User talk:MastahCheef117/M7A1 Sherman All-Purpose Tank

You don't know anything about tanks, do you?

Look at yourself, you've taken a World War 2 design which was known as the flipping Ronson, you know why? It brewed up almost every time it was hit by a decent caliber anti-tank weapon. Thats right, you chose the WWII tank which suceeded thanks to it's numbers and ease of production, not any specific merit of it's design or anything. You know whats also funny? You haven't even upgraded it well. Your upgrades may have made some differece in Italy of Normandy during the 1940s, but they will not do shit against a modern army, let alone the UNSC.

You gave it what? 34mms more armour? Big bloody deal. Thats not going to protect it from a 17 Pounder AT gun used by the British in late WWII, let alone a modern 66mm LAW. The Sherman was known for being easy to kill, and this just makes it harder for a Panzer IV to break through it. Is it going to stop a single M19 Jackhammer from blasting through it? No. It certainly will not stop even a single shot by the Scorpion's 90mm gun, the 76mm 17 Pounder used by the British Military could punch through Tigers with this much armour easy as pie, nothing stopping the 90mm of the Scorpion from doing so, is there?

With the quite frankly pathetic design flaws of the original Sherman and armour dealt with, what do we have? We have an armament which is rather underpowered considering the size of the tank, when the Scorpion could fit a 90mm gun and at least 1 7.62 MG, this hulking piece of metal can fit 3 .50s and a 105mm, you call that an armament? Do you not forget that the Sherman is a bigger target than the Scorpion? When you raise it's profile, you put on decent weaponry and armour to make it worth it, not the rubbish you slapped on after finding a copy of 'Janes WWII Tanks'.

Then when we look at the guns themselves, we find what? A snubby little Howitzer placed on an 'All-Purpose Tank', like thats going to be good for the average Tank Vs Tank combat you get. It is a HOWITZER, not your average GUN, Howitzers are designed for fire which goes beyond line of sight, goes over obsticles and comes down from above like we want artillery too. Do you fight tanks like that? No, you just find your rounds slamming into bare earth while they plant flat trajectory 90mm tungsten rounds into your underarmed, underarmoured and poorly designed arse.

And theres also your beloved .50 machine guns, what are you on? A diet of warfilms stretching across the Second World War which are designed to show the propoganda machine of the victorious allies in full motion? Is there some variant of Future Weapons which pleases itself to the sight of Hardcore All American Gun Porn or something? You seem to forget that the Halo universe already has a plentiful supply of .50 and above weaponry, even Halo 3s bloody minigun is a 12.7mm weapon, why not use that rather than bringing back an old design?

Look at the kill count you provide, you're saying that with less than a thousand rounds in total a single one of these can kill over five hundred infantry and a pair of APCs using only machine guns alone? Thats more bullshit than a field full of living steaks on EX-Lax. Your kill count requires a one shot one kill radio, and the APCs being killed with less than 50 rounds each, are you mad? Are the APCs made out of paper? Was the tank firing on unarmed targets within a narrow canyon?

I have barely scratched the surface of this, but I think this should be enough of a start, I haven't even gotten onto the turret turn speed which would throw the gunner around like a cat in a washing machine, and be a bitch to actually aim properly. Give this tank a good look over, then scrap it. Useful Dave 00:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)