Posts: 758
@up
Why if there already is EZ8 and jackson?
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
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.
4 Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1
You still have jackson.
Why would you want 76mm otherwise if not for AT?
Posts: 17914 | Subs: 8
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.
4 Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
It gives you an option. Say that lategame, you lose all your Jacksons to a Stuka CAS loiter strike. All you have is 2 M4A3 shermans, vs. 3 P4s. Upgrade to 76mm, and you have tanks that can hold the line until better AT can hit the field.
You know, like how they were used in real life.
Its not like Ostheer with the P4, Ostwind, and Stug in T3 don't build P4s because the Ostwind and Stug do their respective roles well. Sometimes you just want a more tanky, mobile, generalist tank.
4 Posts: 1194 | Subs: 1
Sherman will have to lose HE shell, but then it will be a "sort of" easy 8 no ?
Posts: 420
I will simply lol at anyone expecting such a change to a 2 year old general use infantry.
Equally possible are pershing for USF, IS-3 for soviets or ober nerf for OKW.
Posts: 141
Posts: 278
Posts: 4951 | Subs: 1
Panzer IV price is not fine, but you can all live in denial.
For AI the Ostwind is way better, for AT the StuG III Ausf G is way better. PIV loses to T34/85 so what is the point of the PIV? It's a bit less vulnerable than the others I mentioned but not by much. Soviet AT still has guaranteed penetration on its frontal armor (or extremely high penetration chance) and so we are talking about it being able to take a couple more hits is all. Ostwind has better mobility too so in some ways it's more survivable.
EDIT: I will say this. As a FIRST tank only it is useful because it is more versatile - but there's little point to getting additional stock PIV's once you've started building up your armored force.
92 
Posts: 374
Posts: 1930
Posts: 758
Sherman will have to lose HE shell, but then it will be a "sort of" easy 8 no ?
Posts: 40
Posts: 209
Posts: 742 | Subs: 1
well that was the trade-off in CoH1 but instead of having it as a global upgrade i propose of being able to upgrade from the tank itself individually just like the .50cal machine gun so that you can mix and match your shermans to have both anti-infantry and anti-tank capabilities if you get what i am trying to say
4 Posts: 444
 | Playercard of Looney | |||||||||||||||||||
|
Posts: 141
Guys, the sherman's great for it's cost. Sure you have to micro more but it has so much more utility then, let's say the p4. Which it can beat depending on your micro. You can use smoke to atack, cover your retreat etc. Imo the price is fine.
Posts: 830
 |
|
|
1 | ||
 |
|
|
685 | ||
 |
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
3 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
