“only advantage”
Yeah, guess it’s gonna be impossible to convince this community that cannot look at the entire vehicle’s capabilities and arsenal when it comes to judging vehicles fairly.
2 Likes
Worse cannon
Worse armor
Worse mobility
Is this even an argument? The 76mm Shermans are nothing without their stabilizers.
Already listed a bunch of things that make the M4A3 (76) Sherman situationally better against competent players, not gonna list them again.
1 Like
The M4A3 has better acceleration though.
yeah and there 5.7 and do amazing at that tier as there one of strongest 5.7s at the moment First shot first kill is always theres the actual tanks that kept it from dominating no longer fight it at its br so basically there screwed
All this talk about comparing the M4A3 76 with the STP when there is already a Sherman at 6.3. Sure, it might have worse mobility, but the armour is far better. But US players have for years asked for it to be moved down because the gun doesn’t work at that BR.
Shermans have no place above 6.0 (In the TT, uptiers are a fact of the game), T34-85’s do.
quote=“CasperWieIk, post:53, topic:284793”]
but the armour is far better
[/quote]
When you’re facing IS-2 or KT, armor differences between T-34 and M4 Jumbo do not matter one bit.
1 Like
Though i didn’t get my STP yet,but i have his US cousin:T20 medium tank
Looks T20 is similar to STP ,their low pen in AB are so bad,RB maybe a bit better but…i think they can not even pen weak point in uptiers.
So i think gaijin should lower both of them to br6.0
The 76 Jumbo is honestly fine at 6.3, it only suffers in uptiers like almost every heavy tank.
3 Likes
Well doesnt the 6.0 Tiger get APCR shells also?
Which is practically useless.
1 Like
Why would you want them?
so situational you almost never need it
I recently killed Jumbo with it. Penetrated 2 in a row, then he resigned to his fate and I shot him in the MG port with 8.8 APnuke.
Then it turned out I managed to hit 2 tiny spots where APCR can actually do angthing vs the mantlet and I should have gone for the MG port or transmission instead.
It would be useful if Tiger actually faced Churchill VII or if Jumbo’s mantlet wasn’t over 200mm effective almost everywhere.
1 Like
Well, or if penetrations actually had some effect other than getting shot back after 10s.
1 Like
Some time ago I penetrated side od Jumbo’s turret with APCR and then proceeded to kill 2 tanks with it, one being a 1-shot vs IS-1 through the driver’s port, lol.
In that single battle I scored more APCR kills than in the last 5 years, outside of forced APCR grind on some tanks.
Anyway, yeah, the damage is absolutely not there.
Because in some cases it is the only option when the PzGr 39 can’t pen.
The PzGr 40 has better pen even at 30 degrees sloped armor. Does not have same post-pen damage, but if the PzGr 39 can’t pen the target, is it not good to have an option that does?
But the catalogue of things APCR would work against consists of… Well… 2 small spots on Junbo mantlet and maybe some part of black prince turret if you happen to meet one. Other than that it’s kind of sad.
Can i just say these pictures prove quite well how stupid damage against front mounted transmissions is.
These shells are nowhere near the transmission or drive shaft. 9/10 times drive shaft in tanks are also protected somehow by turret basket or just cover so you don’t stick your feet in it.
Last few days I have been astonished how many times I disable enemy tank from moving just by shooting the turret.
Yesterday, I was in Obj 292, and I side-shot an Abrams turret from point blank range. His turret crew was 100% fine, but SOMEHOW I got his horizontal drive and transmission.
Transmissions are definitely one of those things that need a full rework. There’s no reason that a solid steel bar designed to withstand thousands of pounds of force for multiple hours a day whilst being banged around in a metal box should just instantly go poof the second a couple of metal fragments hit it.