I'm pretty sure he is advocating for buffs to the Stug not nerfs. I'm not sure but it seems "crap tanks like Stug III and IV need buffs." is pretty clear.
Balancing the sherman 76
- Thread starter gbem
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
It is currently the best medium tank... if not the best tank ingame... a price hike or an aimtime nerf wont hurt
Its not that the 76 is OP, the issue is that most German armor sucks hard already compared to a simple M10.
I love how everyone rants about super expensive panthers and king tigers, but ignores how anything before the Panther D is usually higher point cost comapred to allied tanks/TDs and WORSE. (jagdpanzer 4 is the exception).
Compare a panzer 4 H to a M10 or sherman 75...the M10 is cheaper, has 1200 range, same front armor, while facing a 10 AP pak 38 or panzer 3 M with 1000 meter range.
Panzer 4 H/G/J is never available at A, has worse range, same armor, shorter range MG...and faces 11 AP AT guns as a basic AT threat...
17th SS is completely outclassed in tanks/TDs compared to anything except airborne... and their price is insane...175 points for a Stug 4 with 12 armor and 1000 range at phase B...yeah sure...very useful...not.
I love how everyone rants about super expensive panthers and king tigers, but ignores how anything before the Panther D is usually higher point cost comapred to allied tanks/TDs and WORSE. (jagdpanzer 4 is the exception).
Compare a panzer 4 H to a M10 or sherman 75...the M10 is cheaper, has 1200 range, same front armor, while facing a 10 AP pak 38 or panzer 3 M with 1000 meter range.
Panzer 4 H/G/J is never available at A, has worse range, same armor, shorter range MG...and faces 11 AP AT guns as a basic AT threat...
17th SS is completely outclassed in tanks/TDs compared to anything except airborne... and their price is insane...175 points for a Stug 4 with 12 armor and 1000 range at phase B...yeah sure...very useful...not.
Last edited:
Imo, almost every tank from phase B onward should get 1200 range, main gun accuracy difference is the way to go.
Stug/panzer 4 h for sure DONT need any price increase, their cost is already insane. The panzer 4 is extremely easy to kill even with basic 57 AT gun, coming in swarms already in A.
Then there is the little thing called the M10 for 130 points, virtually a better and cheaper panzer 4 H.
...the stug 4 should loose 1 front armor and 20 points...
Balance ..there is none, id take a Sherman or M10 over anything German untill the 190 point Jagdpanzer 4.
All Phase B Shermans should also get 1200 meter range.
Hell id take the sherman 76 over the 190 pt jagdpanzer 4... id still have the cqc advantage against it and can kill it as easily as i would a panther G
Last edited:
Well at close range tanks sould have the advantage over TDs, but yes, unit prices are all over the place.
thats what it meant to be. Allies had better tanks and more of them. 17th didnt got much tanks so you have to pay high for the few you have (just like you have to for the old french tanks with eichenlaub). and its fine because for example the 17th gets other weapons to handle tanks and outclasses the inf of all the tank divisions and esp. their arty and air. Also you get pak43s and 88s.
Comparing those tanks directly doesnt make a sense for balance. You have to see them in their division.
I'm not sure if you're serious about the better tank argument but I'm not really going to dive into that. As far as the 17. SS is concerned you have no idea what you are talking about as their Sturmgeschutz battalion was chock full of StuGs. They had a shortage of other things like halftracks but not assault guns. Have you even played the 17. SS? They don't get 88's other than the Pak 43.
there is a difference between being overpriced and crap.
6Acc 14 AP 10 AV is hardly "crap". ridiculously overpriced for 165pt certainly, but hardly crap. By comparison the most commonly available Allied tank hover around 5acc 11 ap 10 AV.
and the HE on the sherman doesn't seems to be "25%" better than the HE on the panzer4/stg. sherman HE have 1.2 physical damage with a 82 meter radius. Panzer 4/ stug 4 HE have 1.12 physical damage with a 78 meter radius.
given the price on stug, I wonder if they used to have a 1200m range, but got bump down to 1000m without a price decrease.
and the m10 could stand to be a bit more expensive, if their slot have more cards.
Last edited:
Havent played them much in the last time. But yeah it was my most played div in the beta. sry that I dont have any unit they have in my head. Still the tank prize is okay in the deck or at least not to far away from where it should be. And even though they had a lot of them (like they have in game too, you can get really a lot of them) it doesnt mean they got them cheaply to the front and so on. I think allied tanks should be less expensive than german ones. also the stug is so much better than the normal shermans or a Cromwell (even the 11/11 one) and they cost 120. Dont underestimate their 6 acc. Also my point stands that you try to make the balance to linear. And linear feeling for tanks or whole divions is the last thing this game needs more of.
Me saying a tank is shit for what I am paying for is not advocating for linear balance. I am totally against that notion and I always have been. As it stands the StuG IV is an incredibly lackluster unit that lives off of its veterancy and accuracy. Paying 175 points for a turret-less tank is a big investment. I don't really want it to be cheaper but what i do want is to give it 1200m range so there is actually something there.
This thread gave me cancer. There are people here who unironocally think that we should nerf the allies and buff the axis simultaneously while there is already pretty much no playerbase and the playerbase that does exist is almost exclusively axis.
Wew
Lad
Wew
Lad
I suggested a 76 nerf and buff to the sherman 75/pz4... this indirectly buffs allies more as the sherman 75 is common as fk meanwhile being superior to the pz4... but removes the status of the best tank in game from being the best tank ingame
Last edited:
To all that oppose:
the 76 sherman is perfectly capable of knocking out a panther D without threat of retaliation thanks to its stabilizer with horrifying precision at 600-800m so long as RNG doesnt screw it up....and regardless the additional suppression made by the first shot towards the panther D still gives it a major disadvantage in the succeeding shots...meaning any engagement within that 600-800m circle is essentially an auto win for the sherman 76....
anywhere outside that circle means the sherman is bouncing.... but proper micro of mobility and smoke can easily prevent such an engagement from even occurring in the first place..... as a result its fairly easy destroying panthers and tigers with a single sherman 76..... and fairly broken how a 180 pt tank can soo easily destroy tanks almost twice its price...
when playing axis and presented with this issue i have to counter it with large amounts of my own smoke and infantryspam..... or pure cheese rocket artillery.... not uncounterable but very cost inefficient to fight against especially considering the 76 is dirt cheap....
when playing allies i find it ridiculous how easy i can destroy more than twice my cost worth of tanks simply because my cheap tank is soo reliably effective against their expensive counterparts.. any allied player who uses smoke and holds fire till they reach a maximum range of 800M will have no problem deleting almost any german tank short of a king tiger.... and when used offensively can easily be used as a tool to force the axis player to give ground..... at phase C..... the phase where the germans are supposed to attack into allied lines...i mean after all the allies have it good at A with their mediums...still being better than axis at the first half of B... giving them what the best and most cost efficient tank ingame at C phase is simply wrong....
another way to look at it is the engagement range.... axis heavies generally win most tank v tank engagements unless tactics are in use... hence the breakneck price... lets take the sherman 76.... a cheap 180 pt tank capable of demolishing panthers and tigers within an 800/600m circle.. outside of that circle is of course axis territory... but anywhere inside is allied territory.... basically one dominates long range combat (outside 800m) and the other dominates short range combat (within 800m).... that means their performance should be fairly even..... question is... why is 1 tank at 180 pts and the other at 280/250/240?.... hell its even better than the firefly at 210 as it almost guarantees victory at close quarters....
the final way to look at it is this.., if you think a 180 pt tank reliably countering a 250 pt panther or a 240 pt tiger... hell even 300 pt jagdpanthers and 280 pt panther Gs within an 800/600m circle and requires a fckton of points worth of rocket arty just to counter it is anywhere near the word "balanced"... then i dont know what isnt...
maybe we should just introduce the T-80UM in the game with 79FAV a 2275m range main gun with some 65 ap and 2800m range ATGM with over 90 ap for 1 pt add it to the allies and be done with it,,, or add the B-52 stratofortress which instadeletes all axis units with bombs or nuclear cruise missiles.... or better yet remove all axis tank and replace them with pictures of hello kitty
the 76 sherman is perfectly capable of knocking out a panther D without threat of retaliation thanks to its stabilizer with horrifying precision at 600-800m so long as RNG doesnt screw it up....and regardless the additional suppression made by the first shot towards the panther D still gives it a major disadvantage in the succeeding shots...meaning any engagement within that 600-800m circle is essentially an auto win for the sherman 76....
anywhere outside that circle means the sherman is bouncing.... but proper micro of mobility and smoke can easily prevent such an engagement from even occurring in the first place..... as a result its fairly easy destroying panthers and tigers with a single sherman 76..... and fairly broken how a 180 pt tank can soo easily destroy tanks almost twice its price...
when playing axis and presented with this issue i have to counter it with large amounts of my own smoke and infantryspam..... or pure cheese rocket artillery.... not uncounterable but very cost inefficient to fight against especially considering the 76 is dirt cheap....
when playing allies i find it ridiculous how easy i can destroy more than twice my cost worth of tanks simply because my cheap tank is soo reliably effective against their expensive counterparts.. any allied player who uses smoke and holds fire till they reach a maximum range of 800M will have no problem deleting almost any german tank short of a king tiger.... and when used offensively can easily be used as a tool to force the axis player to give ground..... at phase C..... the phase where the germans are supposed to attack into allied lines...i mean after all the allies have it good at A with their mediums...still being better than axis at the first half of B... giving them what the best and most cost efficient tank ingame at C phase is simply wrong....
another way to look at it is the engagement range.... axis heavies generally win most tank v tank engagements unless tactics are in use... hence the breakneck price... lets take the sherman 76.... a cheap 180 pt tank capable of demolishing panthers and tigers within an 800/600m circle.. outside of that circle is of course axis territory... but anywhere inside is allied territory.... basically one dominates long range combat (outside 800m) and the other dominates short range combat (within 800m).... that means their performance should be fairly even..... question is... why is 1 tank at 180 pts and the other at 280/250/240?.... hell its even better than the firefly at 210 as it almost guarantees victory at close quarters....
the final way to look at it is this.., if you think a 180 pt tank reliably countering a 250 pt panther or a 240 pt tiger... hell even 300 pt jagdpanthers and 280 pt panther Gs within an 800/600m circle and requires a fckton of points worth of rocket arty just to counter it is anywhere near the word "balanced"... then i dont know what isnt...
maybe we should just introduce the T-80UM in the game with 79FAV a 2275m range main gun with some 65 ap and 2800m range ATGM with over 90 ap for 1 pt add it to the allies and be done with it,,, or add the B-52 stratofortress which instadeletes all axis units with bombs or nuclear cruise missiles.... or better yet remove all axis tank and replace them with pictures of hello kitty
Which is really dumb for a lot of reasons. The 76 is the only tank with any kind of AP that some allied decks get. No wonder the allied playerbase is dead.
What about the Panthers that can snipe the 76 without fear of retaliation? Same with the KTs, or more Panthers. The problem is that since most German armor decks use nothing but the damn Panthers the 76 is never a real threat anyway because of the sheer never of Panthers on the field. Again, look at how many people play Axis (all of them) and look at how many people play Allies (none of them) and you seriously are wanting to take away one of the ONLY things that the Allies have that can even put a dent in the disgusting number of Panthers the Germans can field.
only 2 decks use the 76 sherman.... thats the french and 3rd armored.... the french are anything but underpowered and 3rd armored is one of the most powerful allied deck if u see past its income problem.... and remains my favorite allied deck.... the rest would be unaffected by said nerf... and would moreso benefit from the sherman 75 buff.. that includes both the french and 3rd arm
sniping isnt a problem if one learns to smoke... and in fact forces 2 choices to the axis player.... either to give more land that was lost during A..... or stay and get killed.... see the thing is... the sherman 76 in the wrong hands is just as useless as a stuart at phase C... but in the right hands it outperforms every tank ingame thanks to its aimtime... does your range and firepower really matter if i can simply smoke close in and kill you before u get to shoot?
- Status