The Shermans are a relatively decent tank in my opinion, but do they deserve to be at 5.7, even 5.3? I have nothing to say about the early 75mm Shermans because they are great. I understand that the 76mm is somewhat reliable and the stabilizer is VERY NICE, but I don’t see the Sherman as a very competitive tank where its placed at. The armor is subpar being 63.5mm angled at 47 degrees giving it an armor equivalent on 92mm for the BETTER Sherman. The 76mm gun on the Sherman has a base pen of 149mm flat and 53mm at 60 degrees which isn’t horrible. The mobility is fine and made up for the stabilizer because the tank isn’t super fast so the stabilizer will work most the time driving on uneven terrain on mingling through cities (under 20 kph). The VK is a decent comparison to the 5.7 Sherman but at 5.0. It has a much better gun that can pen anything however it has less filler, higher UFP armor angle at 55 degrees for 60mm making it effective to 104mm. The turrets are comparable but I think the VK is a little better because of volumetric. The VK has better mobility but lacks a stabilizer and has bad traverse. Even the Panther D with 20mm more armor on the UFP and front of the turret still sits at 5.3, .3 below the M4A3 at 5.7. The Jumbo also has an amazing turret but one very deadly weak spot when facing it from the front (mg port) and the 75mm at 5.7 does pretty much nothing. The hull sides even when the front is 20-30 degrees angled likes to get penned by Panthers and Tigers somewhat easily. I don’t have a huge problem with the Jumbo though because it is annoying to fight and it is probably just my problem. The 76mm Jumbo doesn’t really deserve 6.3 either because the only difference is having a 76mm. 6.0 is the max BR I would but the 76 Jumbo. Also, France has the same 76 Jumbo as US but at 5.3 which doesn’t make sense unless Gaijin is trying to give France a lineup which I can’t be super mad bc France suffers a little in lower BRs (NVM just checked only other 5.3s are the ARL which is arguably better than the Jumbo and the other SPAA, everything else is .3 BR difference. Is the position that the Shermans are at just because of how good US CAS is? I just don’t see how basically the same hull used for a 4.0 (M4A2) can be at 5.7.
Forgot to mention: Sherman reverse sucks, KV85 (although a heavy) sits at 5.0, and 5.7 SUCKS WITH NONSTOP UPTIERS (I probably get a downtier 1 in 20-25 rounds playing German and US 5.7)
The Shermans are fine and the Tiger isn’t all sunshine and rainbows. I do have to say though, it is weird for the M4A3 (76) to be at 5.7 simply because it has APCR unlike the M4A2 (76).
APCR on the 76 really isn’t that good because most armor you can’t penetrate will be angled (angled tigers, volumetric hell tanks like panther turret and KV1s) and post pen is so bad that I would rather just take APHE. What justifies the 5.3 M4A2 (76) to be at its BR, like I said other mediums/heavies at the same BR are better.
“Sherman reverse sucks”
I see you never played Panthers?
The Shermans are very decently balanced
Also 25% more horsepower, a more significant change. I think it’s fine at 5.7.
Nope, I have played panthers. Reverse doesn’t matter as much when you can tank shots. I have taken 2-3 penetrating shots before during in panther and pretty much never more than 1 penetrating shot in a Sherman. Besides that they BOTH suck. Panther D, like I said, is .3 below the 5.7 Sherman while having better traits.
What about the VK? It has about the same HP/W but .7 lower than M4A3 (76) and mostly better stats otherwise besides the traverse and lack of stabilizer. Don’t forget that the Sherman before the M4A3 (76) has a top speed 5 kph faster than its successor.
The 76mm is very good if you place your shots right.
Sounds like a you issue, not a gun issue.
I never said that the 76 is bad, rather that the gun is less competitive at its BR. I love the 76 and having 60 some grams of explosive is nice. Find such as the 88, long 75, and 85mm are better. Have you tried the 76mm Jumbo? Very annoying to play especially when fighting Tiger 2s can can pen the UFP and all the turret (pretty much) and only being .3 higher with WAY more armor. It’s a good gun, but to look at BR you need comparison.
we’re comparing the M4A2 and M4A3. If you want to bring random other vehicles into this then you can say the M4A3 has a higher HP/tonne than the Centurion or hell the ordinary Panthers. The VK has a hand-cranked turret and terrible reverse rate, it is exactly where it’s supposed to be, as is the M4A3.
It ain`t that hard figthing Panters, Tiger or Tigers 2 in the stabilized 76mm.
Panther: Aim for the sides of the cannon
Tigers: Cupolas and MG ports
Tiger 2s: Cheeks.
With the gun and the stabilizer they are not the hardest to fight.
They are very, very workable at the BR.
Loweing the BR would cause the Shermans to run riot in downtiers
How many tanks have opportunity to make first accurate shot, which results in disabling enemy tank any way?
This. People getting donked by Tigers/Panthers/KTs should know that you simply got outplayed by someone who wouldn’t let you hit the self-delete button on their tank (Include Maus in the turret cheek one hit delete button, for those playing around 7.7). People have all the tools they need to combat them.