The ones that do exist. It doesn’t help your point to say it’s a dead zone but we should move the 4H to it either.
This is false. They are sidegrades at best with most skilled players saying (including myself) that the Shermans are the best of the 3 early tier big nation mediums, those being the t-34, pz4, m4
And what 4.3’s are those? Churchill NA75? Same gun as the 75 Sherman, but no stab. AMX-13 (FL-11)? Same ammo as the 75 Sherman (identical performance), but no stab. KV-1S? Chi-Nu II? Probably your only comparison here.
Yes, and you’d still have the numerous Pz IV’s from the start of the tree to the end of tier II. Honestly, it should look something like:
panzer 4 F2 is a glass cannon it can be penned with 50 cals as a medium tank its mid just shoot it first and you win
And that’s why I didn’t change it’s BR…
i know half the people hear have never played it thats why im saying it not naming names
Looks sensible to me, though ngl, I would consider moving the J to 3.3 too, because the targeting speed greatly limits you in terms of playstyle. It’s a TD with medium tank spawn cost.
Except it loses to the 5.0 in pretty much everything?
And the 3.7 M4 is just better anyway lol
I have many games in the Chi-Nu II and can confidently say it is better than the Pz IVs.
Why do you put G and H so far apart? They are identical, one is slightly slower but has the spaced side armor and the other one isn’t and doesn’t.
Some of those comparisons were cherry-picked and completely biased to make the M4A1 76 appear better than it is. It is better, but not leagues better.
Please tell me how a 0.3 difference is “far apart”. Panzer IV H also has the longer barrel 75.
What exactly is wrong with the comparison below?
Pretty far apart considering they’re identical.
Wow, so like… 5mm pen? Unless they changed it again when I wasn’t looking.
Wrong Sherman. Re-read my post.
It’s only 1 peg difference and the H has the L48 gun + an extra mg that helps vs open-topped targets (plus the already mentioned side-skirts that defend against HEAT)
Would not make sense to have them on exact same BR.
All of that is more weight and it is significantly slower.
Except frontal turret armor, RoF and APHE damage.
A .50cal is also a nice feature.
The benefits I’ve described more than outweigh the slight reduction of HP/ton ratio.
Neither tank is winning any races.
I’m always amazed that people think that Pz IV are better than shermans
names a bunch of tiny guns with rounds under 3 pounds
You need to back-read more before you respond to a post more than a month later.
I was responding to the bullets below…
“And you apparently lack the understanding that size and weight hardly makes a difference, if the tank has the space for it.”
“You can’t turn the turret and look for targets at the same time.”
“Every time you spot a target from the hatch or periscopes there’s a delay of moving to the gun controls.”
All those points you listed out are for it’s BR, sure it can hold its own at higher BRs but it doesn’t mean it should be higher. Do you really expect it to be on par with the T-34 57 at 4.7 or even the Panthers and Tiger E at 6.0?
At 4.7 it’s gonna be
Average gun
Average ammo
Garbage armor
Garbage mobility
Low profile
Will die or get crippled if touched by anything.
At 6.0 it’s gonna be
Bad gun
Bad ammo
No armor
Garbage mobility
Small profile
If that is what you want then sure why not.
Touché, I was simply commenting that they weigh so little…. I, a tiny chudling, could probably reload that fast
It’s a stellar sniping tank though. Very punchy round and good velocity.
I prefer the shermans, but I have had a pretty good time playing them. I agree they are fine where they are at - though they could perform well at slightly higher BRs just fine. That said, I think new players being forced to play them there wouldn’t fare well and they should stay where they are.