Why has the USF regular sherman become so bad...

...over the last few patches

I mean it lose vs both Pz4 variant and it is countered by Stug and jpz4. We could point out that it is a good AI tank but both Pz4 are as well very good vs infantry without the need to switch amo.

If I think about the switch amo mechanism it supposes to me that or you better better AI or you get better AT than the counter part that doesn't need to switch ammunition. But in the game it is resumed by a slightly better AI than Pz4s to a point where it doesn't make any real difference or still horrible AT performance.
AI performance isn't the problem here, but the AT. There is no need for better IA but more penetration.

Even if the Atgun is now more accessible, I feel that the sherman is simply useless in the majority of situations USF can face. In fact in my opinion the only moment it is good enough to invest on a sherman is if you have the upper hand already. If there is already a Pz4 on the field, it is pointless to build a sherman because you'll still be at disadvantage with a weaker tank and maybe not even AT support if you went T1, unlike other factions and evidently unlike your opponent.
So yes of course sometime you build it, even being late, as a stop gap because you don't have anything better at that time.

I see the sherman as a relic from the old USF design Strong Early game and Weaker late game but those times have ended.
The last commander revamp showed us that, people are eager to get a better sherman, something that isn't a Jackson but that can be there on the field and actually doing damage to other tanks while retaining a good AI. And I have the feeling the 76mm is what should have become the sherman. And I don't really like that because I don't really like the doctrine the 76mm is in.

What's your opinion?

It's fine.

It's cheaper than both p4s.

It's the best AI medium tank. You don't buy it to fight armor.

110 fuel for a unit that can 1 shot squads and decently fight mediums? Where do I sign up? On the other hand, it could be that the OKW pz4 is overperforming a little bit and the t34/76 is underperforming and the cromwell underperforming a little bit, but those are 2 separate topics.

It's fine.

It's cheaper than both p4s.

It's the best AI medium tank. You don't buy it to fight armor.

+1

If you really want a tank to bitch about go look at the comet or cromwell. The sherman does a lot of things pretty well, especially compared to those two.

It's fine.

It's cheaper than both p4s.

It's the best AI medium tank. You don't buy it to fight armor.

it has more pen than p4 and sightly worse reload speed but + 0.75 accuracy on the move
i say use it to flank armor or ost medium tanks

Bun Sherman is fine, it should be on the sidelines trying to get wipes, you rarely want more than one unless you are winning really hard.

I have had some luck using a pair of them supported with a lightweight infantry force and a couple of AT guns. But yes. The M4A3 does what it needs to do just fine. Even better if you go Mech and give it a Dozer blade.

Bun Sherman is fine, it should be on the sidelines trying to get wipes, you rarely want more than one unless you are winning really hard.

well 2 Sherman and 1 Jackson are fucking scary u can't rotate front armor to both Sherman and there the radio vet

well 2 Sherman and 1 Jackson are fucking scary u can't rotate front armor to both Sherman and there the radio vet

As 1180 manpower and 360 fuel should be. Any combination of that many tanks is scary lol.

Its an okay tank but its not rly good in match ups vs the p4 tbh.
Personally it has much less risk to just bite the bullet and either get the 76/E8 or just opt for jackson or scott (if you have AT guns).

Sorry....? Can you repeat that? I thought I read "stock sherman is bad?"

If I think about the switch amo mechanism it supposes to me that or you better better AI or you get better AT than the counter part that doesn't need to switch ammunition.

Which is EXACTLY how it works...
The 140/120/100 pen of sherman AP is overall better than the 125/115/110 pen of the p4 round. (In fact, sherman AP is comparable to the p4 round in anti infantry anyway.)

The sherman HE shell is better anti infantry than the p4 round.

As an aside, the sherman is 10 fuel cheaper. Is having a cheaper vehicle with better raw (though maybe not relative) anti tank and better anti infantry capabilities not enough?

And it has higher moving accuracy multiply among all mediums.

Why has the USF regular sherman become so bad...

IDK, ask the Ostwind maybe?

Yeah, I'd also have to say the base Sherman is definitely fine now. Its generally-inferior performance against any tank of the medium and up sturdiness isn't a problem any more when Jacksons and ATGs pick up the slack well, and how it's liable to send at least one Axis infantry squad running after every HE shot and leave their tanks in the lurch.

low armor and poor penetration

but thats ok

he jsut 110 fuel unit

low armor and poor penetration

but thats ok

he jsut 110 fuel unit

Sherman does not have "poor" penetration it is inline with the other medium tanks.

Sherman would be the last or close to it on the list of medium tanks been bad.

As 1180 manpower and 360 fuel should be. Any combination of that many tanks is scary lol.

no I mean Sherman are always better in pair not just 1 and then Jackson like he was saying

Sherman does not have "poor" penetration it is inline with the other medium tanks.

You forgot to not ignore the fact that axis tanks armor is definitely not in line with all the 160 armor mediums again.

Not saying sherman isn't fine, it is, but stop acting like penetration can be compared without taking into account armor of opponent.