Any plan to add the M26 Pershing to US units?

Hi,

I was wondering since the year of the game is 1944, if there’s a plan to add the pirshing tank some day. The one US tank on a par (even better) than a panther.

ww2incolor.com/forum/showthr … shing-Tank

Plus it looks totally awesome.

It is quite true that the tank came out pretty late to make any difference in the battle field. So did it’s counterpart the Tiger Royal TII.

As said in this document, in their only encounter at the end of the war, pershing defeated the T2.

That document is a formidable source with gun vs armor tests etc…

This could be set in the game by a very high cost and time to field it but for someone looking to work up the tech tree it might be a gratifying medal.

Nico

Well it were possible to field the Pershing earlier for the Allies but they shipped the whole ammo in the pacific LOL. Thats why it came that late in war.

Beside this we already had this in the forum the guys said no.

However maybe some of the devs answere. Cuz the Allies are more powerful as Airforce then Germany. Taking out Tigers was mostly done by planes or naval guns. (One Tiger I was completely flipped over after a navy gun attack.)

Any tanks in France by 1943 would be German I think… :wink: D-Day was in 1944.

And Pershing is MTR now (monthly topic rotation). US is a unique side without a proper heavy tank, and they do well enough as it is (they have other means to fight tanks).

yes my bad but they had the tank earlier available

M36 Jackson is a stronger possibility, one which is even more hotly debated than Pershing.

The main problem with the Pershing, which I covered some in the Sherman article on the wiki, was that various US Army officers in charge of equipment and doctrine were a) of the opinion that the 75mm-gunned Sherman was “good enough” and b) believed that killing tanks was the job of AT guns and TDs, while tanks were supposed to support infantry. There was also doubt as to whether bridges, roads, and support elements in Europe could handle the size, weight, and logistical requirements of the Pershing (that proved not to be the case, although it would have been impossible to land them in Europe until the Allies captured port facilities - so no chance they could have been sent in on D-Day). The main factor that finally got the Pershing into combat in Feb. 1945 was that US tank forces got whipped badly by Tigers and Panthers in the Battle of the Bulge.

I still hope for M36 . Even i won my last US(me) vs Ger game in Nuclear Winter , he builded his 1st tiger 2 late , i was already at the door of his base. If he had rushed tanks instead of vehicle spam , he would be a pain for me in the center. But shermans and T34 do good on hills were range doesnt matter.Still as a superior faction US side should have a better AT weapon a expensive one wich makes it only costeffective vs tiger,kingtiger and IS-2.

I personally think that actually Tanks are balanced.
US=Air Power??
Rus=rushing stuff??
Ger= ground power??
british= airpower?

or the other way round? idk

what do you guys think?

Faction Advantages:

US = arty , infantry ,cheap tanks
GBR = infantry , AT , cheap but powerful tanks (Firefly)
Germany = ranged AT , armor , arty
Russia = infantry, ranged AT , arty

Faction desadvantages:

US = armor,AT
GBR = arty, costy infantry
Germany = infantry , expensive advanced armor
Russia = slow start

i dont c any air advantage

why is the german inf so weak in-game? costs?

I wouldn’t call German infantry weak; IIRC quality-wise they’re second only to the British. And that MG42 in every rifle squad makes a nasty equalizer.

For completeness’ sake I’d like to see the Jackson in-game, since it was in use with US units. It would be a much better tank-killer, but the 90mm gun on it was roughly on par with the 88mm L/56 on the Tiger I - in other words, the Tiger II would still have a range advantage and the M36 would probably be toast after 1 hit at max range. So it would improve but not even the situation if you’re a US commander with Tiger IIs rolling down on you.

Frankly, the best way to beat the Tiger II is simple: Don’t let the enemy build them. Bomb armor yards, take territory, and generally muck things up beyond all hope for the other guy before the first Tiger II comes out.

I see the advantages/disadvantages as thus…

Germany: Infantry, Vehicles, Artillery, Self-Propelled (+), Tank Destroyers (+), Armour (+), Aircraft (-), Structures (+), Engineers - Armoured Offensives
Great Britain: Infantry (+), Vehicles, Artillery (+), Self-Propelled (-), Tank Destroyers, Armour (-), Aircraft (+), Structures, Engineers - Supported Infantry Advances
Soviet Union: Infantry, Vehicles (-), Artillery (+), Self-Propelled (+), Tank Destroyers, Armour (+), Aircraft, Structures, Engineers (+) - Heavy Mixed Advances
United States: Infantry, Vehicles, Artillery, Self-Propelled, Tank Destroyers (-), Armour (-), Aircraft (+), Structures, Engineers - Mechanized Infantry Advances

For the sake of the forecast, this is what Finland and Italy should look like, relative to the existing sides.

Italy: Infantry, Vehicles (-), Artillery, Self-Propelled (+), Tank Destroyers, Armour (-), Aircraft, Structures, Engineers - Heavy Mixed Defensives
Finland: Infantry (+), Vehicles, Artillery, Self-Propelled (-), Tank Destroyers (-), Armour (-), Aircraft, Structures (+), Engineers (+) - Infantry Guerrilla Warfare

Yeah, right!

I am assuming the Hellcat or the Jackson will be added in the near future to validate the statement. :stuck_out_tongue:

It was a mistake, actually. I put in + rather than - and then swapped the colour, apparently.