Premium medium tanks performance test

Okay, so, before you start to reply or criticize what I have posted below. Could you please, at least, finishing reading the post entirely? I have spent more than 5 hours for all of the testing and finishing this whole post. So I do think I deserve some kinds of appreciations.

In the last few days, I have tested the overall performances of all premium medium tanks. The testing subject contains the following subjects: T-34/85, Sherman 76, and Sherman E8. Comet and OKW P4 were also included in the test but with different testing methods.

The AT and AI performance tests were done in these following ways:
1. Two T-34/85, Sherman 76, and Sherman E8 chased one Panther in a certain distance to determine the proper testing range of firing. The chasing distance is determined by real combat experiences of how long could the two allies tanks go before risking too much of destroying the enemy tank. The " the proper testing range of firing" means if the two allies tanks should fire at long or mediums distance. P4, instead, will chase a comet. The Comets, instead, will chase two Panthers.
2. In a group of 10 testings, find out how well will two T-34/85, Sherman 76, or Sherman E8 against one Panthers base on the results from step one.
3. In two groups of 5 testings, find out how well will one T-34/85, Sherman 76, Sherman E8, P4, or Comet performances against two level 3 VGs compare to one panther. One group of testing was done when the main gun was deactivated, and one was done when the main gun was active. The final report is done base on the final conclusion. ( All tests were done in a range when all mounted MGs are able to fire)

T-34/85, testing range: long
Times of Two T-34/85s remains when the panther is destroyed: 2
Times of One T-34/85 remains when the panther is destroyed: 3
Times of panther is still alive while two T-34/85s are both destroyed: 5
AI performance when the main gun is active: Better than Panther.
AI performance when the main gun is not active: Worse than Panther.

Sherman 76, testing range: long
Times of Two Sherman 76s remains when the panther is destroyed: 3
Times of One Sherman 76 remains when the panther is destroyed: 5
Times of panther is still alive while two Sherman 76s are both destroyed: 2
AI performance when the main gun is active: Better than Panther.
AI performance when the main gun is not active: Same as Panther.

Sherman E8, testing range: medium
Times of Two Sherman E8s remains when the panther is destroyed: 4
Times of One Sherman E8 remains when the panther is destroyed: 5
Times of panther is still alive while two Sherman E8s are both destroyed: 1
AI performance when the main gun is active: Worse than Panther.
AI performance when the main gun is not active: Same as Panther.

P4, testing range: long; Against one Comet
Times of Two P4s remains when the Comet is destroyed: 3
Times of One P4 remains when the Comet is destroyed: 5
Times of Comet is still alive while two P4s are both destroyed: 2
AI performance when the main gun is active: Better than Comet.
AI performance when the main gun is not active: Better than Comet.

Comet, testing range: long Against two panthers
Times of Two Comet remain when two panthers are destroyed: 2
Times of One Comet remains when two panthers are destroyed: 2
Times of two panthers are still alive while two Comet are both destroyed: 2
Times of one panthers is still alive while two Comet are both destroyed: 4
AI performance when the main gun is active: Worse than Panther.
AI performance when the main gun is not active: Worse than Panther.


Here are some of my personal background:
I am team game players, which means, most of the times, I play 4v4 and 3v3. I usually ranked among 20 for USF and SOV, and around 70 for the other factions. Its has been a long time noticed that It is very rare to see any high-rank players spamming those premium medium tanks but Panthers. So I decided to do this test. Of course, the test is not perfect. But I have tried my best to simulate the real battlefield as much as possible. I refused to dig in purely base on the data because, in some of my previous testings, I realized, even though the stats show exactly the same, the performance may show slite differences. For example: pak 40 and 6 pdr ready to fire time.

Here is something interesting I found during testing:
1. Sherman E8 has, overall, the second worst AI performance among all the testing subjects. I don't know if it is a bug or not, but its main gun has almost no AOE.
2. Comet hull machine gun has the worst performance. It usually only dropped 2 to 3 models at the same time which takes panthers to drop two squads.
3. Yet perform almost the same, Sherman e8's machine gun cost ten ammos more than Sherman 76's and panther's
4. Panthers seem to have the worst tank turret reaction time. It usually starts to rotate its turret later the others.

Edits:
Since there has been people asking. I'll further explain why did I choose T-34/85, Sherman 76, Sherman E8, OKW P4, and Comet as the testing subjects, or in other terms, why do I consider them as premium medium tanks.
1. The tank should be able to have more than one on the field at the same time. So in this case, Pershing and OKW command panther were excluded.
2. The tank should be able to have the capability of fighting both infantries and armor targets. So, in this case, Sherman 105 and KV8 were excluded.
3. The tank should be able to move in fairly fast speed. Thus the KV1 was also excluded.
4. The selected tank should have a similar tank in its relative factions that are both cheaper and performed worse than it. That is why I consider the OKW P4 as a premium tank but not the OST one.

Good work OP. It's true that sometimes statistics tend to differ from real game situations situations.

I must point out that you didn't describe how long the tanks were chased and that can raise controversy.
It's also worth saying that even though you tried to emulate some tank fights, the support factor is missing and it's critical. I say it because they can easily change the test results, for example a smoke pot can save the damaged tank meanwhile the other keeps charging into the target. This kind of plays are heavily rawarded by game design. It's like acc non linear combat design and that makes it really hard to predict.

I will disagree on the way of choosing the list of premium medium tanks. You either forgot of Pershing (no one considers it a heavy) and I would suggest you to include Panthers if you did with comets. Where are cromwell's? Even Ost P4 are premium mediums, they are costly because of that tag.

Other than that great post

Yeah this is really great. Thanks for putting in the work to get statistics.

“Panther turrets react later” just like real life haha. Why didn’t they give the gunner a non magnified sight.

Nice tests.
To spread a bit more info to your realization on the E8s AI, if memory serves it has by far the best durability and pen of allied premium mediums (this is represented in your results) so it's lowered AI is definitely justified.

Nice tests.
To spread a bit more info to your realization on the E8s AI, if memory serves it has by far the best durability and pen of allied premium mediums (this is represented in your results) so it's lowered AI is definitely justified.

it actually has better ai then other tank on the move and better scatter

Very good work Harry! The community will surely appreciate the effort, you've clearly invested quite some time into this.

I will disagree on the way of choosing the list of premium medium tanks. You either forgot of Pershing (no one considers it a heavy) and I would suggest you to include Panthers if you did with comets. Where are cromwell's? Even Ost P4 are premium mediums, they are costly because of that tag.

Other than that great post

OP clearly stated that he'll try premium mediums. Why I don't know, but I assume that he wanted to shed some light into the premium medium tier that players usually don't see that often, while everybody from low to high level play can get a decent grasp on standard medium performance and balance.

Also: I do consider the Pershing a heavy. And since when is the OST P4 a premium medium? Health and gun are absolute standard and the armor is nothing super special as well.

Okw p4 is as much as premium medium and the dozer blade Sherman

Yup, easy8 is a piece of crap, you will never see it being used by anyone half decent in serious game, even if rifle company becomes best usf doctrine. Just like 76sherman, which sees 0 use despite being in one of the most popular usf doctrine.

Yup, easy8 is a piece of crap, you will never see it being used by anyone half decent in serious game, even if rifle company becomes best usf doctrine. Just like 76sherman, which sees 0 use despite being in one of the most popular usf doctrine.

...
Sherman E8, testing range: medium
Times of Two Sherman E8s remains when the panther is destroyed: 4
Times of One Sherman E8 remains when the panther is destroyed: 5
Times of panther is still alive while two Sherman E8s are both destroyed: 1
AI performance when the main gun is active: Worse than Panther.
AI performance when the main gun is not active: Same as Panther.
...

The experiment shows E8 is far from a being a piece of crap, even when 2 were used against a single panther.
E8 is not useless by itself, it is though clearly shadowed by Jacksons that perform the exact same role much better

E8 is one of the best tanks in the game so idk what you are smoking mate. Look at the stats. It's got over 200 armour and FANTASTIC pen while also being mobile. The only thing the t34/85 has on it is more aoe on the gun and an extra hit of health. All other stats are inferior.
The only reasons you don't see E8s is because the commander sucks and why does a faction with the Jackson need a unit to slug out with axis tanks?

Good work OP. It's true that sometimes statistics tend to differ from real game situations situations.

I must point out that you didn't describe how long the tanks were chased and that can raise controversy.
It's also worth saying that even though you tried to emulate some tank fights, the support factor is missing and it's critical. I say it because they can easily change the test results, for example a smoke pot can save the damaged tank meanwhile the other keeps charging into the target. This kind of plays are heavily rawarded by game design. It's like acc non linear combat design and that makes it really hard to predict.

I will disagree on the way of choosing the list of premium medium tanks. You either forgot of Pershing (no one considers it a heavy) and I would suggest you to include Panthers if you did with comets. Where are cromwell's? Even Ost P4 are premium mediums, they are costly because of that tag.

Other than that great post

The chasing distance is not fixed. It varies depending on maps. Most of the time, the distance is determined by my gaming experience. For example, how long am I able to chase enemies tanks without meeting any AT units. How much possible will I encounter a snare unit? I did this preparation step to determine if the test subjects should fire its main gun at medium or long-range. Basically what it means is that during this period of chasing, will my tanks be able to close their range with panthers. And, the results were pretty disappointing. Only Sherman 76s could constantly reach medium shooting range yet the others could not.

Here are some the testers personal conclusions:
1. I do not agree that Sherman E8 is just a piece of crap. However, I would not see myself produce any during a real game. Here are why: [1] I can use the same resources of producing two Sherman E8s for one M36 and a regular Sherman. This kind of combination will put out more AT or AI output almost in all of kinds situations compare to purely having two E8.[2] The Rifle Company commander sucks, in my opinion. I really don't see any reason for me to choose it over the others.
2. Comet needs a complete remake but not a slight buff. Current testing shows that its performance worse than panthers in both AI and AT performance even though they both cost almost exactly the same.
3. I have just come back from another team game. My friend and I managed to hold off a huge Soviet push with a fairly small army.
Here is a list of the units:
Two soviets: 3 T-34/85s, 2 IS-2s, and 2 SU-85s.
Me and my friend: 1 JP4, 1 Panther, one elephant, and two schrecks PGs
We sacrificed the Panther and the elephant in returned of destroying all of their tanks but one SU-85.
I know the matchmaking maybe a little bit unfair( me being as around rank 70 and my friend ranks around 400), but I still think there is something wrong in terms of the allies tank overall stats performance.

Isnt it funny that people consider pershing medium tank when trying to explain its poor performance for supposed "heavy tank", but insist on calling it heavy when justifying its price tag and nerfs that "put it in line with other heavies"?

The above tested mediums have been relatively unchanged for quite some time.

Comparatively the panther, Jackson and firefly have been adjusted quite frequently in an arms race to make them all quite good.

Despite being versatile, mediums really can't stand up to these TD units because they aren't cost effective against any of them. While the units are all fine, non-doctrinal options are better for killing infantry or tanks in most situations. The only one i really ever build is the 85 because it's good vs infantry, but it's not great vs tanks with its long reload and relatively low pen as evidenced in it performing worst vs the panther. Next patch KV-1 might replace 85's as the best option for tanks in a guard doc.

If you want to make them more competitive choices, they should be buffed but increased in cost so they can show a greater differentiation from non-doctrinal units.

1. I do not agree that Sherman E8 is just a piece of crap. However, I would not see myself produce any during a real game. Here are why: [1] I can use the same resources of producing two Sherman E8s for one M36 and a regular Sherman. This kind of combination will put out more AT or AI output almost in all of kinds situations compare to purely having two E8.[2] The Rifle Company commander sucks, in my opinion. I really don't see any reason for me to choose it over the others.
2. Comet needs a complete remake but not a slight buff. Current testing shows that its performance worse than panthers in both AI and AT performance even though they both cost almost exactly the same.

1.I'm afraid that everything that lacks indirect fire would be suck in team game. So Rifle company sucks because it got no off-map art that could actually destroy something or heavy art units. Pershing is also facing the same situation.
2.UKF is facing a more serious situation. They used to have strong front line units and emplacements at the cost of having no art units. During several patches, their front line units and emplacements are no longer dominant while they still have not art without certain commanders.