Profile of general_gawain

how'bout reducing advanced emplacement regiment's Precision Barrage's cooltime(120Secs->60~90secs) and Munies?(200~140~160)

I know it uses same data with IR Pathfinders and WC51 dodge truck.
but Brit one drops the latest and The most expensive. I think this should get some reduce.

Precision Barrage kills a howitzer to 100% anywhere on the map in combination with Recon Plane of Vet1 AO. Its already one of the cheaper howitzer destruction commander abilities. Since Howitzer are the doom of Advanced Emplacements Regiment it is a pretty perfect combination that is worth its cost.

and Churchill Tank's POP reducing can be happened.
Normal churchill tank's Pop is 19. but Specilaized only one deployable AVRE is 18. it is weird.
how'bout flattening with AVRE. reducing Churchill's Pop to 18.
and Comet can be also reduced to 16~17.

Yeah, I do think 19pop for a damage sponge and AI tank is pretty much in lategame, where its AT capabilities are just not enough to deal with axis armor. A pop reduction wouldn't hurt. Comet pop is more about okay, since it is more of an allrounder.

After all i don't think the reason for the current nerf was that the M4C was too good versus infantry, but rather that the regular AT shells were too potent against even heavily armored tanks.

Yeah I do think this too. In the current version you don't really need to change to HVAP since the 2 seconds faster RoF of the AP shells with lower penetration somehow lead pretty much to the same DPS versus higher armored targets, making the switch to HVAP not very desireable because it has no AOE for fighting infantry. RNG versus heavy armored targets is higher with AP but at average the performance is similar.

So regarding this, the nerf to RoF was a good decision, but it lead to the opposite in the outcome sadly. Now you want HVAP most of the time, its greater accuracy plus penetration works better versus nearly all armored targets M4C has to face usually at its timing. Switching to AP hasn't enough AI value to risk getting surprised by a tank having your pants down. You are better off to rely on the MGs for fighting infantry.

To correct this mistake either revert RoF nerf and lower penetration of AP instead or keep RoF nerf and buff AOE profile of AP shell.

Buffing MGs doesn't lead to the situation where a shell switch is a real decision. It will only lead to the situation that M4C will rely even more on MGs for fighting infantry and stay in HVAP mode.

The fact that they have to switch shells at all is a disadvantage, regardless of how strong either shell is. That's the entire argument. The Sherman's AP and HE shells are both extremely good, but the fact there's a delay between being able to use one or the other (and the mere fact you have to manually switch) is undeniably a disadvantage. This disadvantage is counteracted by the fact that the HE and AP shells are stronger than average, but it's still a present disadvantage.

If they switched instantly, and were switched automatically dependent on the target then this would be a buff to the unit, wouldn't you agree? If you do agree, then you agree that manual shell switching is, in fact, disadvantageous.

What you're stating is rather more misleading than what Gawain was stating to begin with. This really didnt need to go on for quite so long.

Thats a good point indeed.

Since my sentence...

"The shell switch alone (6 seconds) is already a big disadvantage at fighting different targets, so this surely would not be op."

...seems to be used out of context over and over again I'll post an additional statement that I made after this sentence which made clear how it was meant to anybody who takes the time to read it.


Post #648:
"1. Obviously having to switch between two shell modes to get good AI or good AT is a disadvantage compared to a tank who has the same AI and AT values combined in one standard shell. I do think this is out of question."

That should clear things up. So ignore the first sentence please, the second one describes it better.

Having the 75mm-HE AI-capabilities and the 75mm-AP AT-capabilities in one shell would be stronger than having to switch between the two shell types to fight specific targets, right? Thats what was meant with "shell switch is a disadvantage". But because there is no medium tank shell that has as good AI as the 75mm-HE AND as good AT as the 75mm-AP that makes up for the disadvantage of having to switch to the correct shell. This makes the performance of the 75mm sherman balanced and switching between the shell types an interesting choice. How this can be misunderstood is beyond me and has to be purposeful derailing of the actual discussion.

Pretty good summarized. Thx :-)