Sherman Tank imbalanced?

[Bull3t 0verdose]

How come that now Shermans are super powerful and almost indistructable? I have seen and read that now for some reason they can't be pinned even from the side no matter how powerful your gun is. Even from close range. They are even better armoured than heavy tanks. Makes no sense

[Dakota]

Just want to point out:

M4 moves 23 mph, M4A2 moves 22 mph without addon armor, and also 22 mph with it though struggles a bit. There's not a big speed difference, and its actually in favor of the base M4, not the M4A2 due to the higher weight, its true the M4A2 has an engine that is 10hp better, but it is over a ton heavier, over 2 tons heavier with the addon armor.

M4 has a weaker hull but also has a superior turret over the M4A2. If you notice on the M4 it has multiple bumps on its hull front, the transmission case tip is weaker, etc, though on non weakspots the protection is the same as the M4A2, however the M4A2 gets optional addon armor tracks bringing the protection up from the base 105mm to 120mm depending on where you hit. M4A2 turret retains the casting weakspot while the M4 adds a plate over it that turns it into a strong point.

So overall their mobility is nearly identical, one gets a better turret while one gets a better hull, and they use the same gun. The only thing the M4A2 is really boasting as flatly superior is that it has access to APCR and marginally stronger upper sides with addon armor in places.


If we compare to the T-34 1942, it has equal hull armor at 105mm with it also being 130 over the driver port, both tanks have MG port weakspots, the turret front of the T-34 is two layers on the rounded portion, making it 58+58 effective armor (116mm) on the tip of it, going up to around 200mm at bad angles, then 50-60mm on weakspots such as the corner tips or ring.

T-34 AP gets the same pen as the Sherman APHE while its APHE gets slighty better pen than the sherman's AP for flat pen, however it performs superior against angles which allows the T-34 to easily penetrate the sherman at 500m with its APHE while the sherman can not pen itself or a T-34 in the hull from that range.

The T-34 moves up to 26 mph crosscountry while the shermans move 23 and 22mph.


The T-34 equals the Sherman in frontal armor and can angle for more, it wins in ability to penetrate enemy targets, and it wins in speed. It only loses in reload rate, which the sherman will surely need assuming it shoots the hull of a T-34 or misses one of the turret weakspots it must aim for at mid range.

So no, the M4 and M4A2 are definitely far from superior to every 3.7.

[Bull3t 0verdose]

man I just hate them.
Right now I was playing with a BR of 2,3, the SU76 (SPG! ) and could not pin the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ M4A3 105
why do those ♥♥♥♥♥ have such a low BR and are damn tough? Just on paper the just outclass every other vehicle of other nations.

[Bull3t 0verdose]

also can some one explain to me the high BR rating of a su 85 when it is in every worse than a t34-57?

[kamikazi21358]

Originally posted by Bull3t 0verdose:

also can some one explain to me the high BR rating of a su 85 when it is in every worse than a t34-57?

Because T-34-57s were buffed without raising their BRs, and they’re OP right now.

Which the SU-85 isn’t worse, it is missing the weak turret and has a 85mm gun.

[Bull3t 0verdose]

what? T-34-57 are not OP, they are practically glass canons.

SU85 has EXACTLY the same penetration value. So it has higher BR but lacks a turret

[un.Casual]

Originally posted by Bull3t 0verdose:

what? T-34-57 are not OP, they are practically glass canons.

SU85 has EXACTLY the same penetration value. So it has higher BR but lacks a turret

All t34 are excellent especially the 85 plus.

[kamikazi21358]

Originally posted by Bull3t 0verdose:

what? T-34-57 are not OP, they are practically glass canons.

SU85 has EXACTLY the same penetration value. So it has higher BR but lacks a turret

Not exactly now. It is still at a tier where it’s armour does still mean something, expecially in a downtier. Combined with this, it has definatly the mobility. But now, the 57mm was buffed and now easily kills vehicles it doesn’t even face. Essentially, it still has too much armour to be called a “glass cannon” (which I hate that term), it still has the mobility of a light tank, and it has a gun that easily kills 5.7s and more.

I love the Russian 4.3 lineup, but it no longer should be 4.3. It is now too good for 4.3, the T-34-57s I believe now officially need a +0.3 increase.

[billyBOY73]

The Shermans are great tanks but easily defeated (except the Jumbos). The M4a1 and a2 (75mm gun) are bloody beasts though and my fav low tier killering machines.. ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ they are fun to play.

[83athom]

Originally posted by Bull3t 0verdose:

man I just hate them.
Right now I was playing with a BR of 2,3, the SU76 (SPG! ) and could not pin the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ M4A3 105
why do those ♥♥♥♥♥ have such a low BR and are damn tough? Just on paper the just outclass every other vehicle of other nations.

Try one and find out. Its basically a casemate tank giving its turret slew, and stock HE only with little explosive mass.

Edit; And if you can't pen an M4 with the SU-76... you are doing something VERY wrong.

[Bull3t 0verdose]

is there a statistic that says how often a specific team wins? I would say 2/3 americans win

[kamikazi21358]

Originally posted by Bull3t 0verdose:

is there a statistic that says how often a specific team wins? I would say 2/3 americans win

You’re wrong!

You were off by ~.66%!

http://thunderskill.com/en/vehicle/us_m4a3e8_76w_sherman

[Stridswombat]

Shermans of all kinds are incredibly easy to penetrate with Soviet guns, with the only possible exception being the 57mm guns (just aim for the turret or MG port). Soviet guns have insanely good normalization that almost entirely negates sloped armour rendering the Shermans hull of little use.

The 57mm has good flat pen, but worse sloped pen than the 76mm. The 76mm can easily pen its own hull, the 57mm cannot. The 85mm is the opposite with excellent sloped armour pen. That's the difference between them.

[kamikazi21358]

Originally posted by Stridswombat:

Shermans of all kinds are incredibly easy to penetrate with Soviet guns, with the only possible exception being the 57mm guns (just aim for the turret or MG port). Soviet guns have insanely good normalization that almost entirely negates sloped armour rendering the Shermans hull of little use.

The 57mm has good flat pen, but worse sloped pen than the 76mm. The 76mm can easily pen its own hull, the 57mm cannot. The 85mm is the opposite with excellent sloped armour pen. That's the difference between them.

The 57mm has no trouble in my experience. Expecially since it was buffed, significantly. The 76.2mm is the trouble imo.

[Bull3t 0verdose]

ok thx Stridswombat.
But I still don't find the increased BR of the SU justified. SPGs should be cheaper than tanks with turrets.


@kamikazi21358
So I assumed a 66% win rate and this STATISTIC EXACTLY SAYS THAT.
also 2,38 Ground frags per battle is also pretty good. So it proves my point that there is an american bias

compare it with this
http://thunderskill.com/en/vehicle/ussr_t_34_1941_57
http://thunderskill.com/en/vehicle/ussr_t_34_1941_l_11

[kamikazi21358]

Originally posted by Bull3t 0verdose:

@kamikazi21358
So I assumed a 66% win rate and this STATISTIC EXACTLY SAYS THAT.

It was a sarcastic error. I was impressed how it was less than 1% than the global average (according to TS at least).