Profile of Mazianni

Not to mention USF infantry really aren't that much better than standard Volksgrens or Grenadiers yet that's the only fighting unit you have access to for the first 5-10 minutes.

Riflemen scale much better than either squad and are much better than Grenadiers at most ranges with or without LMG42s being involved. Riflemen only struggle somewhat versus VG thanks to their 10% RA vet 1 and relatively early STG upgrade. Provided you choose your fights wisely you shouldn't really be having issues man-for-man versus axis mainline infantry squads.

Great let me here you description of Sherman that would be enough to deal with PzIV and allow the M36 to nerfed.

How do you go from implying USF has tons of AT options for dealing with the Panzer IV to there only being the M36?

A M4A3 with support from ATGs or bazookas can deal with a Panzer IV adequately enough, and as it is the close range penetration of the M4A3 is fine versus the Ostheer Panzer IV (fun fact, the M4A3 AP shots have more close range penetration than the 76mm AP profile proposed here) With veterancy things become more difficult, sure, but overall IMO the Panzer IV is not so much a reason for the M36 to be so powerful as is the Panther, which the M4A3 is hopelessly inadequate against.

Ironically this proposal doesn't actually meet this requirement anyway as this new 76mm Sherman would do terribly versus the OKW Panzer IV or vet 2 Ostheer Panzer IV. The only major change is that in this world the USF roster has lost a major AI tool and generalist in the M4A3.

It AOE could be improved if needed although I have not seen many complain about the 76mm AI capability. As I a pointed Easy8 would be able to face the OKW PzIV.

People don't complain about the 76mm AI because it isn't purchased to fight infantry. It already fills the role you describe here, right now, with this very proposal aiming to nerf that attribute AND remove generalist/AI options from the stock USF roster.

The easy 8, you also pointed out, is to remain doctrinal, so are you just suggesting USF only use one or two doctrines vs OKW?

And that simply mean that it a vetted PzIV would actually be worth instead of being hit and penetrated with 100% by M36. The argument so far is that the USF need something to counter the PzIV and the 76mm can do that. If vetted PzIV prove to strong add an 125% vet 2 penetration bonus.

Except
1. You offer to rework the M36 into an anti-heavy TD here.
and
2. The M36 will still, if an anti-heavy TD, penetrate the vetted P4 100%.

I was talking about the Sherman, which you say REPEATEDLY in this proposal would be a counter to the Panzer IV. And yes, it would absolutely struggle versus the vet 2 P4 which is comparable to the OKW P4 that you have already established this unit (the reworked 76mm Sherman) would not be able to fight.

Pls no historical arguments.

It's a WW2 game, so good luck with that. Casually disgregarding historical facts to meet stupid and pointless balance attributes hasn't helped CoH2 any at all.

No I do not see how the proposal creates an inferior Easy8 the proposals creates a main battle that has lower power level than Easy8 but with better AI. Actually I have not seen allot people complaining about the 76mm AI performance.

...Do you even know what the 76mm Sherman or Easy 8's AI capabilities are like? Currently the 76mm has arguably worse AI than the E8 by virtue of a smaller AOE, and worse scatter, offset by a much higher ROF. This proposal, besides nerfing the 76mm's AT capabilities, would also reduce it's ROF, and made no comment on increasing it's AI abilities, so the 76mm outlined in this proposal would have worse AI and AT than the E8. You also want to remove the Soviet holdover 50 cal upgrade for the more expensive and IIRC inferior USF one which is again a nerf to AI.

Again, people don't complain about the 76mm's AI since they don't really expect it to fight infantry. (The M4A3 is a much better option in this case). The fact it currently shoots ridiculously fast in any case doesn't hurt.

Read more carefully. The suggestions is to remove the dozer blade from 105mm, then it can be added as an upgrade for the M4A3. The is very little reason for 2 dozer Sherman version to exist one 75mm and one 105mm.

There's even less reason to remove it for either vehicle.

As explained AI can be increased if there is a need for it.
USF have an advantage in early game thus Ostheer should have an advantage in T3 game

The Panther is too be counted by M36 not Sherman.

Which brings me back to my first point, which is that nobody will build this unit since an ATG or even a nerfed M36 will be a smarter investment.

As for the T-34/76 it has excellent AI capabilities so I am not sure why you want to bring it up or why in your opinion the Sherman should have better AI, better AT, better armor and Crew.

The T-34/76's AI capabilities come from it's very good hull MG dps, not from it's main gun, which is more or less universally considered subpar. And that is directly the attribute which I am referring to when I talked about the T-34/76's AI, which is why I brought up the AOE, as the 76mm's main gun is actually worse in this regard.

The Sherman is not a dedicated counter is an all around tank so I am not sure what you expect it to counter infatry, counter PzIV and counter Panther?

You have mentioned like a half-dozen times that this unit would counter the Ostheer P4 (at least until vet 2). It would also have the worst AI of any medium tank in game if we implemented it with only the changes you outlined in your original post. So, yeah, unless you buffed the AI (say, to P4 levels?) nobody would build this unit since it'd be neither a generalist nor a counter to, well, anything I guess, since I guess you do not actually expect it to counter the P4 either.

Of course, instead of buffing the 76mm's AI capabilities, one could stick to the status quo with the current M4A3.

With a similar cost and better moving accuracy, smoke and crew I am not sure why in your opinion it should be able to take out a PzIV with easy.

What the hell do you expect it to do then? Gimped AI, gimped AT, what do you expect a USF player to buy this unit for? To deploy smoke with it? Kill 222s? Nobody would buy this unit. It's a terrible proposal. I'm sorry.

Pathfinders have some useful abilities with a large sight range, ability to place beacons and cloaking ability. They are poor combat units however and cost an astounding 290 MP so I can't see them as a viable alternative to Riflemen.

Ok, I actually agree Pathfinders are pretty pathetic tbh (I could have sworn they had 0.9 RA once, but at 1 RA they're squishy af with very little combat value), but they offer great sight and let you reinforce your paratrooper models in the field with beacons, so when going airborne or recon support they are more of an investment into future units than anything else.

Assault Engineers are also quite expensive at 280 MP, same cost as Riflemen but are pretty poor combat units as well especially at that price, they also seem to scale very poor and become less and less viable the longer the game goes on, in fact after the first 5-10 minutes they seem useless. They cost the same as Assault Grenadiers and you'd think they'd have comperable combat preformance but that they do not. Their repair and construction abilities are redundant to RETs.

Ass Engies are great and the flamethrower upgrade they get makes them a no-brainer unit on some maps. You shouldn't fill your whole army with them since they lack snares and are a CQC only unit, but having one or two isn't going to hurt and I would never say they have poor combat ability. They are about on par with Assgrens before either side has upgraded or vetted and after this change will probably be moderately better than Assgrens at vet 1.

Cavalry Riflemen arrive at 1 CP so I guess for that reason alone you really couldn't use them as a Riflemen replacement but more of a Riflemen supplement. They aren't a particularly good combat unit in and of themselves but they are much better than the other two afore mentioned units. They preform best when fighting inside an M3 halftrack due to their very squishy nature. Their AT satchel alone makes them a fairly good unit but they are too weak to be an effective CQB unit on their own.

Cav rifles are a good CQC unit already and the Thompson upgrade makes them even better. The fact they arrive at CP1 definitely means they aren't a replacement unit, yeah. That's fine. You shouldn't fill your whole army up with SMGs anyway.

So really we're still stuck with the dumb Riflemen, Riflemen, Riflemen, LT/CPT build order. I hate having more than two Riflemen because they bleed your MP dry and are terrible later in the game and take up valuable pop and MP for better infantry units like Paratroopers or Rangers.

Riflemen are fine. I wish Paratroopers were more approachable (probably by nerfing their upgrades or something) but Rangers are already fairly easy to work in to most builds even when you have to juggle all the officer units.

None of these units can or should replace riflemen. That's just how the game is, and it doesn't make them bad units.

It should have the highest pen of all AT guns, because historically it could pen anything the allies had iirc. It's the only latewar AT gun after all.

The raketenwerfer is literally a Panzershrek on wheels. No difference besides the carriage, which one could argue made it more accurate at range and easier to load. It also entered service in 1943, only one year after the 6pdr/M1 anti tank gun used by UKF and USF respectively.