4 vs 4 Cheap tactis

[Warhawks97]

Version: 5.15 (latest)
Map: Goodwood

Armor, Inf, RA, AB

vs

TH, SE, BK, Terror


Here is what you can extremely easily do as axis when using units that are not exceeding 400-450 MP even after totally failing the early game.
In fact only a Tiger, SS squad and Jagdpanzer IV/70 exceeded it.
It might be worth for those who complain that the bigger stuff is "too weak" (Which is not true, Tiger would have done great if he had Ostwind as AA defense). The cheaper stuff is therefore extremely cost effective.
You lay down an incredibel Havoc.

Biggest Axis Mistakes:

1. No Ostwinds
2. Terror got a Tiger instead going straight for a first Panther and didnt support the Tiger.
3. TH got perhaps too much arty and fought vs inf. Basically he had to defend the town alone vs inf doc which proved tricky at the end. Meanwhile AT lacked on the other side.
4. Following Point 4, they lacked a proper teamplay.


Possible Questions:
Why i didnt got any Pershing?
Answer:
Too much arty, lack of reconassaince and ambushes everywhere.



If i have a special beg to the devs:
Fix the god damn Tank IV´s armor. All of them. Their 50 mm behave like 80 mm of armor or more and their 80 mm are almost as resistant as 100 mm Tiger armor. I didnt manage to pen them just once with 76 mm, not even with HVAP.


@Markr: Thats what i mean about the cal 50. There are few hilarious moments. First is the Grehyound in the upper town. That gren squad walked along it without just like that. After like 4 bursts the player noticed that he is under fire and retreated with still a few men available.
Second moment is that single Pios just standing there in front of Eeasy eight with its cal 50 shooting bursts and nothing appeared to happen. In both scnearios a MG42/34 top mounted would of whiped the entire squad in burst or two.

[mofetagalactica]

It was just terrible teamplay + 1 regular casual player and even playing as bad as like that, we made the game last a long time and give you troubles.
I was the TH and i wasn't supposed to go to the town front, lack of comunication asked for a change of front tons of times i think i did pretty good with such doc fighting in one of my worst terrains.

[Krieger Blitzer]

Fix the god damn Tank IV´s armor. All of them. Their 50 mm behave like 80 mm of armor or more and their 80 mm are almost as resistant as 100 mm Tiger armor. I didnt manage to pen them just once with 76 mm, not even with HVAP.

If the Shermans are supposed to be even better than now, then they will need to be more expensive.. and Panzer4s will have to be cheaper.

@Markr: Thats what i mean about the cal 50. There are few hilarious moments. First is the Grehyound in the upper town. That gren squad walked along it without just like that. After like 4 bursts the player noticed that he is under fire and retreated with still a few men available.
Second moment is that single Pios just standing there in front of Eeasy eight with its cal 50 shooting bursts and nothing appeared to happen. In both scnearios a MG42/34 top mounted would of whiped the entire squad in burst or two.

I always believed the Greyhound is excellent vs infantry.. just like the Staghound, so I'm really unsure if there are any issues here.

Though, about the 50.cal I agree that something is broken.. based on the test we have done together in the past.. the 30.cal proved to be performing better than the 50.cal somehow, as it should be the opposite.

[Warhawks97]

If the Shermans are supposed to be even better than now, then they will need to be more expensive.. and Panzer4s will have to be cheaper.

Why? Thats already the case actually now. Build cost are about the same (depending on version) and in terms of upkeep and required tec the Tank IV´s clearly beat any sherman. The J (which i opposed) is cheaper than a e8 after mass prod upgrade. The E8 however requires much more tec.

Build cost:

Tank IV J (410/45)< Tank IV F2 (430/50)< Sherman 76 (450/55) <Sherman E8 (500/70)< Tank IV H (550/80)

Upkeep Generally:

Tank IV J < Tank IV F2< Tank IV H.< Sherman 76 <Sherman E8

The Tank IV J costs as much in upkeep as a Stubby Tank IV E. In other words, its even cheaper than the weaker Tank IV F2 with long Barrel.
The H costs also less fuel upkeep than the F2 making the F2 the most expensive Tank IV in terms of fuel upkeep.

The Tank IV costs almost just the half that of 76 sherman in terms of upkeep (e8 is even more expensive in fuel upkeep than 76). So in order to match the upkeeps you need supply yard build or even at least first upgrade. The Fuel upkeep always keeps in Tank IV´s favour.


In terms of mobility the 76 is about as fast as a Tank IV with a better acceleration. In combat with a Tank IV its nothing that could save your life. The E8 helds an advantage.


The 76 meets a F2 at equal level. Sherman beats The F with 67,% pen vs 62,05% pen. However i found some sort of bug that Markr should look at. The Tank IV F2 75 mm L/43 Gun has a damage of 70-90? The L/48 has 80-120. It should be somewhere arround that. Or perhaps i made a mistake. Perhaps Markr could check it out.


But against everything above the F2 version the 76 sherman will very likely lose. The 76 pen vs J with skirts or H is 49,68%. The J in return pens with 65,15% against 76 sherman and 62,853% against the e8 sherman.

Using AP on both sides makes things even worse for Shermans. The pen of a 76 vs J (skirts) and H increases to 76,5072%, in return The Tank IV pens with 86,653% and 83,6% respectively.

The Sherman 76 and e8 have 700 HP compared to the 636 of the Tank IV. However the max damage with AP shells is 600 for Sherman and 750 for Tank IV. What that means is obvious i think.


The Sherman however is top tier tank in two docs, the Tank IV is just a middle tier tank. While investing big into the supply yard in order not to get eaten up by the upkeep and to match the Tank IV, axis spends into even better tanks.

[MenciusMoldbug]

50 cals are definitely weaker than every other top gunner in the game(considering commonwealth doesn't really get 'top gunners' I guess it doesn't really mean anything if you compare only on allies).

Here's 50cal on the M20 that uses copy-pasted stats of a 50cal on top of a sherman:

Here's the Jeep:

So M20 has a way weaker top gun than a Jeep that comes much earlier. Damage means nothing when you have weaker rate of fire, weaker burst, and way worse accuracy; especially when moving.

Every 50cal performs way too differently to each other as well, Recce gets a sniper version of the 50cal with super accuracy stats. While staghound gets a MG42 version of the 50cal that has 0.5-0.5(max-min) cooldown duration between bursts. Hellcat gets a 50cal gunner that misses 75% of his shots at point blank. For some reason stats wise, british 50cal top gunners are way better than their US counterparts.

What actually bugs me the most is that the M20 is using copy-pasted stats of a sherman 50cal while vehicles like Recce with only a MG gunner on top gets super accuracy stats to compensate for that. It really should get its own high accuracy version of the 50cal considering how expensive they make it when you could just save 15 fuel and get a way better 'M20' in the form of a M8.

[Warhawks97]

So M20 has a way weaker top gun than a Jeep that comes much earlier. Damage means nothing when you have weaker rate of fire, weaker burst, and way worse accuracy; especially when moving.

Every 50cal performs way too differently to each other as well, Recce gets a sniper version of the 50cal with super accuracy stats. While staghound gets a MG42 version of the 50cal that has 0.5-0.5(max-min) cooldown duration between bursts. Hellcat gets a 50cal gunner that misses 75% of his shots at point blank. For some reason stats wise, british 50cal top gunners are way better than their US counterparts.

What actually bugs me the most is that the M20 is using copy-pasted stats of a sherman 50cal while vehicles like Recce with only a MG gunner on top gets super accuracy stats to compensate for that. It really should get its own high accuracy version of the 50cal considering how expensive they make it when you could just save 15 fuel and get a way better 'M20' in the form of a M8.

I am aware of all that for a quite long time.

People told me "but recce kills" and i told them "bc it hits something". But thats what they deliberatly ignored.



One jeep is not a cal 50. It uses normal MG damage stats. Has meanwhile less damage per bullet. The cal 50 that comes closest to its real performance is that of the inf doc emplacment when AP rounds are active.

It has accuracy, realistic rate of fire, realistic ammo size boxes (using 50 round box). That can be used as an example of how cal 50 could work.


And since top mounted dont hit shit anyway as you could see in that vid and since high vet late game inf doesnt care a shit of a cal 50 at all, why not making it as an purchasable upgrade for Shermans and Greyhounds. In return they would be effective vs inf as well as against Vehicles and even airplanes to some degree ( a single one wont down a plane, the masses could). A Multipurpose weapon as it was and as it was made for and why US gave it to so many units.

M20 could have it by default and thus being kind of equivalent to german 20 mm cars.



@Menicus: Did you check the US Hull and coax M1919? They have much better pen (and same damage per bullet) stats against german vehicles of the 221/222 familiy.