Originally posted by Lye-El
You state you don't like crap. You also state you want the Sherman.
The Sherman IS crap. If you had a Sherman it would be killed by one round. It would also have a difficult time killing a Panzer and the only way for it to kill a Tiger is to be behind it AND be very close.
IMHO, the Sherman was not crap. It acquired its poor reputation because it couldn't stand up to Tigers or Panthers. Big deal - neither could the T-34/76 -- yet that is the tank so many experts think was so incredibly good. Why? Because when introduced, it was going against Pzkw IIIs and early IVs. It acquired a reputation as a good tank going against lesser ones. Never mind they were destroyed by the bushell in 44 and 45 -- reputation was already established.
"Sherman would be killed by one round". Unlike the Panzer? The T-34? The Osti? All die with one round. IRL the armor protection of the Shermans was about equivelant to the PzkwIV.
A standard Sherman with the 75mm gun would have the one-hit power of the current T-34, but probably twice the rate of fire. An M4A3E8 (I think is correct designation) would have a 76mm gun roughly equal to the PzkwIV. A Sherman Firefly would have the Brit 17 pounder -- firing a sabot round, it was more powerful than the Tiger's 88. An interesting variant would be the 105mm assault gun version of the Sherman with HEAT rounds.
So, lots of ways to introduce it, none of them "crap" or useless.