so yeah if you are lossing a powerfull gun from coh1 and now your sherman gets killed i think we deserve it
Use Jackson. Low armour? Then use its range and not run it into point blank range of a Panzer4.
And stop talking about 76mm like it's not even in the game. M4C, M10 and Easy Eight are all 76mm guns. Should I say OKW got their Hotchkiss stolen from them while ignoring Walking Stuka?
Lastly, the fact that a previous game had stuff is no reason to have it in this one. Axis is not unfair just because it no longer has Jagdpanther. Even sequels aren't the same game.
Back when the USF was the Allied underdog it had shit everything, no terminator vet 3 for Rifles, no mortar, no nothing, they were an extremely micro intensive Army with shit almost everything.
Not relevant given that this is the past.
And their tanks are still shit, this time around however they have superior infantry and support compared to everyone else.
Then why should USF have meatshields if they can kick ass without them? If anything, this justifies them NOT having meatshields because they can kick ass at any stage of the game.
And I still support the idea of having an upgrade to upgun the Shermans and getting a Jumbo in the game via a commander for the USF, the USF just needs more meatshield tanks in order to protect their Jacksons which are very fragile glass cannons on tracks, and the Pershing doesn't really fit that role, but a Jumbo would.
USF does not "need" more meatshield tanks. If a faction is prominent with glass cannons they should not have doctrinal meatshield units as well, certianly not non-doc. Which the OP is complaining about, so in his eyes it solves shit all.
You cannot compare with other factions because they operate on their own design, however similar it could be. UKF and Soviets having their heavy tanks is not relevant to USF.
If you want UKF and Soviet style meatshield gameplay then play those factions. You'd say the EXACT same thing if I made a BS demand like Pershing getting Elefant's range or no KT heavy tank limit (which Churchill and KV-1 does not have, mind you).
Anyhow, both Soviets and UKF have their meatshield variants of tanks already in the game, Brits have the Churchill, and the Soviets have their KVs so I don't see the problem of nerfing the USF infantry and giving their tank force a bit of a buff in order to balance things out.
Don't what what the hell you're talking about now. A 76mm gun isn't going to turn a Sherman into a meatshield tank. If you're really talking about Jumbo, then you're off topic. Make your own thread on it?
I also know what's going to happen even if you get what you want. It's a balance nightmare just to test out, because you got another tank that's AT role in T4, and either too good and no one will get vanilla Sherman, or too terrible and it's a pointless feature. And even after that, you just have the question of what's the point of two Sherman versions in T4 sharing with a tank destroyer, so people would just advocate the vanilla Sherman get deleted. Presto, you got feature/power creep.
So you want Relic to entirely revamp USF infantry- again- just to make them perform more similar to other factions, and just so as to justify adding another unit- and in the case with that's not actually created, into the game. As non-doctrinal. To do what Jackson already does but with the armour of a KV-1.
Yeah, that's not going to happen.