On the one side, we've got people wanting more 1s1k. Or wanting penetration = kill.
On the other side, there's many who dislike being 1 shot 1 killed, especially after driving for minutes to the frontline. If the attacker survives the first hit, he has 4 seconds to spot, aim, and hopefully hit the enemy. Positioning is still the most important factor, though speed and skill have an increased role.
A Tiger survives 4 shots to the upper side (80mm) from a late Sherman 75mm, which is max penetration.
The 88mm can one shot almost any Sherman to the front (at same range where sherman requires 4 side shots).
No attention is drawn there, the 75mm L48 seems ineffective, while the ineffectiveness of the 75mm L40 matches Hollywood expectations and thus is overlooked.
Its unfortunately quite impossible for me to draw any conclusions yet. Some may want the entire damage formula changed, others may want specific cannons or tanks rebalanced. Though allied tanks aren't as weak as documentaries put it, the kill ratios were mainly due to offensive/defensive nature. So I'm taking most feedback atm with a grain of salt. Once players get more accustomed to it, in a couple weeks, I'll open a thread for more technical feedback on it. Until then, I'd suggest to play more before drawing conclusions.
Tho I am interested in general opinions. If given the option between any two tanks, which would you take? Doesn't need to be directly comparable. Did your opinion change with 2.45 when comparing any two?
M4A3 > PzIVh
Panther > Firefly