wodasini88 Posted May 2, 2002 Share Posted May 2, 2002 I wanted to know what tank people here like better sherman or mkIV and why. It seems to me that the sherman has some advantages over the mkIV like speed and a little better armor protection. But I think the mkIV's lower profile and higher velocity gun make up for those issues. I've been playing with several games with the mkIV and sherman and the mkIV always seems to out perform the sherman. what do you think? And what were some of the real life advantages and disadvantages of both tanks when facing off against eachother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Tondu Posted May 3, 2002 Share Posted May 3, 2002 I prefer the Sherman. The Sherman has a lot more variations in CMBO than the mkIV has. The gyrostabilizer is certainly a help and that Jumbo is nice with a 76mm gun. Then there is that Firefly. Yup, I'll take a Sherman -even though it has draw backs. I hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted May 3, 2002 Share Posted May 3, 2002 Defending I’d take the IV. Attacking I’d take the plain jane Sherman. The two are pretty evenly matched. You can’t really get into comparing all the Sheman variants to a IV. The IV comes out behind. In real life the Sherman had the advantage that counted. Quantity has a quality all its own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zukkov Posted May 3, 2002 Share Posted May 3, 2002 in battle, the sherman was not equal to the pzIV(i'm talking the m4a3 with a 75mm gun). certainly it could destroy a pzIV, but it's gun didn't have the range or punch of the 75L48. plus the german usually had the advantage of being on the defensive. off the battlefield, the sherman had the advantage of being mechanically more dependable, meaning more shermans would be there in the next battle. still though, i've seen german tank commanders on the history channel actually say they felt sorry for the american tankers. imagine that. while they were being bombed, strafed, shelled, and forced to fight night and day while dodging everything in the allied arsenal, they actually felt sorry for the americans! i know i know, i got off the subject here. but i just can't get over how guys that must know they are going to lose the war can feel sorry for the guys bringing so much destruction their way. i wonder though. was it a humanitarian thought by the germans, or an arrogant one? lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvio Manuel Posted May 3, 2002 Share Posted May 3, 2002 I think I like Shermans better...they have a 3rd (.50cal) MG, fast turret instead of the mark IV's medium turret, and for only 122pts you get the M4A3 variant and its great 32mph top speed. Granted, if they're up against mark IV's they might need some off map smoke or a 2nd tank platoon as a distraction to get them down to below 600-700m where they have a decent hit%. Shermans are delightfully resistant to the Axis light AT gun, the 50mm- at least frontally or with an angled aspect. I like the mark IVs...I just have to keep them at max.range and keep their field of view pretty small so the thin, medium speed turret isn't such a liability. I like them as far as German tanks go b/c of the high ammo load, being as though I don't play heavier armor games too often. I hate that the mark IV's are vulnerable to enemy light AT...37/40mm in particular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priest Posted May 3, 2002 Share Posted May 3, 2002 Depends what you are doing, the PIV is a better AT weapon, the Sherman is a better AP weapon. Both can kill the other and each has trade offs. Personally I think the PIV looks better but the Sherman was a better (slightly) designed tool, for whatever it is worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts