Generalist balance.

This was pretty much a constant issue with COH 2, but recent 76mm Sherman further highlighted the issue.
For a WW2 game, the stats regarding armor and penetration are nonsense, and i think that changing it could be beneficial AND avoid even balance issues (due to the binary thing that penetration is).

M4A3 Sherman: The game version has high penetration and low armor, while IRL it had good armor but low penetration due to the stubby gun

T34: The game version represent correctly the real life one, the armor was sloped but thin and accounted to slighly less than Panzer 4 80mm, gun penetration was low, balanced by cheapness.

Panzer 4: Average-Goodish armor with 80mm flat steel, above t34 but 13mm lower than Sherman

Cromwell: a bit lower armor than Panzer 4, good gun. Remarkable speed.

76mm Sherman: As m4a2, it has lower armor than M4a3 due to the old glacis, but a better gun

Ez8: M4a3 but with a 76mm

How to change it:

Panzer 4 armor standardized to 160, Schurzen changed to +20 armor (less) but Okw ones comes later thus has it already equipped. Cost to 135. Penetration increased to 140/130/120.

M4a3 armor to 200, cost remains the same but ap round pen goes to 120/115/100.

M4 76 armor to 200, pen to 140/130/120, it loses vet 3 rof bonus, cost to 135.

Ez8 armor to 240, pen to 160/145/130 (quite similar to Churchill). Vet 2 increase pen to 180/160/140. Cost to 155.

Cromwell pen to 140/130/120, armor to 180. Cost to 120.

Nothink really change in terms of direct counters, except panzershreck needing a pen buff (zooks and piats gets passively buffed in comparison obviously).
Atg all still counters those tanks and those tanks pen each others.

What do you think about those changes ?

And what would be the actual point of flipping balance upside down here?

Not to mention it would make P4 completely ineffective against shermans.

And what would be the actual point of flipping balance upside down here?

Not to mention it would make P4 completely ineffective against shermans.

It actually brings consistency across the board (is still a ww2 game).
Grants higher p4 scaling and a proper meatshield for us.

Sherman and 76mm armor could go down to 200 and Panzer 4 armor to 160.

T-34 armor was far better than P4, P4 had 50mm turret and flat 80mm frontal hull, T-34 sloped 45mm was better than Tigers flat 100m. T-34 does not even remotely perform how it was in real life in comparison to P4 and Shermans. And 75mm Shermans armor penetration was exact same as 76mm on T-34 IRL

T-34 armor was far better than P4, P4 had 50mm turret and flat 80mm frontal hull, T-34 sloped 45mm was better than Tigers flat 100m. T-34 does not even remotely perform how it was in real life in comparison to P4 and Shermans. And 75mm Shermans armor penetration was exact same as 76mm on T-34 IRL

No radio
No solid optics
Horrible vision for commander
Stiff gears for driver
Crammed turret so commander had to operate as gunner too

T34/76 found its match armor and penetration wise as soon as the long barreled Panzer iv f2 showed up, which was mid 1942. Tiger showed up late 1942 near Leningrad too.

If we go for realism, then all tanks should have huge range and Panthers, Tigers would destroy every t34, including the 85 variant, every Sherman variant etc.

To add to that, the Jackson, Firefly and su85 would completely one hit every axis tank at sizeable range. Same for Panthers and Tigers vice versa.

The elefant, jagdtiger and jagdpanzer iv would one shot every other tank in the game from sizeable range.

Etc etc.

Realism no.

Gameplay and mechanics yes.

Edit: now that I remember, I read Soviet after action reports of t34-85s frontally penetrating King Tigers due to poor steel quality in later stages of the war. Should we use a modifier in game like warthunder did? KT armor x 0.9!

T-34 armor was far better than P4, P4 had 50mm turret and flat 80mm frontal hull, T-34 sloped 45mm was better than Tigers flat 100m. T-34 does not even remotely perform how it was in real life in comparison to P4 and Shermans. And 75mm Shermans armor penetration was exact same as 76mm on T-34 IRL

That's plain wrong, t34 armor was 45mm sloped to 60 degrees from vertical, accounting to a max of 90mm of effective thickness.
However, due to overmatching factor given by the thin steel armor, a lot of this theoretical armor was reduced when the shell had a diameter higher than 1.5 times the actual thickness (1.5x45=67.5), thus 75mm overmatched t34 hull armor.
That doesn't apply to Sherman armor when 75mm shells are used (53x1.5=80mm), but only when 88 or higher are (irrelevant since 88 penetrate anyway). Tigers, Panzer 4 (having only flat armor) and IS2 and Panthers (due to having a big actual thinckness) didn't suffer from it.

Absolutely wrong again, F34 76mm couldn't top 70mm of penetration at 500 ms, the weakest AP shell fron m3 75mm L/40 could penetrate 80 mm at that distance, it was clrearly subpar.

I think this is more of a historical debate than anything else. Relic could easily introduce flying homing goliath units with auto-targeting features and make it historically correct from within their game world.

Just accept the stats and units as they are in the game, it makes everything more fun.

You have no idea what you're even talking about, overmatching is only relevant for deflection shots and ww2 era shells had worse penetration against highly sloped armor, in reality these 45mm were harder to punch through than 100m flat for shells of those period.

As for T-34, you're utterly clueless - you're comparing early war ammunition for 76mm against mid war german tanks, 76mm on T-34 was actually better than Shermans 75mm, it had worse ammo throughout the war, but even with inferior ammo it reached same pen with mid-war shells

learn the basics before bringing in IRL stats on tanks

You have no idea what you're even talking about, overmatching is only relevant for deflection shots and ww2 era shells had worse penetration against highly sloped armor, in reality these 45mm were harder to punch through than 100m flat for shells of those period.

As for T-34, you're utterly clueless - you're comparing early war ammunition for 76mm against mid war german tanks, 76mm on T-34 was actually better than Shermans 75mm, it had worse ammo throughout the war, but even with inferior ammo it reached same pen with mid-war shells

learn the basics before bringing in IRL stats on tanks

False, overmatching happens if a shell hits sloped armour that is thinner then the calibre of the tank shell. That is the case with basically anything but 50mm for t34. It made t34 obsolete by 1942, when kwk 40 have been introduced.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sloped_armour

Then bring the statistics of any shell here, right now i compared F-34 AP, APHE and APCR, none of those surpass 71mm of pen, which is mediocre.

I think this is more of a historical debate than anything else. Relic could easily introduce flying homing goliath units with auto-targeting features and make it historically correct from within their game world.

Just accept the stats and units as they are in the game, it makes everything more fun.

One can hope.

Edit: now that I remember, I read Soviet after action reports of t34-85s frontally penetrating King Tigers due to poor steel quality in later stages of the war. Should we use a modifier in game like warthunder did? KT armor x 0.9!

Fun fact: some dude in official war thunder forums proved that 1941 t34 and 1942 t34 were so poorly welded that plates could fall off even with 37mm NON pen, devs questioned its theory but the guy proved it, and devs banned him after losing the argument.

The outrage after this happened made them remove king tiger modifier tho ahahah, and later the Maus modifiers were removed as well

You realize there are several AP shells for 76mm? You used pen data from early war shells.

Overmatching is irrelevant, wast majority of German tanks didnt have 88mm guns, most of them were either long or mid lengh 75mm, these werent enough to make 45mm obsolete it didnt work like that. Pak40 75mm couldnt punch through that 45mm despite overmatching it, heck, even IS-2 could not punch through Panther hulls depite with overmatch untill it recieved ammo with blunt shaped nose to help with sloping

You realize there are several AP shells for 76mm? You used pen data from early war shells.

Overmatching is irrelevant, wast majority of German tanks didnt have 88mm guns, most of them were either long or mid lengh 75mm, these werent enough to make 45mm obsolete it didnt work like that. Pak40 75mm couldnt punch through that 45mm despite overmatching it, heck, even IS-2 could not punch through Panther hulls depite with overmatch untill it recieved ammo with blunt shaped nose to help with sloping

Then BRING stats that surpass mt values, or write the shell name so i can check it.

75mm DO OVERMATCH 45mm, by the very definition of overmatching (you are backpedaling from your wrong definition of overmatching already).

Thought this is a balance forum not the history wehraboo circlejerk one

daily reminder: Germany started and lost both world wars

I'l telling you that 75mm overmatching 45mm and 122m overmatching 80mm didnt mean crap if shell didnt have enough velocity to pentrate anyway. Pak40 caliber overmatched 45mm, It still could not penetrate.

I'm not going to bring you anything, just googling it will show you list of shells with penetration tables in less than minute
Protip: BR-350A is early war shell

I'l telling you that 75mm overwatching 45mm and 122m overmatching 80mm didnt mean crap if shell didnt have enough velocity to pentrate anyway. Pak40 caliber overmatched 45mm, It still could not penetrate.

I'm not going to bring you anything, just googling it will show you list of shells with penetration tables in less than minute
Protip: BR-350A is early war shell

This is false, the kwk40 has a velocity of 740 m/s (APCBC)

http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/

This prove me right as well
The BR 350B (the best apbc shell of the gun) shows unlikely penetration on panzer 4 h hull frontal armor even on point blank and impossible beyond 500 ms.

At the same range is sure penetration for kwk40 apcbc on t34 hull, and possible up to 800ms.

The 76mm was way worse than Sherman 75mm APC.

No you are definetly not bringing anything.
I asked you to disprove me by bringing in a shell that surpassed those stats mentioned but you can't. Either accept objective data or disprove it with actual sources, i don't really intend to discuss this more than needed to justify those in game changes.

daily reminder: Germany started and lost both world wars

ähm...no. Only history-noobs would believe that.
Germany startet 1ww? Are u shure? pls read again the real history.

germany startet the 2ww? When iam right france and GB made it to a worldwar. (not one from them wantet to help poland...they wantet to beat germany again.) And why they didnt declare the war to russia...even russia declare poland the war and invaded them with germany? hm?

oh..yes germany lost the 2. ....against the half world....which needed 4 years Oo

My point is, it wasnt different from Sherman pen which you claimed it to be, and I'm talking about actual pak40 not tank version on P4/Stug, which proves my point, normal AT gun with same caliber could not punch through hull of T-34 while gun with longer length and high velocity could, meaning that point "lol its overmatched 45mm" is invalid

Who lost or won the war is completely off topic.