M10's current status.

[Guest]

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Jodomar]

considering what you can do with an m10, no i don't think its ridiculous at all. It's a cheap throw away tank that is good against tanks and infantry. I personally thinks it's ridiculous that i can run mass amounts of ranger or airborne and still field 5 m10's. Axis doesn't have a cheap spammable tank. The stug doesn't count because it does not have the speed nor turret that the m10 has to offer.

[Killer344]

Read the guidelines before making a thread people, it ain't so hard.

[DarkSoldierX]

For 600 manpower and 320 fuel for 2 M10's you can counter a 610 manpower and 500 fuel unit the panther. The M10 is a tank destroyer but the Panther is a anti tank tank. It occasionally hits a infantry but you can run over anyone in it unless they are supressed unlike the m10 which can kill inf much more reliably by running over them. Anyone here think theres a problem with this like I do?

[lionel23]

Nope.  The panther is also much, much more durable and has long range and very good armor, it needs to be treated like any other heavy tank, it needs to be supported.  No panther is going to solo everything.

2 M10s are needed to take on a panther, that's 20 pop of 'armor' on the field that is extremely vulnerable to AT fire (fausts/paks/shreks/tanks).  M10s are meant to be throw-away units (generally most allied armor is except maybe the sherman and carefully microed Shermans) while axis armor is generally more resilient (P4, Panter, Tiger, Hezters, King Tiger, etc).

I should also point out that the original poster is both saying Shermans are too good against tanks and M10s are too good against tanks... this is double nerfing 2 out of the 3 general purpose allied tanks (with the hellcat being the 3rd which has crappy penetration in the first place) while Pershings are a doctrinal unit for Armor only.  Also it should be noted just because it's a tank destroyer does not mean it can or should only fight tanks, just like how ATGs can be used against other ATGs as an example.

[Spartan_Marine88]

For 600 manpower and 320 fuel for 2 M10's you can counter a 610 manpower and 500 fuel unit the panther. The M10 is a tank destroyer but the Panther is a anti tank tank. It occasionally hits a infantry but you can run over anyone in it unless they are supressed unlike the m10 which can kill inf much more reliably by running over them. Anyone here think theres a problem with this like I do?

Its a fast tank. It happens, but Infantry should always be protected by at least 1 at unit. 90% of the time (myself included) its the stupid rash infantry push that leaves 2 squads of Grens without support and thus the m10 crush. I have never had it happen in a co-ordinated push or defense

[Rocksitter]

"while axis armor is generally more resilient"

 That is not what the leader board says...

[Mysthalin]

Having played with M10s to no end..

No, they're quite fine as is. The only problem was the stacking buffs in armor doctrine - and with tank command getting a nerf, it's now a lot better.
Perhaps the top T2 could use a slight nerf in added speed, and Improved Armour could be nerfed from 1.25 to 1.2 health - but as a base the M10 is quite OK.

[Nimitz]

I just hate how good they are at killing infantry. On the other-hand I find it retarded how high their pool cost is, the only justification for it at the moment is its good AI capabilities.

[SX23]

I'm not whining about the fact that M10's can kill a panther, but the fact that they can crush infantry due to their speed and that quite easily. Also the fact that no axis tanks can counter it. (Axis tanks in vcoh and real war were supposed to be better, no?)

[EliteGren]

I'm not whining about the fact that M10's can kill a panther, but the fact that they can crush infantry due to their speed and that quite easily. Also the fact that no axis tanks can counter it.

First off, crushing is a thing you're going to need to live with. It's a core mechanic.

And secondly, no axis tanks can counter an M10? You might aswell state that you become a werewolf at night and eat babies.

[Mysthalin]

Axis tanks in vcoh and real war were supposed to be better, no?)

You just broke two guidelines for posting on this forum with one sentence. Want to guess what they are?

[Jodomar]

A few people said that if you took the crush away from the m10 infantry would block it. I have personally never seen infantry block any of the numerous vehicles that don't have human crush. Have you ever seen infantry block a kangaroo? I sure as hell haven't nor have i seen infantry block m8's/pumas/t17/stuart/halftracks. Just take the crush away and I'll be fine with that.

[Mysthalin]

I've seen infantry block every single one of the vehicles you listed, actually(I've used volks to block a T17 from circling my 88 tons of times, if out of fausts). And, with the exception of the kangaroo, all of those vehicles are only half as wide as the M10 - so imagine how an M10 would fare.

[SX23]

I've seen infantry block every single one of the vehicles you listed, actually(I've used volks to block a T17 from circling my 88 tons of times, if out of fausts). And, with the exception of the kangaroo, all of those vehicles are only half as wide as the M10 - so imagine how an M10 would fare.

That would make poeple create other strategies than the "suicide rush". Not to mention that I once played a game where my m10 had 24 infantry kills due to crush.

[Nimitz]

I'm not whining about the fact that M10's can kill a panther, but the fact that they can crush infantry due to their speed and that quite easily. Also the fact that no axis tanks can counter it.

First off, crushing is a thing you're going to need to live with. It's a core mechanic.

Why? It would be perfectly possible to give m10s and hellcats light-crush (like LVs).

I've used volks to block a T17

Could you please explain a bit more? As far as I know only kettens can be blocked by infantry. LVs may not be able to crush inf but they will push them.

[105TigerHunters]

SX are you and Undeath working together to undermind the allies =P this is the second thread were your imposing nerfs or axis buffs which are blatently not needed.

Im sry if you take this offensivly but if you are losing a P4 to a single M10 then you are "Doing it wrong."

Yes 2 can take down a panther IF it is not supported, remind me who uses panthers unsupported if you say your self then once again refer to the qoute.

[Mysthalin]

Nimitz - giving orders to your infantry overrides the game mechanic of making infantry scatter in front of a tank/vehicle. This is particularly noticeable with M10s and the way they crush - people give move orders to the infantry that are about to be crushed, thus making the squad try and re-group at the centre of the squad's entity(thus resulting in some very dead infantry).

[Jazzhead]

Nimitz - giving orders to your infantry overrides the game mechanic of making infantry scatter in front of a tank/vehicle. This is particularly noticeable with M10s and the way they crush - people give move orders to the infantry that are about to be crushed, thus making the squad try and re-group at the centre of the squad's entity(thus resulting in some very dead infantry).

Doesn't it seem funny how the game mechanics punish micro in this instance? It basically just comes down to luck whether your squad will be run over..

[gamesguy2]

Nimitz - giving orders to your infantry overrides the game mechanic of making infantry scatter in front of a tank/vehicle. This is particularly noticeable with M10s and the way they crush - people give move orders to the infantry that are about to be crushed, thus making the squad try and re-group at the centre of the squad's entity(thus resulting in some very dead infantry).

Doesn't it seem funny how the game mechanics punish micro in this instance? It basically just comes down to luck whether your squad will be run over..

Or if you had a unit to scout with, you could see the M10 coming and garrison those infantry.

Btw it's the same with a stug.  And from my experience stug is way better than a M10.  Lower pop and better anti-infantry without having to rush in.  Starting with a stug and a piece of supplemental AT is extremely viable, starting with a M10 is generally not.

[Jazzhead]

Nimitz - giving orders to your infantry overrides the game mechanic of making infantry scatter in front of a tank/vehicle. This is particularly noticeable with M10s and the way they crush - people give move orders to the infantry that are about to be crushed, thus making the squad try and re-group at the centre of the squad's entity(thus resulting in some very dead infantry).

Doesn't it seem funny how the game mechanics punish micro in this instance? It basically just comes down to luck whether your squad will be run over..

Or if you had a unit to scout with, you could see the M10 coming and garrison those infantry.

Btw it's the same with a stug.  And from my experience stug is way better than a M10.  Lower pop and better anti-infantry without having to rush in.  Starting with a stug and a piece of supplemental AT is extremely viable, starting with a M10 is generally not.

The stug would be amazing if it weren't for its god-awful pathing and lack of turret