Sherman V (cw)

[mofetagalactica]

Why is this unit so useless if its not being used by royal ing and equiped with tulips? Even being a reward is already a bad choice lmao.

There is a shit ton of ideas to make sherman variants wich cw had thousands of these.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Leas ... onversions

I would recomend a rework of this unit, there is info about Royal Marines Armoured Support Group having shermans with fake turret gun to control indirect fire, there is even info about sherman V equiped with avre.

¿Maybe give more use to this tank? ¿Maybe even toggable HE instead of one shoot? ¿Indirect fire support with tank commander inside? ¿anti mine field equiptment? ¿sandbags upgrade?

[MarKr]

Sherman V is an example of a unit that seems to got implemented just to have more units.
Giving it HE mode is sort of pointless because Cromwells have HE mode too, which is maybe less effective but also significantly cheaper. Add to it that both have about the same durability but Cromwells have better speed and are harder to hit and you again have little reasons to go for the Sherman. I think even the sandbags (if it is possible to apply them to this model, not sure) wouldn't help much because for countering medium tanks you're better off with Cromwells and heavy axis tanks will most often one shot Sherman with sandbags too.
The model does not have other turret/weapon variations so avre turrets won't be possible here either. Technically speaking, indirect fire should be possible but CW already has 95mm Cromwell and Churchill for this. Maybe the anti-mine flail would be possible for this model but would this upgrade option make the unit more appealing in your eyes?

[Black Panther]

actually there is a use.
AP rounds that can penetrate even a PZ4 H.
but anyway, this unit circles around speciall ammunition abilities, so idk

[mofetagalactica]

¿Why don't we add buildable canadian sherman 76w? ¿Maybe as a general upgrade on the HQ or any other truck wich will reeplace sherman V for canadian armor support?

[Warhawks97]

If the guns on shermans wouldnt be so hilariously weak.

Shermans like this 75 versions wouldnt have issues penetrating early model Tank IV´s like E and F versions. I mean some of them were outdated at the time the sherman went into production and its no secret that these shermans could engage tank IV´s with max 50 mm armor from fairly long distances.
I mean atm the 75 mm guns have worse chances to pen Tank IV´s as the 57 mm guns. Thats already sad. If that would be fixed, the AP rounds on that sherman would really make some sense at least.


So, the is no need to remove/replace this unit. Fixing stats would help a lot.

The british, and thus including Canadians, didnt use the 76 mm shermans as far as i know. They received mainly the M4A4 version (British called them MK V seen here in game) and these were the only versions along with the basic M4 that didnt receive 76 mm guns. British instead upgraded some theirs simply with 17 pdr guns. "Only" the M4A1, A2 and A3 production lines switched to to 76 mm guns from 1944 onwards.

[mofetagalactica]

¿Canadians not receiving 76w ? wtf lmao
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldw ... sy-8-tank/
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldw ... p-comments

We have 76w canadian models already on bk, but its just a shitty call-in for royal engineers.

[Warhawks97]

The war ended in 1945. And they received them post war in 1946 only. Thus, they didnt use them in ww2. And if, then the ammount is extremely low. I wouldnt add them. Or we might see people in future calling for the Maus tank. The Super Pershing was already a huge debate whether it saw action or not and if this single occurence could be counted as "part of the war". Ok, people dont care that much about shermans, but i wouldnt add any 76 to CW at all, not even as call in.

As said, if US wouldnt have so shitty stats, even the 75 mm version would be a quite decent unit.

[kwok]

This was actually brought up a long while ago pre-reworks but deferred to post reworks for balance reasons. Here are some clips from convos for reference. There were some other messages traded with ideas but I can’t find them right now. Maybe I’ll find them later, I’m not on a computer so I stitched this from my phone and it is very difficult

Cromwells + changes to Sherman V to make it more viable
It was mentioned that Cromwells are very often the unit that CW rush because thanks to its speed, good rear penetration on units up to Panther level and low cost it can deal with many targets rather easily. One of the suggestions was to delay the Cromwell untill Captain is built. This could be a solution. I was also thinking of some ways to make the Sherman V more viable reward choice in other doctrines so that it is not picked solely for RE doctrine. The changes I had in mind was removal of the AP ability (because it is not very useful there since the basic penetration is quite low) and giving it HE mode as Sherman M4 in US has + possibly the Phosphorus shot ability which would give to the tank more of a utility role.

I think the main issue with these units as rewards units are they aren't comparable enough to use one over the other. The cromwell is a weird situation where it's too strong as a t2 unit and too weak as a t3 unit with a high micro: high reward ratio. Meanwhile the sherman really shines late t2 early t3, but the british build orders doesn't have a strong place for it because how important it is to get to doctrine specific units by t3.
the key is to buff the cromwell somehow and move it into t3 build order OR to nerf the sherman and move it down to t2. For the sake of the current meta, I think it would make more sense to move it to t3 and give it buffs.
The specific buffs I need some more time to think about. I'd probably ask the community for some ideas since they might have some preconceptions as to "how cromwells should be used historically/realistically"

Some other ideas I remember mentioned was RAF Sherman’s get a radio to call air strikes, arty Sherman’s get victor target.

[MenciusMoldbug]

Recce already has victor target. I rather the RA sherman get it's own artillery barrage ability that it can use on stuff near it or use it from behind obstacles. It should be on it's own cooldown timer and not share the ability with the Artillery Spotter from the doctrine tree to make it more appealing to use. RAF can probably get a strafing run for the sherman to use on stuff (after a muni upgrade on it).

[Warhawks97]

In my opinion, such abilties belong to command units like command tanks/vehicles/officers.

Giving such abilties to a random basic unit just like that would make the unit perhaps usefull and surely unique, but would fail to address the actual issue of being simply a poor combat unit.

That unit could a perfect counter to early Tank III rushes and early Tank IV models (E and F versions). Some sort of a low cost counter/equivalent to exactly those. That would release some pressure from CW to rush Fireflies and static medium AT guns. I mean what tools CW have to attack early Tank IV´s and Tank III´s? Only the firefly so far which requires CW. Cromwell can fight them as well but costing more than the Tank IV´s making it thus only cost effective when maneuvering wisely. Th sherman could be the "to go" unit for low cost that can stand up 1 vs 1 against them.

Building a tank to get arty/plane strike is in my opinion nonsense and the combat unit would fail its purpose of being a combat unit and it gets turned into some sort of "self defending artillery spotter tank". Such things should only be given to officers and command units. And as i understood it, all officer units will become doctrinal with doctrinal abilties like the WH officers. If we are going to add such abilties to a regular tank, what are the command units supposed to get in their respective doctrines in the future?

[CGarr]

In my opinion, such abilties belong to command units like command tanks/vehicles/officers.

Giving such abilties to a random basic unit just like that would make the unit perhaps usefull and surely unique, but would fail to address the actual issue of being simply a poor combat unit.

That unit could a perfect counter to early Tank III rushes and early Tank IV models (E and F versions). Some sort of a low cost counter/equivalent to exactly those. That would release some pressure from CW to rush Fireflies and static medium AT guns. I mean what tools CW have to attack early Tank IV´s and Tank III´s? Only the firefly so far which requires CW. Cromwell can fight them as well but costing more than the Tank IV´s making it thus only cost effective when maneuvering wisely. Th sherman could be the "to go" unit for low cost that can stand up 1 vs 1 against them.

Building a tank to get arty/plane strike is in my opinion nonsense and the combat unit would fail its purpose of being a combat unit and it gets turned into some sort of "self defending artillery spotter tank". Such things should only be given to officers and command units. And as i understood it, all officer units will become doctrinal with doctrinal abilties like the WH officers. If we are going to add such abilties to a regular tank, what are the command units supposed to get in their respective doctrines in the future?

Was about to reply to Kwoks response but this sums up my thoughts on the matter pretty well, I'd rather see this unit either have better combat performance or abilities that would make more sense for a frontline tank (speed, AP, MG suppresion, buttoning tanks with coax and hull MG, maybe a 0 damage stun with HE shells, etc). Call-ins make more sense on command/recon units. If they required the tank to have a commander inside similar to US armor doc, that could work too.