Login

russian armor

Can we make Relic add to USF the shermah 76 mm gun

13 Mar 2017, 01:42 AM
#41
avatar of Waegukin

Posts: 609

...the 76 mm gun is just a small buff vs panzer iv

The Sherman in game is already cheaper with better utility and beats the Ost P4, the last thing it needs is more pen. IMO, if Shermans did get some sort of upgrade, a Jumbo package would make more sense to compliment the Jackson, though I doubt Relic would add it at this point due to the need for art assets.
nee
13 Mar 2017, 04:42 AM
#42
avatar of nee

Posts: 1216

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.
13 Mar 2017, 09:10 AM
#44
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Mar 2017, 04:42 AMnee
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.


Not relevant given that this is the past.

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.

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).

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.


You already lost the argument when you said the Churchill VII has 110mm of Armor.

The USF should not stay an Army with OP infantry and shitty tanks, you not agreeing with that is an entirely different matter. The balance of power should be distributed all around and players should not be limited because of Relic' shortsightedness.

I am not going to further argue with a historical illiterate and balance know it all.

This discussion is over.
nee
13 Mar 2017, 11:07 AM
#45
avatar of nee

Posts: 1216

Nice try with the mommy act, your opinion on USF design is just that. You made no discussion at all, and your assertions of USF not having meatshield units (knowing you, you;re not going to define that term), and the claims that they shouldn't be designed the way they are, is not relevant to the subject. I'll ignore your pointless ramblings from now on since they are neither civil nor on topic.

@OP no there are no mods that include just the 76mm Sherman, one has to presume the modders didn't think on making one because it's just not that remarkable, especially given the options I have already pointed out. Other factors affect mods such as the author's time and effort, and whether game updates mess with the mods which necessitate updating said mods to be compatible. It's a bit of a mess, really, give how mods work in this game in general.
13 Mar 2017, 11:49 AM
#46
avatar of mondeogaming1

Posts: 464

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Mar 2017, 11:07 AMnee
Nice try with the mommy act, your opinion on USF design is just that. You made no discussion at all, and your assertions of USF not having meatshield units (knowing you, you;re not going to define that term), and the claims that they shouldn't be designed the way they are, is not relevant to the subject. I'll ignore your pointless ramblings from now on since they are neither civil nor on topic.

@OP no there are no mods that include just the 76mm Sherman, one has to presume the modders didn't think on making one because it's just not that remarkable, especially given the options I have already pointed out. Other factors affect mods such as the author's time and effort, and whether game updates mess with the mods which necessitate updating said mods to be compatible. It's a bit of a mess, really, give how mods work in this game in general.
USF is the only faction that doesnt have early mines and sandbags my opinion is if you want to play USF go to coh1 at coh2 only riflemen and maybe rangerts spam zooks only
13 Mar 2017, 15:35 PM
#47
avatar of Mirdarion

Posts: 283

USF is the only faction that doesnt have early mines and sandbags my opinion is if you want to play USF go to coh1 at coh2 only riflemen and maybe rangerts spam zooks only


It seems to me that your play style is not supported by a certain faction. Yes, USF doesn't have mines as early and readily available as other factions, but in return they get the best mine in the entire game. And why you would want sandbags on a faction that survives by being mobile (instead of digging in) is beyond me.

Simply try out one of the other factions. There are another four of them, chances are your preferred way to play the game is possible with one of them.
nee
13 Mar 2017, 18:06 PM
#48
avatar of nee

Posts: 1216

He probably doesn't want to buy them, implied by his apparent unwillingness to buy a DLC commander featuring 76mm Sherman.
13 Mar 2017, 19:04 PM
#49
avatar of mondeogaming1

Posts: 464



It seems to me that your play style is not supported by a certain faction. Yes, USF doesn't have mines as early and readily available as other factions, but in return they get the best mine in the entire game. And why you would want sandbags on a faction that survives by being mobile (instead of digging in) is beyond me.

Simply try out one of the other factions. There are another four of them, chances are your preferred way to play the game is possible with one of them.
if you saw everuone soviets at coh2 are like americans at coh1 coh1 sherman 80 fuel t 34 80 fuel
13 Mar 2017, 19:07 PM
#50
avatar of mondeogaming1

Posts: 464

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Mar 2017, 18:06 PMnee
He probably doesn't want to buy them, implied by his apparent unwillingness to buy a DLC commander featuring 76mm Sherman.
just to EVERYONE Know i have all USF commanders but as i see your picture i can already tell you are an Ax8s fan
13 Mar 2017, 19:11 PM
#51
avatar of mondeogaming1

Posts: 464



It seems to me that your play style is not supported by a certain faction. Yes, USF doesn't have mines as early and readily available as other factions, but in return they get the best mine in the entire game. And why you would want sandbags on a faction that survives by being mobile (instead of digging in) is beyond me.

Simply try out one of the other factions. There are another four of them, chances are your preferred way to play the game is possible with one of them.
the only good mine usf has is from m20 but i always go captain and if you get riflemen field defenses they get revuralmines like soviets and brits
13 Mar 2017, 19:37 PM
#52
avatar of Wygrif

Posts: 278

Evening out the power spikes is a good idea. That means nerfing USFs early game, yes but it also means buffs to their late game. A meatsheild upgrade for the Sherman seems like a pretty good option, all things considered.
14 Mar 2017, 00:43 AM
#53
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

jump backJump back to quoted post13 Mar 2017, 19:37 PMWygrif
Evening out the power spikes is a good idea. That means nerfing USFs early game, yes but it also means buffs to their late game. A meatsheild upgrade for the Sherman seems like a pretty good option, all things considered.


It's the most logical way to go, if you ask me and a lot more other people.

However the 76mm Sherman is not really a meatshield tank, it's armor is only a bit improved around the turret I believe but that's about it, a Jumbo Sherman would be the actual meatshield.

A 76mm Sherman would actually just mean the USF would rely less on meatshields, since their tanks main workhorse medium tanks would be better able to take on heavier enemy Armor meaning that the USF would rely less on the class cannon that is the Jackson.

So you will have 2 options presented to you, have 2 specialized tanks, those being the Jumbo and Jackson, or have 1 jack of all trades tank that doesn't excel at anything but can still prove to be useful with good micro and if you have about 2 or 3 of them.
14 Mar 2017, 12:29 PM
#54
avatar of mondeogaming1

Posts: 464



It's the most logical way to go, if you ask me and a lot more other people.

However the 76mm Sherman is not really a meatshield tank, it's armor is only a bit improved around the turret I believe but that's about it, a Jumbo Sherman would be the actual meatshield.

A 76mm Sherman would actually just mean the USF would rely less on meatshields, since their tanks main workhorse medium tanks would be better able to take on heavier enemy Armor meaning that the USF would rely less on the class cannon that is the Jackson.

So you will have 2 options presented to you, have 2 specialized tanks, those being the Jumbo and Jackson, or have 1 jack of all trades tank that doesn't excel at anything but can still prove to be useful with good micro and if you have about 2 or 3 of them.
there is a jumbo sherman with 76 mm gun and they should put an option for 100 fuel to upgrade shermans armor and 70 fuel its gun
14 Mar 2017, 14:33 PM
#55
avatar of Tiger Baron

Posts: 3145 | Subs: 2

there is a jumbo sherman with 76 mm gun and they should put an option for 100 fuel to upgrade shermans armor and 70 fuel its gun


I know there is a Jumbo variant with the 76mm gun but we don't want another heavy tank with the EZ8's Armament, the whole point of the Jumbo is to be a meatshield, a tank to protect the Jackson, a tank that can take a few hits before it needs to go back for repairs.

Plus the 75mm gun is more effective against infantry due to it's HE shells, the 76mm is not.

That's why using the Jumbo in front of the Jackson in order to protect it from enemy tanks and infantry while the Jackson in the back snipes away at enemy Armor is the perfect combination, similar to the Churchill and Firefly combination of the British. The Comet acting as the intermediate tank like how the 76mm Sherman would work, albeit with a better gun, speed and Armory than the 76mm Sherman, thing is you will never be able to build as much Comets as you will be able to build 76mm Shermans.
14 Mar 2017, 15:42 PM
#56
avatar of mondeogaming1

Posts: 464



I know there is a Jumbo variant with the 76mm gun but we don't want another heavy tank with the EZ8's Armament, the whole point of the Jumbo is to be a meatshield, a tank to protect the Jackson, a tank that can take a few hits before it needs to go back for repairs.

Plus the 75mm gun is more effective against infantry due to it's HE shells, the 76mm is not.

That's why using the Jumbo in front of the Jackson in order to protect it from enemy tanks and infantry while the Jackson in the back snipes away at enemy Armor is the perfect combination, similar to the Churchill and Firefly combination of the British. The Comet acting as the intermediate tank like how the 76mm Sherman would work, albeit with a better gun, speed and Armory than the 76mm Sherman, thing is you will never be able to build as much Comets as you will be able to build 76mm Shermans.
yeah but with the 76 mm gun you can destroy p4 with more than half health due to its really fast reload and decent penetration
14 Mar 2017, 15:46 PM
#57
avatar of mondeogaming1

Posts: 464



I know there is a Jumbo variant with the 76mm gun but we don't want another heavy tank with the EZ8's Armament, the whole point of the Jumbo is to be a meatshield, a tank to protect the Jackson, a tank that can take a few hits before it needs to go back for repairs.

Plus the 75mm gun is more effective against infantry due to it's HE shells, the 76mm is not.

That's why using the Jumbo in front of the Jackson in order to protect it from enemy tanks and infantry while the Jackson in the back snipes away at enemy Armor is the perfect combination, similar to the Churchill and Firefly combination of the British. The Comet acting as the intermediate tank like how the 76mm Sherman would work, albeit with a better gun, speed and Armory than the 76mm Sherman, thing is you will never be able to buildch Comets as you will be able to build 76mm Shermans.
and if you get heavy calv commander turn on the combined arms shermans 76 mm gun is 2 seconds i tested it with cheat command 2
14 Mar 2017, 15:56 PM
#58
avatar of mondeogaming1

Posts: 464

There is an M4A3 76(W) unit in the games files using the same model as the EZ8, however there is no upgrade and I don't believe we can make one because the game doesn't allow editing a model currently.
do you want me and you to add for a mod only the 76 mm gun sherman to add me steam gt:sakismondeo
14 Mar 2017, 15:58 PM
#59
avatar of Mirdarion

Posts: 283

if you saw everuone soviets at coh2 are like americans at coh1 coh1 sherman 80 fuel t 34 80 fuel


If I understand you correctly (and your liberal approach to orthography and grammar doesn't make that overly likely), you are comparing two entirely different units of two entirely different factions from two not so entirely different games. Let me phrase this politely: It is of absolutely no importance to Company of Heroes 2 how a unit in Company of Heroes 1 performed or how much it cost.

the only good mine usf has is from m20 but i always go captain and if you get riflemen field defenses they get revuralmines like soviets and brits


The M20 mine is not simply the only good mine USF gets, it is the best mine in the game, period. And as I said, if you always go Captain but still want a mine without relying on commanders, you might have a problem with your playstyle-faction selection. Try out a different faction, they may suit your desired playstyle better than USF.

Aside from that, with the current state of the game it is not just unlikely that a 76mm Sherman will become a thing, it would also require extensive reworking in terms of balance. As it stands, that is not going to happen at this stage of the game's life-cycle outside of a very extensive modding project (which in turn is also unlikely to happen with Relic's fucked up approach to modding tools, considering how long ago they promised to release extensive modding tools in the first place). Which is actually just one of many broken promises/announcements/whatever you want to call it, and just more proof that anything Relic says should be taken with too much rather than too little scrutiny.
14 Mar 2017, 16:11 PM
#60
avatar of mondeogaming1

Posts: 464



If I understand you correctly (and your liberal approach to orthography and grammar doesn't make that overly likely), you are comparing two entirely different units of two entirely different factions from two not so entirely different games. Let me phrase this politely: It is of absolutely no importance to Company of Heroes 2 how a unit in Company of Heroes 1 performed or how much it cost.



The M20 mine is not simply the only good mine USF gets, it is the best mine in the game, period. And as I said, if you always go Captain but still want a mine without relying on commanders, you might have a problem with your playstyle-faction selection. Try out a different faction, they may suit your desired playstyle better than USF.

Aside from that, with the current state of the game it is not just unlikely that a 76mm Sherman will become a thing, it would also require extensive reworking in terms of balance. As it stands, that is not going to happen at this stage of the game's life-cycle outside of a very extensive modding project (which in turn is also unlikely to happen with Relic's fucked up approach to modding tools, considering how long ago they promised to release extensive modding tools in the first place). Which is actually just one of many broken promises/announcements/whatever you want to call it, and just more proof that anything Relic says should be taken with too much rather than too little scrutiny.
first i want to tell you not to say something about my grammar ever again not cuz of respect but at least from being from another country (Greece) and USF suppose to have the best medium tanks and push with medium tanks not with heavy tanks and with the 76 mm gun it would really help to kill a panzer iv with more chances and faster reload
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

471 users are online: 471 guests
1 post in the last 24h
6 posts in the last week
34 posts in the last month
Registered members: 49187
Welcome our newest member, manclubgayote
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM