Have you played the tanks at all? Sherman armor definitely has a much higher tendency to bounce.
Even more so if you’re fighting over the first shot and the Pz IV doesn’t have time to properly aim. Which happens quite often with shermans having stabilizer.
I said from the beginning that I was against the presence of Sherman 76s in BR3, read my message again. We can’t move BR tanks with ridiculous arguments like “armor doesn’t matter because there are Panzerfausts”.
Speed doesn’t matter much in this game, they are useless on most maps.
Japanese tanks are always worse than all other countries, by this argument we should make all other countries as weak as Japan.
I’ve played this tank quite often, I have even bought camo for it.
It’s an extremely specific vehicle that definitely doesn’t fit to all maps (so it’s not much for F2P players who have limited slots).
Btw. What would help this tank the most is if it didn’t share a tanker squad with other high BR tanks.
But I don’t think this tank needs to go in BR3. Only players who stand with it in the artillery zone and then are pissed they didn’t survive are of that opinion.
If any tank should go to BR3, it’s the Achilles. Not the hellcat.
Vehicle movement speed + great turret turn speed = superior tank destroyer at BR3. Which is a M18 and not M10. You need some penalty of playing as a fast tank with amazing stats around it’s turret and shells, armor is not enough of argument neither does open top as you can just drive away quickly and reposition.
German, Soviet and Japanese TDs doesn’t have turret with very fast rotation speed they are turretless, they also don’t have 50 cal or very fast movement speed, their armors are also insufficient and usually below armor of normal tanks. So why American TD should be allowed to be the best of the best at BR3? Do you really think that Stug III F and Na-To equal to M18? Don’t make me laugh.
50% of the matches will be against Japan you can’t ignore them. I guess you don’t mind always winning against them.
Getting stuck on the Pacific map is a huge pain.
It is useless on most maps, and its speed can never compensate for its weak armor!
And it’s also very funny that you want to move the STUG to BR2 but are against the M18 in BR3, their weapons are almost the same, the STUG has much better armor and survivability, and the M18 is faster.
This is because the Germans were allowed to have the KT, 75/32 m41, sd.kfz.234/2, etc.
Then I want assault rifles to be eliminated from all countries, because Japan doesn’t have an assault rifle!
Yeah, their guns look similar in appearance. But that’s about it. 
I’m not going to discuss such ridiculous comparisons.
There is not much difference!
That’s why one of them has BR3.3 in WT, while the other has BR 6.0.
Or are you telling me that their anti infantry capabilities are crucial in this case?
Well I would say that the hellcat is many times better against infantry.
This discussion is truly ridiculous.
mrw anti-infantry capabilities are being sarcastically presented as secondary in an infantry-centric game.
don’t worry Dark Gaijin will send them green painted STG44s 
That’s not what I would have said or thought.
I was putting it in the context of it not being a decisive point between them that would somehow affect their BR from WT. Given that hellcat is far superior against infantry.
But okay.
I “sort of” see what you are getting at (But only because currently BR 3 can Up tier)
Probably just because I’m an old War thunder player but the 76mm Shermans are already with their appropriate counterparts at BR 4, or will be after the next patch (The 76mm is plenty to 1 tap anything frontally at BR 4)…and the 75 Sherman has arguably the best capabilities of any tank at BR 3 already. (Excluding an uptier)
When I look at tanks placements I am thinking ahead for a time when its BR ±0 ( 
)…So 76mm Shermans are placed well at BR 4 and the 75mm Shermans pretty happy at BR 3
But that’s just what I am accustomed to.
Everyone sure likes to talk about the adequacy of the M1 76mm when BR 4 is populated by Panthers and Tigers, which, unlike the relationship between the preceding P4s and the P5/P6, there is no notable compromise in the performance of the tank shell when comparing US 75mm and 76mm.
I see the 75mm and 76mm as sidegrades to the other.
The Pak 40 makes no such compromises between anti-personnel and anti-tank performance, and the succeeding vehicles retain or upgrade its existing capabilities.
In WT they literally share the same BR. Do you think tigers/panthers have a greater advantage against infantry than 76mm US tanks?
I honestly fail to see the disbalance
If you are BR 3 you “could” say its a side grade…wont make a difference whether you use 75 or 76mm against other BR 3 tanks…they will pop 1 shot.
BUT, if you are BR 4 the 76 is a definite upgrade. 75mm has got nothing on BR 4 tanks, while the 76 1 shots them frontally quite happily and still does enough vs infantry
Yes.
I don’t understand the attempt at laying down some kind of perspective where it’s somehow considered an “upgrade” in the context of fighting something that are also “upgrades” of their predecessor vehicles. At the end of the day, you’d still be making a compromise for the upgrade, while the vehicle it’s intended to fight doesn’t have to make glaring compromises just to be adequate.
That’s not full context. You are just nitpicking random numbers for your needs.
