The Basic M4 (Sherman)

[Yarbles]

How would it get on in the MA?

Not well I think but then I have killed tanks with an M8, and damaged them with an osti and wirrble.

I would like to see how it would do against the firefly and the basic T34. I assume the M4 came up agianst the T34 in Korea. Does anyone know how that went?   

[Anaxogoras]

The M4 would be unperked, and see less use than the Panzer IV.  Against a Tiger it might be almost helpless because of its poor firepower.

Still, there is a need for this tank in the AvA and scenarios, even if its anemic firepower isn't suited for your typical main arena spawn-camp, errr, tank battle.

[RedTeck]

It could be used for psychological value. A 30 M4 mission comes into a field, you might not get a chance to find out if its the Sherman or Firefly. Not sure what role it would fill. Tiger there if you wanna be somewhere for awhile, kill in 1 shot, and want to avoid getting bombed by a plane. T34 for a fast, well armored tank; and if you want to have a big gun you take the -85. The panzer is in between T-34 and M4 in speed, has a better gun, and descent armor. Then theres the M4. Its only .5 Km/H faster than a Tiger, thin armor, and a gun that, at least in the war, required very close engagement ranges. Camping a spawn it might get you a few kills. I'll agree a non-perked American tank would be nice. I remember the FSO in December where with 30 min to go Fireflys and Tigers were disabled, leaving the U.S. Side with M8s only versus Panzers. The M3 and M5 were the only other American Tanks I know of, and would fair even worse in here, leaving U.S. Tank Destroyers like the M10, M18, or M36. If one day every tank will be in the game, I'd say wait for the "plain" M4 and get a T.D. like the M18 or M36.

[Yarbles]

I like the idea of the tank destroyer but would be as easy to kill as an m3 from the air unless it was a very late model with a roof.

[Angus]

I guess it would be very easy to model, so why not?
BTW, rather than a tank destroyer, how about mobilized arty? I feel sure that it would be used.

[Rich46yo]

I like the idea of the tank destroyer but would be as easy to kill as an m3 from the air unless it was a very late model with a roof.

Then again a high eny TD might see a lot of use simply due to its ability to get you perk points in a hurry. Most of us already have an ocean of GV perks already but still its an idea. Best of all the TDs were very fast and manueverable. The M-18 went like 60 mph.

[Yarbles]

I guess it would be very easy to model, so why not?
BTW, rather than a tank destroyer, how about mobilized arty? I feel sure that it would be used.

Isnt that sort of covered by the LVT4? 

[Saxman]

It could be used for psychological value. A 30 M4 mission comes into a field, you might not get a chance to find out if its the Sherman or Firefly. Not sure what role it would fill. Tiger there if you wanna be somewhere for awhile, kill in 1 shot, and want to avoid getting bombed by a plane. T34 for a fast, well armored tank; and if you want to have a big gun you take the -85. The panzer is in between T-34 and M4 in speed, has a better gun, and descent armor. Then theres the M4. Its only .5 Km/H faster than a Tiger, thin armor, and a gun that, at least in the war, required very close engagement ranges. Camping a spawn it might get you a few kills. I'll agree a non-perked American tank would be nice. I remember the FSO in December where with 30 min to go Fireflys and Tigers were disabled, leaving the U.S. Side with M8s only versus Panzers. The M3 and M5 were the only other American Tanks I know of, and would fair even worse in here, leaving U.S. Tank Destroyers like the M10, M18, or M36. If one day every tank will be in the game, I'd say wait for the "plain" M4 and get a T.D. like the M18 or M36.

Red,

Remember that a number of teething problems--like the gun and armor--were worked out of the Sherman in later models like the Easy-8. It's completely possible for HTC to add a "standard" Sherman that will remain competitive with the Panzer, so don't write off the M4 as useless based on the early models.

Also, if an earlier Panzer were added as well an early-model Sherman would STILL be competitive in the EW arenas.

[RedTeck]

Granted I'm a little biased cause I like my T-34 and usually don't even bother with the perked rides other than the -85 on occasion. But I cant see a reason to take an M4 over a T-34 or Panzer. Now the M4A3E2 Sherman Jumbo wouldn't be bad, but it would end up perked.

[Fencer51]

The Sherman in it's various variants should be the next vehicle added, it is desperately needed for Special Events.  A tank destroyer adds nothing to the game that a tank does not do.  If you are in fact not worried about Special Events, there is no reason to add any other vehicle.  Everything is already here for a multisided non-historical battle.

[splitatom]

they would have to add the m4a3 for the reason of that the early one was almost worthless against every german tank

[Yarbles]

The Sherman in it's various variants should be the next vehicle added, it is desperately needed for Special Events.  A tank destroyer adds nothing to the game that a tank does not do.  If you are in fact not worried about Special Events, there is no reason to add any other vehicle.  Everything is already here for a multisided non-historical battle.

I thought late war shermans had access to highly effective HVAP round though this was rare. Our panzer MK4 Is very late war so why not have the best Sherman with the best Ammo. It wont have the gun of the Firefly but it might match the Panzer in effective firepower.   

[RedTeck]

The HVAP was there but as a demonstration of the thought process of the day where if possible, pockets of German tanks were bypassed by M4's and left for tank destroyers.

"Hypervelocity Armor Piercing HVAP ammunition, standardized as M93, was developed for the 76 mm gun in July 1944. This new projectile could penetrate the front turret of the Panther at longer ranges than standard ammunition. Its distribution was, however, prioritized to US Tank Destroyer units"

Could always get the M36. It was a TD built upon thje M4 platform with a 90mm MG

[Blooz]

The basic M4 Sherman wasn't designed to fight other tanks. It was designed to exploit weak areas of the enemy line and get into the rear areas to destroy supplies and communications. trouble is this strategy needs alot of space to achieve success. It worked well enough in Africa. Not so in the mountains of Italy and the hedgerows of Normandy. Once the US armor got in the open it was then that the Sherman was in its element and did well.

The basic M4, if added to the game, would need to try and avoid the enemy to be successful, reach the town or base and tear things up. In AH we have the Firefly. It can do the same job that the basic M4 was designed to do with the added ability to fight other tanks. The T34/76 was designed the same way. Exploitation in the advance. The basic M4 while nice to have for scenarios (and a vehicle I'd like to see in game) would be redundant as we already have a T34 and Firefly.

[Rich46yo]

I would say the design and philosophy behind the Sherman was deeply flawed, as evidenced by it being the first and last tank designed behind this philosophy. I know the use of armor was in its infancy, or close to it, at the time. But If other major powers got it right, that tanks should be designed to kill other tanks, then why didn't we? Since then we have never looked back. We are just lucky we got the other elements of combined arms right and that we had some brilliant generals. We still should have gone to war with a better tank.

The Sherman wasn't a complete failure. It actually was a pretty decent tank. But it was not a good tank on tank, tank. We simply mobbed the German armored divisions. Mobbed them with combined arms, complete control of the air, and an almost limitless supply.

The game I think doesn't really reflect the realities of the actual war that made the Sherman worthwhile. In the game we are pretty much killing other tanks with tanks. Even the Panzer lV and its high vel gun would far outclass the Sherman. Fireflys and T-34s would chew them up and spit them out. Especially since they cost so few perks to up, perks easily made up for with wirbels.

I dont blame the purists in the game for wanting the tank. I too am one. I love historically correct elements being in the game and historically correct operations. But I think a more worthwhile addition would be a very fast TD, or even a light/scout tank. After all we already have an M-4 tank. I dont see how getting a second one, with a far less effective gun, would help anything.

My thoughts anyway.