Common Ground on the Sherman issue. Here it is....

[Thoragoros]

Those who support the boosting of the Sherman are saying essentially that the sherman was too weak for what it cost, and therefore it needed to be boosted.

They are also saying that the allies need viable armor.

Those who oppose it are saying that the sherman needed a cut in cost to make it effective.

They are also saying that Allies are meant to spam tanks, similar to how orks and Imperial Guard spammed units in Dawn of War.

Therefore, is not the common ground on the Sherman an issue of Cost Effeciancy?

Thus, if the Sherman was made to be more historic in stats, and cost (meaning a cost cut) neither side could complain. Where am I wrong?

[DoltIncognito]

Historically you needed 5 shermans to take out a single tiger, and you would lsoe 4... No thanks :)

I do think they should be a cheap, weak unit though. But I'm rather enjoying the buffed shermans atm :D

[Thoragoros]

Oh my goodness! In game terms it means about 2 shermans to beat a panzer! NOT 4-10! Think a little!

[WildeCard]

Stop making MORE Sherman threads.. Uberjumper already asked you to collect your Sherman related thoughts in another thread, and a link was included for you.

I may be backseat moderating, but I take responsibility for the consequences.

[jasaund]

I can agree to that. Make them cheeper but keep them weaker.( For balance sake, although I disagree that the sherman should be a weak tank) OO rymes. And maybe up the cost of the 76mm gun.

[Soulblighter]

Thoragoros stop making threads about shermans. We got one already... use it.

Wildecard if you realize you are backseat moderating.. dont hit the post reply button next time k?

thread locked.