Balancing the sherman 76

[gbem]

woah 3rd armored spearhead and 2e DB... sort of a tough division to recieve a small nerf (except 2edb) but bear with me....
that sherman 76 deserves a price hike.... as it stands id take a sherman 76 over a firefly... in my time playing the allies... specifically the 15th scots guards armored 3rd armored and 2e DB ive tried and tested both tanks....

personally speaking that veterancy plus the quick aim stabilizer makes short work of literally every axis opposition under 600m.... and its cheap price of 180 pts makes it the most cost effective tank in the allied arsenal hell even for the entirety of the game..... and imho the best tank the allies get... and loads better than many axis tanks...that includes the panther D and the tiger E....

literally anyone with the ability to use that quick aim stabilizer can kill twice its number in panthers and tigers thanks to its high speed fast stabilized aimtime and accuracy....and in fact so long as ive deployed 76 shermans i have always killed more panthers than i have lost sherman 76s...

is it honestly balanced for a 180 pt tank to destroy 240 and 250 pt tanks with relative ease?

i mean compare it to the closest tank in its price range... the StuG IV... at 175 pts it gets....
no quick aim stabilizer
200m range!!
1 less acc bcz range
no turret
5km/h less speed
1 more AP due to range
all for 5 points pts and 1av....

a small price hike should most likely be done... 190 or 200 points seems reasonable enough...
its somewhat better than the jagdpanzer 4 thanks to the stabilizer and the turret 1 AP and 5km/h... for the price of 3av which isnt really much compared to what you gain...

in turn a price buff to all mainline medium tanks (sherman 75 and pz4) should most likely be done...

discuss

 

[I WUB PUGS]

Fuggit, just make it a 300 point tank.

While you're at it, make Jumbo frontal armor like 16 or something.

Also, take the stars off of those 76mm AT guns. Americans were poorly trained anyway and had terrible morale.

Also, the Calliope is too cost effective. Should probably make it cost like 350 points.

Phase C income for 3rd Armored is too high too.

 

[Rojan]

It is the best medium tank in the game because of its stabilizer. The dual vet one is amazing. I don't really know if it needs a price hike though. Not to derail this thread but you did talk about the StuG IV to compare it and I would like to say that the StuG IV does need 1200m range. It could make it more comparable to things like the 76mm Sherman.

 

[Herr_Robert]

I think $180 is a reasonable price for the Sherman 76. However, I do think that most of the other medium tanks are underpowered. Personally, I would like to see the late Panzer IVs and StuGs get 1200m range for a slight price increase, and the Sherman 75s to become $10-20 cheaper across the board.

literally anyone with the ability to use that quick aim stabilizer can kill twice its number in panthers and tigers thanks to its high speed fast stabilized aimtime and accuracy....and in fact so long as ive deployed 76 shermans i have always killed more panthers than i have lost sherman 76s...

Maybe if you are fighting a player of a lower skill level... You can't set the price of an unit based on encounters where one unit is micromanaged, and the other unit is not. If the German player is capable, he will not give you a chance to destroy 2 Tigers or Panthers for every one of your Sherman 76s.

 

[Rojan]

I think $180 is a reasonable price for the Sherman 76. However, I do think that most of the other medium tanks are underpowered. Personally, I would like to see the late Panzer IVs and StuGs get 1200m range for a slight price increase, and the Sherman 75s to become $10-20 cheaper across the board.



Maybe if you are fighting a player of a lower skill level... You can't set the price of an unit based on encounters where one unit is micromanaged, and the other unit is not. If the German player is capable, he will not give you a chance to destroy 2 Tigers or Panthers for every one of your Sherman 76s.

I don't want to see the Pz IV and StuG III's at 1200m range. I see why from a consistency perspective but it would break balance of the Pz IV vs. Shermans. Right now the Shermans usually have the edge in the battle with their stabilizer but if you give them an extra 200m range it will bust this balance. The only german unit that needs 1200m range that currently doesn't have it is the StuG IV. It is a snowflake unit that is incredibly lackluster for a rather serious price investment.

 

[Herr_Robert]

I don't want to see the Pz IV and StuG III's at 1200m range. I see why from a consistency perspective but it would break balance of the Pz IV vs. Shermans. Right now the Shermans usually have the edge in the battle with their stabilizer but if you give them an extra 200m range it will bust this balance. The only german unit that needs 1200m range that currently doesn't have it is the StuG IV. It is a snowflake unit that is incredibly lackluster for a rather serious price investment.

Yeah, it would obviously require some more balancing than just changing the prices, but in the end I think that it would be worth it and improve the gameplay by making it more oriented around medium tanks. The Germans could be given access to more Panzer IIIs so they have a budget medium tank, and some of the Allied divisions could be given a better availability of Sherman 76s/Fireflies/Challengers to deal with the buffed Panzer IV/StuG range (I'd love to see the 2nd Inf. Div. get Sherman 76s).

 

[gbem]

It is the best medium tank in the game because of its stabilizer. The dual vet one is amazing. I don't really know if it needs a price hike though. Not to derail this thread but you did talk about the StuG IV to compare it and I would like to say that the StuG IV does need 1200m range. It could make it more comparable to things like the 76mm Sherman.

since people opposed a buff to the stug and at that point i still havent seen the power of the 76 sherman and used it with overwhelming success id say nerf the 76... i mean its ridiculous how dangerous it is to german tanks under 600m... and those are 250/280 pt panthers.... dying to cheap 180 pt 76s with ease

 

[gbem]

Fuggit, just make it a 300 point tank.

While you're at it, make Jumbo frontal armor like 16 or something.

Also, take the stars off of those 76mm AT guns. Americans were poorly trained anyway and had terrible morale.

Also, the Calliope is too cost effective. Should probably make it cost like 350 points.

Phase C income for 3rd Armored is too high too.

3rd armored can recieve other buffs (specifically infantry) while your at it..... meanwhile 2e DB more than deserves it.. regardless its still a more useful tank to the firefly as it is... it makes no sense how a 180 pt tank is better than a 210 pt firefly... either remove that stabilizer or make it 200 pts

 

[gbem]

I don't want to see the Pz IV and StuG III's at 1200m range. I see why from a consistency perspective but it would break balance of the Pz IV vs. Shermans. Right now the Shermans usually have the edge in the battle with their stabilizer but if you give them an extra 200m range it will bust this balance. The only german unit that needs 1200m range that currently doesn't have it is the StuG IV. It is a snowflake unit that is incredibly lackluster for a rather serious price investment.

actually i never use the panzer 4.... thing is the panther is a better heavy tank if i wanna destroy AT guns and support the front lines.... as that armor literally dies to a sneeze of any AT gun.... and 140 pts for a tank thats only useful for dueling other mediums but does it soo ineffectively and dies to a sneeze is practically useless imho...

the sherman 75 currently has massive advantages over the panzer 4 as it stands.... and id rather have a sherman 75 in almost every situation to the panzer 4.... a buff to 1200m range might actually make it more useful...

it is after all a high velocity gun to the low velocity 75mm m3

 

[gbem]

I think $180 is a reasonable price for the Sherman 76. However, I do think that most of the other medium tanks are underpowered. Personally, I would like to see the late Panzer IVs and StuGs get 1200m range for a slight price increase, and the Sherman 75s to become $10-20 cheaper across the board.



Maybe if you are fighting a player of a lower skill level... You can't set the price of an unit based on encounters where one unit is micromanaged, and the other unit is not. If the German player is capable, he will not give you a chance to destroy 2 Tigers or Panthers for every one of your Sherman 76s.

rojan is correct here.... the 76 sherman is the best medium tank ingame... soo good that it can compete with heavy tanks and not to mention better than the firefly (yes)... i mean 3 AP vs more mobility and a stabilizer? id rather take the stabs... when used correctly under 600m no tank short of a king tiger stands a chance... i could simply pop a smoke go in kill the target and get out without issue

whereas the firefly tries to challenge german tanks in their domain... long range..the 76 sherman gives me an option no other tank can.... i can simply outmaneuver them and fire at closer ranges.... and win almost every time so long as RNG doesnt screw you over

 

[Karlburg]

I don't know if i'd want to inflate the number of 1200m range tanks further to the point where only two 1000m medium tanks remain(the cromwell and the sherman 75)

 

[gbem]

I don't know if i'd want to inflate the number of 1200m range tanks further to the point where only two 1000m medium tanks remain(the cromwell and the sherman 75)

tis y i suggested a simple price hike for the 76 sherman instead....it would put it in line with the StuG IV and the firefly.... the panzer 4 and the shermans can simply get price reductions across the board...

 

[Rojan]

actually i never use the panzer 4.... thing is the panther is a better heavy tank if i wanna destroy AT guns and support the front lines.... as that armor literally dies to a sneeze of any AT gun.... and 140 pts for a tank thats only useful for dueling other mediums but does it soo ineffectively and dies to a sneeze is practically useless imho...

the sherman 75 currently has massive advantages over the panzer 4 as it stands.... and id rather have a sherman 75 in almost every situation to the panzer 4.... a buff to 1200m range might actually make it more useful...

it is after all a high velocity gun to the low velocity 75mm m3

The Panzer IV still has its place and I don't think it is at all massively outclassed by the Sherman. It is cheaper and its gun is very good. Just don't try to slug it out unless you have serious veterancy over it. It is a well balanced match up that requires tactics.

I don't know if i'd want to inflate the number of 1200m range tanks further to the point where only two 1000m medium tanks remain(the cromwell and the sherman 75)

There would be the Pz. III's. Although I think only the StuG IV should be an applicant for the 1200m buff. That or a small price decrease. It is pretty lackluster.

 

[gbem]

The Panzer IV still has its place and I don't think it is at all massively outclassed by the Sherman. It is cheaper and its gun is very good. Just don't try to slug it out unless you have serious veterancy over it. It is a well balanced match up that requires tactics.


There would be the Pz. III's. Although I think only the StuG IV should be an applicant for the 1200m buff. That or a small price decrease. It is pretty lackluster.

yeah but why pay 140 pts for a mobile AT gun on tracks instead saving up for a panther which is a capable anti-anti tank gun unit as it can pop AT guns at range... and a great firesupport vehicle..... my 12th SS deck doesnt even have a single pz4 but rather relies on a pantherspam and simply microing said pantherspam

 

[gbem]

if i could field 75 shermans instead of pz4s in my 12th SS deck id prolly do so tbh

 

[Rojan]

yeah but why pay 140 pts for a mobile AT gun on tracks instead saving up for a panther which is a capable anti-anti tank gun unit as it can pop AT guns at range... and a great firesupport vehicle..... my 12th SS deck doesnt even have a single pz4 but rather relies on a pantherspam and simply microing said pantherspam

Not every deck has panthers and tigers. I use Pz IVs in my 17. SS and other decks. An example is in phase B for Windhund you only have Pz. IV.

 

[IronHat]

Phase C income for 3rd Armored is too high too.

the lehr and 3AD both tied for having the lowest total phase A and B income in exchange for having the highest phase C income.

(phase A and B both last 10 minutes, 3AD have -10 pt in phase A and the lehur have -10 in phase B. This mean at the start of phase C they would have received the same amount of total income).

The similarity is undoubtedly intentional, as the Lehr and 3ad are their respective faction's late game division. They are suppose to get the best tanks in the game.

and FYI, the bonus on the stabilizer is 1 second. Regular tank take 4 seconds to fire. Stabilizer equipped tank take 3 seconds. M10, firefly, Achilles, and the challenger lack the bonus.

 

[Rojan]

the lehr and 3AD both tied for having the lowest total phase A and B income in exchange for having the highest phase C income.

(phase A and B both last 10 minutes, 3AD have -10 pt in phase A and the lehur have -10 in phase B. This mean at the start of phase C they would have received the same amount of total income).

The similarity is undoubtedly intentional, as the Lehr and 3ad are their respective faction's late game division. They are suppose to get the best tanks in the game.

and FYI, the bonus on the stabilizer is 1 second. Regular tank take 4 seconds to fire. Stabilizer equipped tank take 3 seconds. M10, firefly, Achilles, and the challenger lack the bonus.

Are you autistic? He is being sarcastic.

 

[IS-2]

woah 3rd armored spearhead and 2e DB... sort of a tough division to recieve a small nerf (except 2edb) but bear with me....
that sherman 76 deserves a price hike.... as it stands id take a sherman 76 over a firefly... in my time playing the allies... specifically the 15th scots guards armored 3rd armored and 2e DB ive tried and tested both tanks....

personally speaking that veterancy plus the quick aim stabilizer makes short work of literally every axis opposition under 600m.... and its cheap price of 180 pts makes it the most cost effective tank in the allied arsenal hell even for the entirety of the game..... and imho the best tank the allies get... and loads better than many axis tanks...that includes the panther D and the tiger E....

literally anyone with the ability to use that quick aim stabilizer can kill twice its number in panthers and tigers thanks to its high speed fast stabilized aimtime and accuracy....and in fact so long as ive deployed 76 shermans i have always killed more panthers than i have lost sherman 76s...

is it honestly balanced for a 180 pt tank to destroy 240 and 250 pt tanks with relative ease?

i mean compare it to the closest tank in its price range... the StuG IV... at 175 pts it gets....
no quick aim stabilizer
200m range!!
1 less acc bcz range
no turret
5km/h less speed
1 more AP due to range
all for 5 points pts and 1av....

a small price hike should most likely be done... 190 or 200 points seems reasonable enough...
its somewhat better than the jagdpanzer 4 thanks to the stabilizer and the turret 1 AP and 5km/h... for the price of 3av which isnt really much compared to what you gain...

in turn a price buff to all mainline medium tanks (sherman 75 and pz4) should most likely be done...

discuss

it is the strongest allied tank in my opinion just for the fact that in 600 meter combat you are going to dumpster anything short of a king tiger. of course not applicable for all maps and is player dependant unit. it has amazing synergy with france because in later stages the enemy will be pushing into you, and pushing into 76 (w) with anything but a king tiger is auto death. juicing them to vet 2 or 3 makes their aim time like M1A2 abrams.

right now its price is not factoring in stabilizer, and axis tanks around its price are just trash can by comparison. I am speaking Jagd IV and especially stug IV. it doesnt really need a price nerf though... just some crap tanks like stug III and IV need buffs. it is markedly less effective in 3AD because you wont have such territory advantage with them as you would france. 76 W is so efficient at ambushing I can kinda see where the OP is coming from with this but it really dont need a nerf. if nerfed then only for france.

i feel allies armour deck against german armour deck is more micro heavy but definitely more rewarding both K/D and territory wise if you can handle it because of the close range advantage and superior stun support.

 

[Protosszocker]

it is the strongest allied tank in my opinion just for the fact that in 600 meter combat you are going to dumpster anything short of a king tiger. of course not applicable for all maps and is player dependant unit. it has amazing synergy with france because in later stages the enemy will be pushing into you, and pushing into 76 (w) with anything but a king tiger is auto death. juicing them to vet 2 or 3 makes their aim time like M1A2 abrams.

right now its price is not factoring in stabilizer, and axis tanks around its price are just trash can by comparison. I am speaking Jagd IV and especially stug IV. it doesnt really need a price nerf though... just some crap tanks like stug III and IV need buffs. it is markedly less effective in 3AD because you wont have such territory advantage with them as you would france. 76 W is so efficient at ambushing I can kinda see where the OP is coming from with this but it really dont need a nerf. if nerfed then only for france.

i feel allies armour deck against german armour deck is more micro heavy but definitely more rewarding both K/D and territory wise if you can handle it because of the close range advantage and superior stun support.

Why you wanna balance the game so linear. Stugs doesnt need nerf. They are expensive yes but most of the time they are the only pick you have in the divisions wher you ahve them so if you want armor you have to buy them. Therefore these divisions have other cheap units and strong units like 88 paks and flaks and strong inf or air. So pls dont argue for a straight balance. Its like saying berserker in sc2 need a speed buff because zerglings are so fast. or Broodlords need airattack because tempests and carriesrs have one.

The french deck for example has shitty inf and arty and the number of tanks it can call is also pretty limited. So haveing this anchor is important for the deck. i mean the 2e is far from being op atm.