Northman505

Are British Tanks Good?

BigBawsBarabus
BigBawsBarabus gave DarkFenix2k5 a warning for this post
Reason: Verbal Warning Only · Points: 0 ·
1 minute ago, Razielkaine said:

Brits didn't use aphe.  They don't make up imaginary ammo in this game, if you can't find evidence it was used ots not gonna be in the game.

 

I know very well the Brits didn't use APHE. What I'm saying is Gaijin should ignore that for the sake of game balance, fun has to trump realism. That's why your crew don't bail out the instant you take a penetrating hit, that's why German tanks aren't randomly breaking down all the time and why Russian tanks have even half way decent reload times. The same way they ignore historic but un-fun factors for other nations, they should now do for the British and give them APHE.

 

Or they could properly overhaul solid shot so that it's worthwhile, but I don't see that happening this century, so here's a solution that even the lazy incompetents at Gaijin might be able to implement without breaking everything.

BigBawsBarabus (Posted )

1.1.23. Any post judged to be "insulting and/or inflammatory by deed or intention" by the Gaijin Staff and administrators.
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DarkFenix2k5 said:

 

I know very well the Brits didn't use APHE. What I'm saying is Gaijin should ignore that for the sake of game balance, fun has to trump realism. That's why your crew don't bail out the instant you take a penetrating hit, that's why German tanks aren't randomly breaking down all the time and why Russian tanks have even half way decent reload times. The same way they ignore historic but un-fun factors for other nations, they should now do for the British and give them APHE.

 

Or they could properly overhaul solid shot so that it's worthwhile, but I don't see that happening this century, so here's a solution that even the lazy incompetents at Gaijin might be able to implement without breaking everything.

Brits as for the most part as competitive as any other nation before them and far ahead of most the Japanese tanks at least till tier 4-5.

 

There are things that can make them better but adding made up content is the game of world of tanks. Keep that rubbish there.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not that British tanks are "fine as is", it's that very devoted, fiercely loyal British players are good despite the woeful state of solid AP mechanics. Only though practiced, precise play have these players actually made these hunks of crap successfully play against other nations' monster tanks that use post-pen damage that follows the meta of War Thunder much more closely.

 

Gaijin should really consider reverting solid AP post-pen damage closer to how it was when British tanks were in closed beta.

 

On an unrelated note: Aside from the Walker Bulldog and Type 60 SPRG, Japanese Tier 4 seems like complete trash. However, the Chi- line of tanks are very, very fun to play, and the Japanese line of tanks remind me of British tanks in that you have to play back on the second or third line, be careful with your decisions, and reward precise play.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Razielkaine said:

Brits as for the most part as competitive as any other nation before them and far ahead of most the Japanese tanks at least till tier 4-5.

 

There are things that can make them better but adding made up content is the game of world of tanks. Keep that rubbish there.

 

You're one of a very small proportion of people that considers the British tanks competitive. Take one look at the ownership of different nations and it's pretty clear which nations perform and which don't.

 

Grinding the Brits is nothing but stress and hard work, having to carefully shoot an enemy multiple times to achieve what any other nation can do in one shot without even aiming properly. British tanks have perhaps 10% of the killing power of any other nation, they've been given nothing in exchange. That's not balance.

 

And made up content is in the game. Chieftain's ammo? E-100? Either of those ring a bell? The latter was just added in the name of shiny, but the former was done in the name of balance. If they can make up imaginary ammo to nerf a tank, they can make up imaginary ammo to buff tanks too. I appreciate that War Thunder takes greater lengths to preserve historic accuracy than WoT, but when that focus allows balance as pisstakingly bad as this to remain in game, it's not worth it.

 

Anyway, like I said, I'd be perfectly happy for them to simply give us properly working solid shot mechanics, but I think that's about as likely as me winning the lottery 6 weeks in a row.

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Razielkaine said:

Brits didn't use aphe.  They don't make up imaginary ammo in this game, if you can't find evidence it was used ots not gonna be in the game.

just look at Chieftain HESH L37a7:

1 there's no HESH round under that designation.

2 Chieftain newer used that round.

3 it isn't round for 120mm gun.

4 its 105mm.

5 smoke round.

6 used by FV433 Abbot SPG .

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, arczer25 said:

just look at Chieftain HESH L37a7:

1 there's no HESH round under that designation.

2 Chieftain newer used that round.

3 it isn't round for 120mm gun.

4 its 105mm.

5 smoke round.

6 used by FV433 Abbot SPG .

id seen this argument before when the brits came out and the conquerors gun was mislabeled and other things.  the ammo issue came up but sources were found that showed it was legit.  i didnt look into it personally.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(DISCLAIMER: I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT BRITISH TANKS FROM RESERVE UNTIL 4.0 BR, SINCE I DIDN'T PLAY HIGHER THAN THAT,I DON'T EXACTLY KNOW THAT MUCH ABOUT TANKS HIGHER THAN 4.0, AND I WONT TALK ABOUT THEM)

Also, Im gonna talk about RB battles, I don't have much experience in AB

 

Now everyone talks about this topic, many people complain about how much the British tanks suck in this game, but the reasons I'm making this topic are

1.Some people still deny that British tanks are bad, which is RIDICULOUS.

2.no one gives a solution at all, and Im gonna try to give one(its gonna include a fix for tanks from all the tree probably).

 

now let's start with the first one, proving that British tanks are bad and can't compete with other nations.

first, there is not a single British tank with more than 50% win rate.

 

number two: this is a long one, Im gonna talk about every single tank/td, starting from reserve until 4.0 BR:

Spoiler

 

{I'm gonna rate these vehicles as (Terrible->Below average->Average->Above Average->Excellent}

Terrible: This vehicle is useless..

Below average: It's underperforming, but not so bad.

Average: this vehicle is good, it can compete with vehicles on other nations.

Above Average: this vehicle is very good in the hands on any player, deadly in the hands of pros, but its small flaws did't allow it to be excellent

Excellent: this vehicle is awesome, its not only very good, but it doesn't have many flaws, and can be easily used by any player.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A.13 MK.I/II

pros:

-very good gun penetration for its BR

-good mobility

-armor is sloped for sides, can allow lucky bouces

cons:

-Terrible armor, can be easily penned by SPAA.

-No HE rounds

-bad gun damage

-Terrible reverse speed

Raiting : Average

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tetrarch mk.I

pros:

-Very good run damage/pen

-Very good top speed

cons:

-Terrible armor, can be easily penned by SPAA.

-Slow turret traverse

-Sluggish,and hard to control at fast speeds

-Terrible reverse speed

Raiting : Average

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valentine mk.I

pros:

-Very good armor

-Good gun penetration

-Good reload rate

-Good turret rotation speed

-Awesome -15 Gun depression.

cons:

-Terrible speed and all aspects of mobility

-Only 3 Crew members

-1 shotted when penned

-Weak driver port(weak frontal spot)

-No HE shells

-Bad gun accuracy at long ranges

-Terrible reverse speed

Raiting : Above Average

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Crusader mk.II

pros:

-Good Speed and moblity

-Good gun penetration

-Low Profile

-Fast gun reload rate

-Trolly side armor can bounce

cons:

-Terrible gun damage(no spalling/shrapneling)

-Terrible armor, easily penned by SPAA.

-1 shotted almost always,because of the small tank size.

-Terrible reverse speed

Raiting : Average

 

Crusader mk.III

pros: (Same as m/II) plus:

-Good reverse speed 7 km/h

-mk.9 shot has good spalling/shrapneling,even allows for 1 shots sometimes

cons:

-Terrible armor, can be easily penned by SPAA.

-Only 3 crew members

-1 shotted almost always

Raiting : Above Average

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Matilda II

pros:

-Fast gun reload rate

- -20 Gun depression and +20 elevation.

-Armor can be useful if you get undertiered

cons:

-Armor angeling is useless, because it has a sloped part that will be flat for your enemies, you will get 1 shotted if penned there.

-Terrible Speed and in all mobility aspects

-Terrible gun damage(no spalling/shrapneling)

-1 Shotted if penned on the turret

-Armor is useless, has a huge weak spot of 25mm on armor

-Often get uptiered with Pz.IV F2, which will destroy your dreams in 1 shot anywhere on your tank

-SPAA can pen you if shot at your huge weak spot

-Inaccurate gun at long ranges

-1 km/h reverse speed

Raiting : Terrible

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valentine Mk.XI

pros:

-Good gun penetration

-Sloped turret, allows lucky bounces

- -15 of gun depression

-Good Armor that can be angled.

-Turret is angled, allows for lucky bounces

cons:

-Terrible speed and in all mobility aspects

-no machine gun

-Armor is't very useful in its BR

-driver port is a weak spot

-1 shotted almost always

-only 3 crew members

Raiting : Below Average, Even Terrible (Always gets matched with Pz.IV F2s, that you have no mobility or armor to protect you from them)

 

{Same goes for valentine Mk.IX}

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cromwell V

Now this one I want to talk about a little bit, this cruiser tank has a very good repetation in-game, and - I feel - is overrated,

pros:

-Excellent speed and mobility, very good in all mobility aspects.

-Excellent Gun penetration.

-Fast reload

-5 crew members.

-Excellent Turret rotation speed.

-Very good gun depression (-12)

cons:

-1 shotted 95% of the time.

-Can be penned by Wirbelwinds, which there are tons in every single game.

-Gets matched with Pz.IV F2s and 88mm Flak trucks every single game.

-Weak side armor

-Terrible reverse speed(3 km/h)

-Its the only usable tank in its BR, once you make a small mistake, you get 1 shotted, then you are forced to spawn in a terrible tank.

Raiting : Above average, I'm so sorry, but this tank, I got stuck in it for a very long time, it's awesome, but the spam on Pz.IV F2 and 88mm flak truck is terrible, I can't count how many times I got 1 shotted and went out of the game with 0 kills,even when I manage to get 1-2 kills, I have to spawn on a Matilda, or a 3 inch gun carrier, or even an Archer, which are all terrible, also, It's wierd how the 75mm on this thing doesn't do that much damage, Am I using the wrong shells?, I felt like the Sherman 2 was much better at ammo racking and spalling, wierd, I can't give it excellent.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3 inch gun carrier

pros:

-89mm of armor at 3.0 BR

-uhm.. idk

cons:

-Huge silloate

-Bad speed and mobility

-1 shotted often, crew is stacked

-Bad gun penetration

-Bad accuracy

-thin top armor

Raiting : Terrible

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Archer

pros:

-Awesome 17-pdr Gun, good damage and awesome penetration.

-Very Good speed in the opposite direction on the gun, can be used to retread very fast.

-Very wide gun traverse

cons:

-Very hard to learn, a small mistake will kill you.

-Terrible 4km/h speed in the direction on the gun.

-often 1 shotted  from the front(opposite direction of the gun), immobalized for a long time if shot from the back(direction on the gun.

Raiting: It will be Excellent if you mastered it, but bad if you don't know how to use it

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cromwell I

pros (same as the mk.V) plus:

-Better speed.

-More useful vehicles in it's BR (Sherman 2)

-Gets matched with the same vehicles as the Cromwell V but with better aspects.

cons (same as the mk.V).

Raiting: Above Average

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sherman II

pros:

-Sloped frontal armor

- -12 degrees of gun depression

- APCR rounds with 143 mm or armor pen.

-Decent mobility

-50.cal for aircraft and lightly armored vehicles

-Amazing HE filler! (you don't know how much British tanks players love this!)

-Not easy to pen by SPAA from the front

-Gun is more stabe on the move than other vehicles

cons:

-Weak side armor(not a big deal tbh)

-worse mobility off-road

-gets 1 shotted quite often(but not nearly as much as the cromwell)

-High profile

Raiting : Excellent

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Churchill mk.III

pros:

-Super armor, nearly inpenetrable from the front if angled, especially if matched against Russians

-Very intimidating for the enemies, which allows to to have a very good supporting role for your aliies

-Very good gun penetration

-Very fast reload rate

-Very strong side armor, can't be penned by SPAA if on a slight angle

-Invunarable for SPAA

-Suspention eats so much shrapnel

- -12 degrees of gun depression

cons:

-very bad gun damage (spalling/shrapneling)

-Terrible mobility and speed

-Terrible reverse speed

Raiting : Excellent   it's cons do not negatively effect its role, which is supporting you team mates, being the sponge of your team. yes, its not very good for getting too many kills, but you don't need to, if you bounce too many shots you will get so many points anyway, also, its not hard to learn how to angle your armor at all IMO.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Achilles

pros:

-Awesome 17-pdr, with good penetration and high damage

-Shells have a good chance to ammo rack

-Has a turret

-Good mobility

-Angled armor allows for bouncing shots, and additional tracks to help.

-Crew isn't stacked, many shots take out only 2 crew members, Can take many shots even if penned

-Good gun depression for a TD (-10 degrees)

-5 crew members

-.50 cal machine gun for aircraft

cons:

-Big ammo racks

-open top

-very slow turret traverse speed.

-bad reverse speed

-although the run is good, its hard to 1 shot with.

Raiting : Excellent

 

 

 

 

Now, I'm gonna talk about the solution.

In my opinion, fixing solid shot will fix everything, solid shot's mechanics in warthunder are't the best or the most realistic, not only in my opinion, but many people say that.

first things first, ammo racking, it's really wierd how in warthunder, solid shots can't reliably ammo rack, but they do IRL, A shell traveling for about 800m/s, will have so much speed even after penetrating armor, especially if that armor was thin, when a very fast shell hits the ammo, goes and spins inside it, there will be so much friction going on, and all the friction will make heat, which leads to exploding that ammo rack, So imo, increasing the chance of blowing ammo racks with solid shots is required.

second thing is, they should tell the player which shell shrapnels/spalls more, no one wants to go to the shooting range and test each type of shell he has, and spend an hour trying to figure out which shell shrapnels more.

If these changes were made, I and many more people will be very happy with British tanks, it will balance out the game a lot more! I think everyone agrees that British tanks are worse than others, right? 

 

 

 

 

Edited by ImDoneFor

_Catweazle_63 (Posted )

merged
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Crusader Mk III is awesome. Once you get the Mk9 Shot it tends to one shot most tanks, or at-least cripple them allowing you to finish them with your second. The reverse speed is also 7KMH, that's by no means fantastic but it's not terrible. It's better that the majority of the British tanks. While I agree it's not that fast, especially compared to the reserve tanks, it's all about the gun. The armour is also extremely trollish. I've bounced plenty of shots off my side armour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mercedes4321 said:

What do you mean the Valentines are terrible? I thought they were great.

the first one is, but the rest? you can't use that gun depression because you can't climb hills properly, and the armor is useless.

 

Just now, Illusionyary said:

I think the Crusader Mk III is awesome. Once you get the Mk9 Shot it tends to one shot most tanks, or at-least cripple them allowing you to finish them with your second. The reverse speed is also 7KMH, that's by no means fantastic but it's not terrible. It's better that the majority of the British tanks. While I agree it's not that fast, especially compared to the reserve tanks, it's all about the gun. The armour is also extremely trollish. I've bounced plenty of shots off my side armour.

you are right, I'm gonna edit that out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm having no real issues with my Britsh below BR 4.0 tanks. The Matilda is pretty bad imo, but the rest is quite awesome.

Also, I'd rate:

 

A13's: good

Crusaders II and III: very good

Tetrarch: below average. maybe even bad

Valentine I: average

T17E2: below average

 

Matilda II: bad

Valentine IX: average

AC Mk II AA: Extremely good

 

This is what I have driven so far. Maybe it's just me because I value gun and speed over armor.

Edited by Stahlvormund101
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ImDoneFor said:

the first one is, but the rest? you can't use that gun depression because you can't climb hills properly, and the armor is useless.

I've always done very well in my Valentines, no matter which one it is. What in the world are trying to with them?

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stahlvormund101 said:

I'm having no real issues with my Britsh below BR 4.0 tanks. The Matilda is pretty bad imo, but the rest is quite awesome.

Also, I'd rate:

 

A13's: good

Crusaders II and III: very good

Tetrarch: below average. maybe even bad

Valentine I: average

T17E2: below average

 

Matilda II: bad

Valentine IX: average

AC Mk II AA: Extremely good

 

This is what I have driven so far. Maybe it's just me because I value gun and speed over armor.

I never rely on my armor, except against SPAA, or If Im using the mighty churchill, or valentine mk.1

but I hate crusaders because if how frustraiting it is to get 1 shotted while you need 4 shots to kill, and penned by SPAA.

 

Just now, Mercedes4321 said:

I've always done very well in my Valentines, no matter which one it is. What in the world are trying to with them?

I just hate terrible mobility with no armor

Edited by ImDoneFor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, ImDoneFor said:

I never rely on my armor, except against SPAA, or If Im using the mighty churchill, or valentine mk.1

but I hate crusaders because if how frustraiting it is to get 1 shotted while you need 4 shots to kill, and penned by SPAA.

I need 2-3 shots maximum.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Been_Benuane said:

After a whopping 889 games played....

Are you expecting him to talking about 4.0+ Br Brits tanks?

medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ImDoneFor said:

I never rely on my armor, except against SPAA, or If Im using the mighty churchill, or valentine mk.1

but I hate crusaders because if how frustraiting it is to get 1 shotted while you need 4 shots to kill, and penned by SPAA.

Where are you shooting? I'm unlucky if I need 3 shots to kill someone, its usually only 2 at the most.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mercedes4321 said:

Where are you shooting? I'm unlucky if I need 3 shots to kill someone, its usually only 2 at the most.

I was over-exaggerating, but some guns(like the churchill's or the crusader mk.II's) require 3 shots or more to kill, also you need more time to aim than any other gun with HE filler rounds, because you need to kill the gunner first.

Edited by ImDoneFor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Been_Benuane said:

After a whopping 889 games played....

well, I played AB with Germans first, then left the game for a very long time and went back to it, then played RB with British, I struggled a lot in the cromwell V, I can't count how many times I got 1 shotted early game trying to early cap, then got out of the game with 0 kills.

Also, I almost finished researching tanks at 5.0 BR <3

 

Edited by ImDoneFor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ImDoneFor said:

well, I played AB with Germans first, then left the game for a very long time and went back to it, then played RB with British, I struggled a lot in the cromwell V, I can't count how many times I got 1 shotted early game trying to early cap, then got out of the game with 0 kills.

 

Maybe you shouldn't go for the cap early ? Flank ? It's what a cruiser tank is made for. Anyway it's true that british tanks are not Point'n'click german Tigers, it's mainly because the post-pen damage are very low. Hope that someday we will get a buff on those sweet APCBC / APDS.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, StalkerSoC said:

Maybe you shouldn't go for the cap early ? Flank ? It's what a cruiser tank is made for. Anyway it's true that british tanks are not Point'n'click german Tigers, it's mainly because the post-pen damage are very low. Hope that someday we will get a buff on those sweet APCBC / APDS.

Yea I know, but I was very reckless then, I also used to do very dangerous flanking manuvers that led to my death most of the time, but I started trying to be more passive and think more before I advance, I realized that it's not good to always be the meat shield for my team, is spawning first as an SPAA is a good idea? I can try to go for the cap then If I died I can respawn with a sherman 2 or a cromwell.

I'm not a bad player in most aspects, Im good at sniping, I am able to shoot targets on the move from far ranges, I usually am able to snap-shot Pz.IV's Gunners(popping out of cover shooting then going back behind), but positioning is my only weakness, and I think im improving.

Edited by ImDoneFor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ImDoneFor said:

Yea I know, but I was very reckless then, I also used to do very dangerous flanking manuvers that led to my death most of the time, but I started trying to be more passive and think more before I advance, I realized that it's not good to always be the meat shield for my team, is spawning first as an SPAA is a good idea? I can try to go for the cap then If I died I can respawn with a sherman 2 or a cromwell.

I'm not a bad player in most aspects, Im good at sniping, I am able to shoot targets on the move from far ranges, I usually am able to snap-shot Pz.IV's Gunners(popping out of cover shooting then going back behind), but positioning is my only weakness, and I think im improving.

What I usually do in 4.0 BR is that I go for Achilles (I got both premium, so for me It mostly do the whole game in RB), with the Achilles I'am able to take out the most armored foes; going for any German tank hunter then moving to Pz.IV F2. When I battle against russian I make Kv-1 a priority since the Achilles high pen get them fairly quickly, then I focus T-34. If both my Achilles dies, I get the Cromwell 1 out. And last maybe you should go for Sherman II/Churchill Mk II, I often don't go that far since I survive pretty well in the Achilles.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, StalkerSoC said:

What I usually do in 4.0 BR is that I go for Achilles (I got both premium, so for me It mostly do the whole game in RB), with the Achilles I'am able to take out the most armored foes; going for any German tank hunter then moving to Pz.IV F2. When I battle against russian I make Kv-1 a priority since the Achilles high pen get them fairly quickly, then I focus T-34. If both my Achilles dies, I get the Cromwell 1 out. And last maybe you should go for Sherman II/Churchill Mk II, I often don't go that far since I survive pretty well in the Achilles.

Yea, I was going to do that, but I really want to play with the sherman II now, reasons are, I like the HE filler on the m61 shell, I want to get used to shermans so I have an easier time with the firefly (maybe?), and I like the sherman a lot for some reason, I want to have fun and train before I get to 5,0 BR, it's a pain from what I'v heard, I do pretty good with the Achilles, my KDR is 2 to 1 maybe, but I have a harder time with medium tanks like the Cromwell and the Sherman, So I wanna get used to them.

Edited by ImDoneFor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ImDoneFor said:

Yea, I was going to do that, but I really want to play with the sherman II now, reasons are, I like the HE filler on the m61 shell, I want to get used to shermans so I have an easier time with the firefly (maybe?), and I like the sherman a lot for some reason, I want to have fun and train before I get to 5,0 BR, it's a pain from what I'v heard, I do pretty good with the Achilles, my KDR is 2 to 1 maybe, but I have a harder time with medium tanks like the Cromwell and the Sherman, So I wanna get used to them.

Yeah 5.0 is painful, the firefly is the most painful thing I've ever played in my life. I have rushed the 5.0 br to get Rank IV tanks, and I'am happy about this decision. If you want to play in 5.0 Br go for the Comet, at least you won't suffer as much as the firefly with the APDS.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29 December 2016 at 6:44 AM, Razielkaine said:

id seen this argument before when the brits came out and the conquerors gun was mislabeled and other things.  the ammo issue came up but sources were found that showed it was legit.  i didnt look into it personally.

 

Nope, no sources where found.

 

120mm L37 HESH is a complete fabrication, it did not exist.

 

However the true round, L31 HESH is still in service and information is restricted, therefore no way of submitting sources to prove the true stats.

 

Gaijin created a HESH round brcause the Chieftain needed one and took thd opportunity to create thier own stats for it.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.