such as JagdPanzer, JagdPanther or hetzers which - by the way - were better performing compared to M10, M17 and M36.

Anything they did, they were one step behind. Hell, I wonder what sky batlles would turned into if germans had enough resources to build and maintain enough Me262s.

Hell, I wonder what sky batlles would turned into if germans had enough resources to build and maintain enough Me262s.

and there is the topic your your new scifi trilogy.

Everyone will switch to USF and spam rangers if they come to the game.
325 mp with two bazookas and Thompson (without any ammo upgrade) sounds damn unfair! I will permanently play USF!

Interesting post. I wait the next lesson ^^

Anything they did, they were one step behind. Hell, I wonder what sky batlles would turned into if germans had enough resources to build and maintain enough Me262s.

Dunno, a Nuclear bomb on their head maybe. I guess everyone here is happy they didn't had enough resources to bring the way to the next stage.

Strange decision, because in Africa they surely met the PzIV ausf F2 and G models also, that were superior to M4 at least in firepower.

We did encounter the F2 and even the Tiger in Africa, but the F2 wasn't considered a threat and the Tiger, a Heavy Tank, was considered rare enough that our AT doctrine could handle them on the occasion they appeared.

Not allways in a combat situation you chose your fight. If germans chosed their fight at Prokhorovka (kursk region)they would have won. So what a couple of M4s would have done if they surprisingly met a P4 ausf G or H? Or worst, a Tiger?

That's what the Ardennes Counteroffensive showed us. Before that we were largely on the offensive, we had our air power, we had our intel, we chose where, when, and how to attack. We did notice the disparity in firepower, and 76mm armed Shermans were created to try to reduce it, but they weren't the majority, and as far as the big picture was concerned, we were still winning strong. The Ardennes Counteroffensive blindsided us and showed us the flaws in our Tank Doctrine. This lead to the 76mm becoming standard, especially with the introduction of the Easy Eight.

Unfortunately not even better equiped shermans with 75 or 76 mm guns could not go toe to toe with a Panther or a Tiger. They were superior to all PIV models but that was it. Not talking about dedicated AT self propelled guns such as JagdPanzer, JagdPanther or hetzers which - by the way - were better performing compared to M10, M17 and M36.

True, but even while the Panther Tank was far better at Tank combat than even the 76mm Sherman, we have more than enough advantages to make up for it. Our air power, our reliable artillery support, our mobility, and of course our numerical advantage. German Panzer Divisions were lacking in strength and numbers. In fact, some of our Infantry Divisions had more Tanks than some German Tank Divisions. The greatest threat to US Tanks was not a Panther or a Tiger or any Tank Destroyer, but the humble Panzerfaust.

Anything they did, they were one step behind. Hell, I wonder what sky batlles would turned into if germans had enough resources to build and maintain enough Me262s.

We were behind on an individual level, but as far as numbers and support went, we were way way ahead, and that's why we refused to change until the day our numbers were matched and our support was unavailable.

I guess everyone here is happy they didn't had enough resources to bring the way to the next stage.

Of course.

Anything they did, they were one step behind. Hell, I wonder what sky batlles would turned into if germans had enough resources to build and maintain enough Me262s.

Except this one
900MP, 300Fuel, 15 CP

Good job derailing my thread....

Good job derailing my thread....

You know, I noticed you always suffer getting your thread derailed. Pity you.

wishlist threads are the easiest to derail.

What the fuck is this x t-34 or shermans to take down a tiger?

Where does this statistic even come from, it is backed up by no historical basis whatsoever and is just pure fantasy.

The permament airstrikes or 10 fuel shermans is also pure nonsense.


Rocket strafes were actually incredibly inneficent againts tanks, only 8% of the rockets actually ever hit the tank, alot of tanks were knocked out because during a strafing attack, crews would often jump out of the tank and get annihilated by the rockets, in the tank itself, it was pretty safe and the chance of getting destoyed by a rocket is fairly low.

Deraling and pushing someone 'cuz he/she wants non-broken factions must be amazing....

I think that if an US tankman from that period would read this, he would kick your a.... until Berlin and back. Do you think they didn't prefer to have better tanks in order to keep pace with german armor? Don't you think that this did matter for them? Do you think the US generals and leaders enjoyed seeing burned boddies emerging from twisted carcases of their tanks? Of course they didn't.

But german technology was superior. And they just couldn't keep pace with it. So the only way to beat it was through numbers. The best tactics. Same in the case of soviets.

SIGH...you are indoctrinated I am afraid in the Myth of the Ubermensch. They had some things better some things worse. But they did have a hard on for big guns due to Hitler compensating. Of course we could get into Universal Parts and how great that was and how our tanks had a higher Up-Time as a result since it made logistics so easy. And we can also put this out there for your enjoyment:

http://ftr.wot-news.com/2013/09/05/common-myths-about-wwii/

At your silly response about veterans of course they would have preferred better tanks but it wasn't up to them. US Industry is what won us the war. We didnt require over engineering. And the fact that the US actually killed more German tanks then Germans killed American tanks is quite funny...

And stop with the Melodrama...its silly.

Back on Topic:

I hope they do Add the Rangers like I said before. I think 400MP would be a fair cost as long as they performed well.

Good job derailing my thread....

my bad