M4 sherman!

[mjtaylor]

Originally posted by VooWho
The only reason why no one wants the Sherman is because theres no tanks that it can compete with in AH. How about we add more sucky tanks instead of the ultimate tanks of the war. How about we get a Sherman, Panzer III, Matilda, Crusader, those other russian tanks, those crappy japanese tanks, those crappy Italian tanks, and all those other tanks. If we had more of these tanks, then the Sherman would have more tanks in its class. If we get more tanks like the tiger, panther, and those big prettythang German tanks, then we well never see anything like the sherman in the game, because people well say this "It won't match up to the Tiger" "Its has a crappy gun" "It has thin armor" "Its too slow" "Its got no competition" blah blah blah. If we get say the King Tiger then there is no hope for anymore tanks as though "Nothing can compete with it" Add the Sherman it won't kill us to have a sucky tank.

amen, hey if we have thein 8-player, it would be called "BAD TANKS OF THE WAR AND 1 GOOD 1 (THE M4 SHERMAN)"

[mjtaylor]

Originally posted by Martyn
Cromwell? Comet? Pretty please...

cromwell is like the sherman, low volocity 75mm cannon, but thicker armor (slightly) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cromwell_tank  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_Sherman (well according to those same, well worse)


comet would be alright, it would nice though, but want sherman!


who watches The Military Channel's "Tank OverHaul"?

[tedrbr]

A little reality check for the thread:

VooWho     The only reason why no one wants the Sherman is because theres no tanks that it can compete with in AH. How about we add more sucky tanks instead of the ultimate tanks of the war.

sparow     I agree with many of you. The problem is that armour in AH started with very good, very late war models.
In an ideal world we would have at least a medium and a heavy tank of each Allied and Axis country - maybe not the Japanese, French and Italian - but certainly, German, Russian, British, and American for each period, Early, Medium and Late War, what would give us lots of room to play with balance and perks.

* Most seem to agree that the Sherman added, alone and on it's own merits to the game with the current GV's in use now, would be a hangar queen, and unable to compete with the other tanks in the game.

* By sparow'spost:  So, at a minimum add 5 additional tanks to the existing 3?  The answer in order to get Shermans in-game, and playable as opposed to being hangar queens, is to add large numbers of weaker tanks, and I suppose heavily perk the heavy tanks?  

* All these weaker tanks you want would be just so much cannon fodder to IL-2's, Hurries, Mossies, and Yak-9T's  prowling over the fields, and fewer GV's able to afford the perk price of the heavier tanks (priced to force players into weaker tanks in the first place).  I can kill multiple Osties, Panzers and even Tiger's with an IL-2 sortie.... what chance would a Sherman have?

* You are talking about adding a half dozen GV's to what is primarily an air combat game, where the fighter and bomber pilots can't get any additions to the planeset.  We've seen, what, the F4U-1A (which still doesn't show on the website) and the Jeep in the last 1-1/2 to 2 years?  What are the chances of seeing more than 1 GV addition in the next 2 years?  You'll be luck to see 1 addition, you certainly are not going to see multiple GV's added to the game.


Now, I've argued elsewhere that both the buff drivers and the GVr's need an addition each for their perks.   For GVr's, I've suggested a Towed 88mm Flak 36 would be the best choice.... around for Early War, enable a manned puffy ack to force buffs to higher altitudes, and help in defense, add player controlled indirect artillery with HE and Smoke, and add a long distance direct fire AP weapon.  Weak defense due to exposed crews is the trade off.  Light perk to limit overuse.
Thread Here   It gives you something different with multiple roles, while asking for just one addition to the GV-set.   I doubt it would be a hangar queen.


So, given that you get the possibility of ONE addition to the GV set in the foreseeable future, EW, MW, or LW timeframe: would YOU chose the Sherman?

[E25280]

Originally posted by tedrbr


A little reality check for the thread:

* Most seem to agree that the Sherman added, alone and on it's own merits to the game with the current GV's in use now, would be a hangar queen, and unable to compete with the other tanks in the game.

I disagree.  See my previous post.

Originally posted by tedrbr
* By sparow'spost:  So, at a minimum add 5 additional tanks to the existing 3?  The answer in order to get Shermans in-game, and playable as opposed to being hangar queens, is to add large numbers of weaker tanks, and I suppose heavily perk the heavy tanks?

Presupposes the Sherman would be a hanger queen.  It would not.  Therefore, invalid point.

Originally posted by tedrbr
*  All these weaker tanks you want would be just so much cannon fodder to IL-2's, Hurries, Mossies, and Yak-9T's  prowling over the fields, and fewer GV's able to afford the perk price of the heavier tanks (priced to force players into weaker tanks in the first place).  I can kill multiple Osties, Panzers and even Tiger's with an IL-2 sortie.... what chance would a Sherman have?

Better chance than the Panzer due to the more effective AA gun.

Originally posted by tedrbr
*   You are talking about adding a half dozen GV's to what is primarily an air combat game, where the fighter and bomber pilots can't get any additions to the planeset.  We've seen, what, the F4U-1A (which still doesn't show on the website) and the Jeep in the last 1-1/2 to 2 years?  What are the chances of seeing more than 1 GV addition in the next 2 years?  You'll be luck to see 1 addition, you certainly are not going to see multiple GV's added to the game.

Still operating off of the first erroneous assumption.  Invalid point.

Originally posted by tedrbr
Now, I've argued elsewhere that both the buff drivers and the GVr's need an addition each for their perks.   For GVr's, I've suggested a Towed 88mm Flak 36 would be the best choice.... around for Early War, enable a manned puffy ack to force buffs to higher altitudes, and help in defense, add player controlled indirect artillery with HE and Smoke, and add a long distance direct fire AP weapon.  Weak defense due to exposed crews is the trade off.  Light perk to limit overuse.
Thread Here   It gives you something different with multiple roles, while asking for just one addition to the GV-set.   I doubt it would be a hangar queen.

But it would seem this would require an entirely different code set vs. adding another tank to the game.  This makes your suggestion less likely.

Originally posted by tedrbr
So, given that you get the possibility of ONE addition to the GV set in the foreseeable future, EW, MW, or LW timeframe: would YOU chose the Sherman?

Absolutely.

Those who resist the idea of the Sherman tend to do so due to the Sherman's reputation.  I predict that, if modeled correctly, the Sherman would be very competitive -- and the BBs would erupt with complaints about the "overmodeling" of the Sherman, the same as we have constant complainers about the flight models of this-or-that aircraft.  HiTech uses hard data to model these things.  Hard data about the Sherman suggests even the earlier models would be competitive in AH vs the current set, and some later versions would dominate all but the Tiger.

[Wes14]

some later versions would dominate all but the Tiger.

say whut? i don't think they would dominate the T-34's:p

[E25280]

Originally posted by Wes14
say whut? i don't think they would dominate the T-34's:p

The version of the T-34 in AH is an earlier version with the 76mm gun.  If we were to get a Sherman Firefly with the British 17 Pounder, for example (better AT gun than the Tiger's 88mm), then yes, the AH T-34 is dominated.

[Wes14]

i dunno its the driver/gunner more then the tank (unless a fighter(player) uses a M8,lol)

in a H2h room i was in a 30-ish minute fire fight ina T-34 against a tiger (ended in Tie)

[tedrbr]

Originally posted by E25280
Those who resist the idea of the Sherman tend to do so due to the Sherman's reputation.  I predict that, if modeled correctly, the Sherman would be very competitive -- and the BBs would erupt with complaints about the "overmodeling" of the Sherman, the same as we have constant complainers about the flight models of this-or-that aircraft.  HiTech uses hard data to model these things.  Hard data about the Sherman suggests even the earlier models would be competitive in AH vs the current set, and some later versions would dominate all but the Tiger.

Presupposes the Sherman would be a hanger queen.  It would not.  Therefore, invalid point.

The Sherman's early 75mm would be typically out-ranged by the Panzer IV's 75mm, though the IV's lower velocity 75mm (compared to Panther's HV 75mm and Tiger's 88mm) may take two shots to kill a Sherman at range.  Sherman's armor designed to withstand 50mm rounds.  Or you could go with the later Sherman 76mm HVAP gun and rounds, and limit the use of the Sherman to Late War arenas only, but it would be more effective vs the Panzer at longer ranges.  So less competitive and MW (maybe EW, forget what years that includes), or more competitive and limited to LW.

The only thing really going for the Sherman over a T-34 is that it mounts a .50 in the cupola. It *might* be a couple miles an hour faster on hardball.  Otherwise the T-34 is pretty close in capabilities as the Sherman... so I guess I have to concede the point, the Sherman would not be the hangar queen, the T-34 would be....

End result; gaining one uncommonly used tank while reducing a similar tank to obsolescence in-game.  Does not seem an economical use of programming and development time.  As far as game modeling, a Sherman would be very nearly a T-34 with a cupola gun added.  

Better chance than the Panzer due to the more effective AA gun.

No more effective than the .50 cal mounted on the M3 or jeep now, as far as game code would be concerned.  So, no, no better chance than the Panzer, as the Panzer IV has more armor to protect it from the front, maybe a little less to the sides.  Just AA, which the T-34 does not have.

Regarding 88mm Flak36:

But it would seem this would require an entirely different code set vs. adding another tank to the game.  This makes your suggestion less likely.

 

Most of the code already exists for current GV's like the M16 and M3, Puffy Ack, and the 5 inch guns on CV and CA.   A Flak36 would probably resemble a 5-inch gun in use (firing) more than anything.  No more difficult than making the adjustments and spec changes for a new tank, just pulling the code from different areas.   It's not as if they need to start from scratch.  And an 88mm Flak would cover EW to LW.

Finally, the American plane set and GV set are already pretty large compared to everything else in the game already.  6 American Vehicles, 3 German, 1 Russian.  A little more variety would not be a bad thing here, especially to support the SEA and AvA Heavy Metal Mondays.