@ neosdark: +1During the Normandy Campaign in 1944, The Brits determined it took 5 Shermans to take out one Tiger I. Only one Sherman was expected to make it back from the engagement.
Shermans are actually better than Panzer 4s and 2 M10s>Panther for the same cost: 600MP 110FU. AT guns are extremely good when they use AP rounds, use that. BARs costing fuel is a way to delay teching. Fuel is the teching resource, which determines how quickly you can gain access to higher tiers of weaponry. If you could get BARs from the start it would be imbalanced.
Quote from: GodlikeDennis on June 27, 2011, 05:33:05 AMShermans are actually better than Panzer 4s and 2 M10s>Panther for the same cost: 600MP 110FU. AT guns are extremely good when they use AP rounds, use that. BARs costing fuel is a way to delay teching. Fuel is the teching resource, which determines how quickly you can gain access to higher tiers of weaponry. If you could get BARs from the start it would be imbalanced. You know the absolute sad irony is that when I posted American Tanks a v. long time ago, and GodlikeDennis used this EXACT quote... well almost. I wish Ami had better tanks as it stands it almost seems like a fluke they survived WWII... but its up to relic to fix that not EF...
haha ami tanks didnt survive, they just made more shermans than the germans made AT shells the sad thing in my view is that the american intelligence knew there men wouldnt survive armor engagemants unless lucky and threw them at them anyway and tank crews were never told exactly how one sided the engagements were, they just said get close in and preferrable behind them the soviet tankers without radios and t34 had a better chance, much better
No, Americans will not be changed. 2 M10s DO beat a Panther. I am talking from FAR more experience than you.