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

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.

As opposed to the 180 armor that the opponent's comparable cost medium has?

From another one of my posts:

"Sherman chance to pen p4 at max range: 56%
P4 chance to pen sherman at max range: 69%

Sherman chance to pen p4 at mid range: 67%
P4 chance to pen sherman at mid range: 72%

Sherman chance to pen p4 at close range: 78%
P4 chance to pen sherman at close range: 78%"

Seems more or less in line to me once you consider armor values of comparable costed enemy tanks. Slightly favoring the p4 at some ranges, but subjectively "in line," especially when you, again, consider its 10 fuel cheaper.

As for the panther and okw p4, you pay more, you get more.

75mm is fine, arguably best medium tank to rush. Problem is when you need something bigger there simply is nothong like it in usf roster outside of pershing. Both "special" sherman variants are trash. And sorry but did you really suggest making 76mm the standard usf med instead of 75mm? I would stop playing usf if that happens, 76mm is so trash in most situations.

The hell you say, the 76mm Sherman is ideal when you got a strong infantry rooster, since they can fight armor really well and still bleed the enemy with regular rounds by their sheer volume of fire and moving accuracy.

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?

When you put in comparison Tech design, not really. Sherman is cheaper by 10 fuel but for that price you still miss half of your teching progress if you want your sherman hitting the field before a panther.
Even with more penetration raw stat than the Pz4 it has worst performance. at far range we're just at 1/2 to 2/3 in favor for the pz4 which is not something to be ignored on a 4 shots to death matchup .

Everyone jumped on the topic with the AI performance in mind but are Pz4 AI performances bad? Not at all so yes the sherman HE shell is a bit better but Pz4s are doing the same job just fine vs infantry. Someone mentioned that Sherman can control your flank and deter lone capping squads but pz4 are doing it as well. there is nothing the sherman does the Pz4 doesn't do equal of better.

Now when it comes to fight armor, when it comes to defend yourself (because your opponent is also allowed to push) then you got a tank that can't do the job reliably.
I'm not expressing mystic stuff or rocket science, check by yourself on casts or replays and compare how many time you see a Sherman and how many time you see Pz4s. Sherman are ignored by players the majority of the time because you need Jackson to fight Pz4. And the problem is there, you need Jackson to fight medium tanks unless you pickup a doctrine with superior mediums.
On the other side Ostheer and OKW have dedicated medium tank counter named Stug and Jpz4 but no one build them to counter shermans because a Pz4 does it better.

The sherman is fine. The M4A3 isn't going to solo panthers and that's not a problen. The 76, E8 and TDs are there for that.

If you honestly think nobody builds StuGs or the StealthPanzer you need to play more.

The hell you say, the 76mm Sherman is ideal when you got a strong infantry rooster, since they can fight armor really well and still bleed the enemy with regular rounds by their sheer volume of fire and moving accuracy.

"they can fight armor really well" haha show me one replay from top 50 player where 76mm sherman was worth its cost. This thing bounces off of p4 even with HVAP sheels not to mention anything bigger. Its such a downgrade from 75mm, almost never worth to buy it. 75mm is enough to brawl with p4, for anything bigger you need jackson, 76mm doesnt have a place in close game between 2 equaly matched players.

Can't believe Esxile thinks Ost p4 AI is good. It's just as shit as the cromwell's AI. You can actually 1v1 an Ost p4 if you pick your engagement so that you're at most fighting at midrange (or closer). Sherman and p4 actually have around the same chance the penetrate each other. Sherman has more pen to fight the more armor of p4 and p4 has less pen to fight the lesser armored sherman.

Can't believe Esxile thinks Ost p4 AI is good. It's just as shit as the cromwell's AI. You can actually 1v1 an Ost p4 if you pick your engagement so that you're at most fighting at midrange (or closer). Sherman and p4 actually have around the same chance the penetrate each other. Sherman has more pen to fight the more armor of p4 and p4 has less pen to fight the lesser armored sherman.

You obviously haven't ever tried to kill infantry with the cromwell lmao.

You obviously haven't ever tried to kill infantry with the cromwell lmao.

Both ost p4 and cromwell are shit at killing inf. Only an extremely biased person would think otherwise. I bet u didn't know there's a noticeable difference between the OKW and Ost p4 AI capabilities.

"they can fight armor really well" haha show me one replay from top 50 player where 76mm sherman was worth its cost. This thing bounces off of p4 even with HVAP sheels not to mention anything bigger. Its such a downgrade from 75mm, almost never worth to buy it. 75mm is enough to brawl with p4, for anything bigger you need jackson, 76mm doesnt have a place in close game between 2 equaly matched players.

Don't be silly, top players don't play USF, I've had good success with them! I even killed an Elephant, with just two of them, once.

Both ost p4 and cromwell are shit at killing inf. Only an extremely biased person would think otherwise. I bet u didn't know there's a noticeable difference between the OKW and Ost p4 AI capabilities.

Yeah they're remarkably samey. P4 has slightly better kill radius (80 dmg radius) and better AoE radiuses but crom has better AoE far damage. Pretty samey reloads too. Although the one thing p4 definitely has over crom is that it has the pintle 42.

I've noticed time and time again the okw p4 is way better at killing infantry. Regularly snipes models on the move lol. Don't make assumptions I guess.

Yeah they're remarkably samey. P4 has slightly better kill radius (80 dmg radius) and better AoE radiuses but crom has better AoE far damage. Pretty samey reloads too. Although the one thing p4 definitely has over crom is that it has the pintle 42.

I've noticed time and time again the okw p4 is way better at killing infantry. Regularly snipes models on the move lol. Don't make assumptions I guess.

So if they're the same, (the pintle ain't free after all) why would u disagree that the ai ability of the Ost p4 is just as pathetic as the cromwell and far worse than the Sherman.

So if they're the same, (the pintle ain't free after all) why would u disagree that the ai ability of the Ost p4 is just as pathetic as the cromwell and far worse than the Sherman.

Simple. He's also biased against ostheer. Everyone that makes well supported arguments that don't align with your beliefs is biased against ostheer.

Actual answer: he tried to word things conservatively. The p4 main gun actually has a non insignificant advantage (well, if I wasn't being conservative, id say it has a significant in advantage) in kill radius. Each of the p4's machine guns is also much better (60%? or so) than the cromwell's, in addition to having the option to upgrade a pintle machine gun the cromwell does not have access to entirely.

Simple. He's also biased against ostheer. Everyone that makes well supported arguments that don't align with your beliefs is biased against ostheer.

Actual answer: he tried to word things conservatively. The p4 main gun actually has a non insignificant advantage (well, if I wasn't being conservative, id say it has a significant in advantage) in kill radius. Each of the p4's machine guns is also much better (60%? or so) than the cromwell's, in addition to having the option to upgrade a pintle machine gun the cromwell does not have access to entirely.

Are you trying to put words in my mouth? I didn't say he's biased against Ost. And if you're trying to say Ost p4 has more scatter, then how come OKW p4 has less scatter and does noticeably better against inf. "Kill radius" isn't even a statistic. Allied infantry aren't afraid of an Ost p4 because they know it can't hit a single model most of the time. Cromwell has a slightly smaller AOE but somehow it just snipes models a bit better than the ost p4 somehow.

im not a fan of the sherman id rather rush a jackson. most of the time i get caught with HE rounds. but thats just me

Are you trying to put words in my mouth? I didn't say he's biased against Ost. And if you're trying to say Ost p4 has more scatter, then how come OKW p4 has less scatter and does noticeably better against inf. "Kill radius" isn't even a statistic. Allied infantry aren't afraid of an Ost p4 because they know it can't hit a single model most of the time. Cromwell has a slightly smaller AOE but somehow it just snipes models a bit better than the ost p4 somehow.

I never mentioned scatter. The scatter for both the ost p4 and cromwell appear to be identical. The OKW p4 does have less scatter than both.

Edit: kill radius isn't a hard coded statistic, no. But it is a concrete, objective value that is as valid as any hard coded value.

Anyone who says the Panzer IV for Ostheer is trash against infantry needs to adjust their perspective. The main gun may not hit all the time but it does well enough blasting models before the MGs are added.

On the M4 75mm, you build it to support your forces by having a shield for TDs, a smoke launching platform for infantry, a unit that can chase away capping squads with potential to wipe, support in most pitched battles that do not include heavies or masses AT and be a unit that can threaten the flanks. Short, a versatile tank and it fits better as a first unit if you have ATGs or other things in place to fight off the first Panzer IV or medium tank from the opponent. Having a Jackson is nice but it’s only there for AT.

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.

I see that you continue your little crusade of proving me wrong but once more it does not actually work for you. I have very clearly write penetration and not chance to penetrate. The penetration of the Sherman is not "poor", it is in similar levels with the other mediums. The close one is actually x112% higher than that of the PzIV.

As for chance to penetrate check "Jae For Jett" where he clearly demonstrate the level of the differences.

Are you trying to put words in my mouth? I didn't say he's biased against Ost. And if you're trying to say Ost p4 has more scatter, then how come OKW p4 has less scatter and does noticeably better against inf. "Kill radius" isn't even a statistic. Allied infantry aren't afraid of an Ost p4 because they know it can't hit a single model most of the time. Cromwell has a slightly smaller AOE but somehow it just snipes models a bit better than the ost p4 somehow.

OH and OKW PIV have the same Hull/Coaxial DPS.

Range 10/25/35
Sum of both MGs together and below the Mounted MG

15.353/12.96/10.716
(15.187)*-11.956/7.289/3.982

*The number in between brackets is the DPS at 0 range, i chose 10 because the other doesn't have a drop off till that range.

This is the one for Cromwell
12.478/8.353/6.44


-OH PIV and OKW PIV have the same AoE. OKW PIV has less scatter. (7.5 vs 6.5 and 6.4 vs 5.54 on scatter angle and Distance max respectively).
-OH PIV and Cromwell have the same scatter.
-They both have the same AoE radius.
-LETHAL AoE (80dmg) is higher for OH PIV. 1.13 vs 0.88
-Mid distance dmg is in favour of the PIV depending on the range you are counting it. 56dmg at 1.25 vs 64dmg at 1.0. PIV still has higher dmg at 1.0 range
-Damage at far, HEAVILY favours Cromwell. While they should have the same damage at the initial far range from the Cromwell (1.5 = 32dmg), From that point onward the dmg doesn't drop off for the Cromwell. It deals 32dmg from 1.5 to 2.5 range (radius). Meanwhile the PIV dmg drops to 8dmg.


If this is too hard to understand: the PIV have higher full health wipe potential and better MGs. The cromwell is better/reliable against heavily dmg squads (30% HP).

Somehow (look in the https://www.coh2.org/topic/86569/statistical-oddities thread) the PIV can't clear garrison at all, while the Cromwell should be the "best" stock medium at clearing it.

...
When you put in comparison Tech design, not really. Sherman is cheaper by 10 fuel but for that price you still miss half of your teching progress if you want your sherman hitting the field before a panther...

Sherman can easily arrive earlier than Panther unless your opponent is ahead on fuel and has not produced a single vehicle.

I'm not expressing mystic stuff or rocket science, check by yourself on casts or replays and compare how many time you see a Sherman and how many time you see Pz4s. Sherman are ignored by players the majority of the time because you need Jackson to fight Pz4....

Not really, the reason do not see Sherman that much, has to do with fact that USF can deal with infatry without them, while ostheer need the PzIV to deal with allied infatry.

And no one does not need a Jackson to fight a PzIV, USF have a number of AT option and even a supported Sherman can fight a PzIV just fine.