Profile of JohnSmith

Perhaps OffTopic: Does CB on Mortars have the same "feature" as CB on artillery pieces?

It is an alternative that doesn't bring much at the end.
It is debatable if a pair of E8s would be better then regular sherman and jackson combo.

At that point, a regular sherman and Jackson combo would be supported by some other USF commander ability that is not part of the EZ8 commander. and it'll do a better job.

I wouldn't rate a tank that is ~20% cheaper in all categories even if you take the balance preview changes into account as (very)similar/akin to tank XYZ. I'd also not call it a late game unit, since you can get it around the 16-17 minute mark. You can make it to that time without being forced to build a medium tank beforehand. And given that its currently only role is to kill mediums, it will only shine while mediums are the strongest unit on the field, which is not the late game either.

I'm not going to argue schematics of sentences, nor what can be considered similar nor what is late-game, especially not for a unit that is at the very end of a doctrinal track. I know the costs, read the costs, played against 2xUSF who tried the EZ8, and I don't intend to argue what is a good cost, especially for something that has had its cost hiked up to 150 fuel. Yet, the EZ8 has no space at all in the game.

What type of play does the EZ8 has got when it arrives 16-17 minutes? Answer is simple, it barely has 2-3 minutes of perhaps a chance of killing a medium. And then it sits there doing nothing at all. No wonder I haven't seen it for ages in any 2on2s, and if there were any, it just pinged against my panthers, or they were gone against my pgrens shreks. It is always better for the USF player to get a Jackson first and foremost in every case. these things pack totally, and they're not even doctorinal. Why does the eZ8 even exist in the game? Nobody really knows, and the changes seem more like changes just for the sake of it. USF will prob stick to their usual commander choice.

Why would you build a tank that is only good to fight mediums when you can, for the same price, build a tank that is good vs medium and heavy tanks.

It is not only the combo M4A3 / Jackson that is good, its the logic of building a sherman to punish infantry while able to defend itself vs medium (with the appropriate support) and then build a Jackson to fight anything armored.

Questions anyone should answer are:

Why would you build a M4A3 then a Ez8?
Why would you build a Ez8 first and then a M4A3 or Jackson?
Why would you build a Jackson and then a Ez8?

And that's exactly what I have been pointing at, why get something doctorinal when there are much better options? Why would my USF opponent in 2on2 even choose EZ8 when there are better commanders with better solutions to everything instead of a very specific nonsense EZ8 with no punch and still high cost that arrives quite late (not going to argue what late game is, it still arrives late) to the game? I hate these hit and giggle away Jacksons that just deals with everything. Just give the EZ8 some better AT and done with it. I'd get to see less paras. done and dusted.

I don't get it, why are we now comparing a late-game doctrinal unit which should pack quite a punch with a cost akin to a panther to a mid-game tank with much lower cost? Even with that badly chosen example it shows that EZ8 doesn't pen much at all. Or was that on purpose?

Relic, as quoted from 2014 (dates are missing in OP's post); that's more than seven years ago, and ages before WFA/UKF and any community involvement and any other more recent patch note that overwrite these design ideas to better fit the unit's intended purposes. Not to forget that numerous Relic staff members have moved on since 2014.