New allies medium tank rebuff

The Sherman tank was not the best as anti tank combat (especially against Tiger 1), but performed well for its job, which is mostly infantry support. It was still the best tank the American had during that time for its job, but it's not the best tank during WW2 overall. but Sherman tank was reliable, fast and cheaper than german tank. it did have some advantages. Its thinner armor made it lighter and more maneuverable on solid ground, an important advantage in the cold, hilly terrain and small villages of Western Europe. i think the allies medium attack should have some buff like +15 speed, cheaper cost, or 15% damage against infantry and light armour unit. sherman tank was very versatile in and could be used for literally anything under the sun. The chassis was adapted into tank destroyers, recovery vehicles, heavy breakthrough tanks, even this dinky thing.

• Doctrine: The Sherman literally fitted the U.S. Army’s requirements for a medium tank perfectly. It was light enough to be shipped overseas. Even early-war Shermans were more than equipped to engage almost all enemy armor in existence as well as fortifications and dismounted troops. There’s this myth that the Sherman wasn’t designed to fight enemy tanks, and that’s why it was no match for Tigers and Panthers. This is literally such bullshit I feel an overpowering urge to gag whenever anyone says this. The Sherman was absolutely designed to fight enemy armor and did this VERY well. But we’ll talk about that later.
• Revolutionary Features that actually worked: Early Shermans had a reputation for flammability, and this isn’t entirely untrue, but the fact is almost ANY tank will burn readily if hit right. Once M4A3s started receiving wet-stowage racks, Shermans became one of the safest tanks of the war. The stabilizer, while often neglected by crews, could actually be very useful in getting the co-axial machine gun on target faster or while moving, a big advantage when fighting infantry.
• Crew comfort; While tanks aren’t built for the express purpose of being comfortable, it’s always an upside, and the Sherman was rather spacious for a tank of it’s day (excluding the Firefly, which was a stop-gap measure despite being effective).
• Firepower: The short 75 mm gun of early Shermans was more than capable of killing any German tank short of the Panther at combat ranges. At close ranges of under 500 meters, it even stood a chance against the Tiger I’s frontal armor. Once Shermans were up-gunned to the 76 mm M1, it was capable of knocking out Tigers frontally at range. The ‘going around behind where the armor’s thinner’ myth is straight horse shit. By the end of the war any German tank short of a King Tiger was vulnerable frontally at combat ranges.
• Reliability: All tanks and military hardware break. But the Sherman was a quite reliable vehicle all things considered. All the u.s tank were standardize into every single part of the tank that it could be used and cannibalize the another destroyed sherman tank part which where not damage to repaired,recovered, and recycle.
• Convenience. The Sherman also carried a very fast and efficient electrical traverse system for the turret. Batteries were charged as the tank drove, meaning the turret could be traversed even if the engine was shut off. German ‘big cats’ used hydraulic traverse that relied on pumps powered by the engine. This meant that if say, a Panther, needed to fire, the whole tank would have to come to a stop, and then the driver would have to throw the vehicle in neutral to get as much power as possible to the pumps so the turret could move a little faster. This system was horrendously inconvenient and required much more coordination among crews. In general, the Sherman was simply an ergonomic vehicle that was comparatively easy to operate.
• Producibility. Almost 50,000 Shermans were made during the war. Enough said.