Sirchby

tanks/vehicles
M36B2 Jackson (M3A1): Modernized Tank Hunter

M36B2 (M3A1)   59 members have voted

  1. 1. Should M36B2 (M3A1) be added to the game?

    • Yes. U.S. Ground Forces Tech Tree is running very low on tank destroyers
      58
    • No. No need for more American vehicles
      1
  2. 2. What status should it be?

    • Regular: There is simply not enough American regular tank destroyer
      56
    • Premium: America needs to have the most Tier 4 premium in the game
      1
    • Event: Don't want to see a lot of this tank destroyer in game even if it's mass produced & saw combat
      2
  3. 3. Should M36B2 (M3A1) have additional .30 cal on top of the turret?

    • Yes. It looks good on top of it. Just like Fury
      49
    • No. It's not important
      10

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

74 posts in this topic

1 minute ago, Wilhuff_Tarkin_ said:

Are there any other besides that one and M60A2 and sheridan ?

Yes. Some of them get . . . interesting.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mercedes4321 said:

Yes. Some of them get . . . interesting.

But are there any other than that?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Wilhuff_Tarkin_ said:

Are there any other besides that one and M60A2 and sheridan ?

M113 w/ Dragon ATGM and M150 TOW.

There's also the IFVs that need not be named if we go more modern w/ IFVs of all nations at top tiers.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Wilhuff_Tarkin_ said:

But are there any other than that?

Well there is an M113 with the M47 Dragon, an M113 with 4 SS.11s, an M113 with a TOW launcher on top and I gave even seen an M113 with an extending arm that has an ATGM on top (I forget which one though). As you may have noticed, they are pretty much all M113 based.

0

Share this post


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

M113 w/ Dragon ATGM and M150 TOW.

Exposed gunner kinda disqualifies them.

I think we would have to stick with M901 but in few variants for US top ATGM.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Wilhuff_Tarkin_ said:

Exposed gunner kinda disqualifies them.

Considering the exposed nature of most SPAAs and open-top TD's, no way.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Retry said:

Considering the exposed nature of most SPAAs and open-top TD's, no way

I wouldn't mind them. But I said that from Gaijins perspective. All ATGM carries currently in game have loading mechanisms.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wilhuff_Tarkin_ said:

300 mm pen. HEAT-FS can't fight at 7.0 ?

M36     -  5.7

M36B1 - 6.0

M36B2 - 6.3

M36B2 with HEAT-FS at 6.7-7.0

M56     7.3

M50     7.3

M901   8.0

 

 

That if it indeed has 305 mm penetration.

If not?

 

That M36B2 (M3) - 6.3 slot will be replaced with M36B2 (M3A1) to support the M46 at lower BR.

 

But if M348 is repaired as it actually is, both M36B2 & M46 are safe to enter 6.7 & 7.0 respectively.

 

M36B2 (M3) doesn't offer any advantages over M36 to be placed in 6.3 which will only repeat another M36 BR 6.3 problem.

Also, it's redundant, again.

 

(Maybe downtiering T95 to Ferdinand level at 6.3 is a better choice. Damn slow 13 km/h gun carriage doesn't do any good at 6.7. Just look at the T28.)

 

3 hours ago, Wilhuff_Tarkin_ said:

T95 should be moved to Heavy tank branch as it was later renamed "T28 Super Heavy Tank" not Tank destroyer or GMC, SPG.

 

T95 should not be in heavy tank branch as there are already some important heavy tanks slot entering 6.0 - 7.0 without T95 to disrupt the research progress.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sirchby said:

T95 should not be in heavy tank branch as there are already some important heavy tanks slot entering 6.0 - 7.0 without T95 to disrupt the research progress.

It shouldn't be in a geme in a first place, it's rubbish and hardly anybody plays it... hardly anybody has patience to play it. I would place it in Heavy tank branch behind T34 or T30 it won't disrupt anything anybody who would want to get it will, aybody who don't will skip it. Problem solved.

 

As for the M36 you're right with everything it's not as good as M46 or even M26 but game gives us opportunity to balance vehicles by ammo avaliable. At some point in a Tech Tree you have to move from "classic" WW2 style gameplay to post war era HEAT-FS type of gameplay.

I see M36B2 (with 305mm pen HEAT) and let's say M46A1 (with HEAT too) a decent "transition" tanks between rank IV and V. They will be still penetrateable for their WW2 opponents while fully spaded capable to fight T-44s, T-44-100, Early T-54s, Is-3 etc.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Wilhuff_Tarkin_ said:

It shouldn't be in a geme in a first place, it's rubbish and hardly anybody plays it... hardly anybody has patience to play it. I would place it in Heavy tank branch behind T34 or T30 it won't disrupt anything anybody who would want to get it will, aybody who don't will skip it. Problem solved.

 

Barely someone play it because its exploding mine cupola.

 

I assure you 8/10 will play T95 again with its cupola "automatic bounce mechanical weakspot" removed.

 

9 minutes ago, Wilhuff_Tarkin_ said:

As for the M36 you're right with everything it's not as good as M46 or even M26 but game gives us opportunity to balance vehicles by ammo avaliable. At some point in a Tech Tree you have to move from "classic" WW2 style gameplay to post war era HEAT-FS type of gameplay.

I see M36B2 (with 305mm pen HEAT) and let's say M46A1 (with HEAT too) a decent "transition" tanks between rank IV and V. They will be still penetrateable for their WW2 opponents while fully spaded capable to fight T-44s, T-44-100, Early T-54s, Is-3 etc.

 

This kind of problem is getting way out of my reach, & I will only focus on passing this tank destroyer first.

"BR / Period issues" comes last.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sirchby said:

Barely someone play it because its exploding mine cupola.

 

I assure you 8/10 will play T95 again with its cupola "automatic bounce mechanical weakspot" removed.

I don't think they ever change the cupola thing be ever removed, I belive it's a "balance" weakspot to make sure it's not OP or something.

7 minutes ago, Sirchby said:

This kind of problem is getting way out of my reach, & I will only focus on passing this tank destroyer first.

"BR / Period issues" comes last.

Fine.

I like to thing about Tech Trees as a whole. I remebmer back in a days I struggle in M47 against T-54s wihout HEAT-FS. Having those rounds a little bit earlier and easier at lower BR seams a good idea to me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2017 at 0:09 PM, Results45 said:

If this gets HEAT-FS, I'm gibbing it for BR 6.3 :yes_yes_yes: :good:

 

 

I read somewhere that the US HEAT-"FS" is actually just the HEATwith 210mm of pen. It makes sense since it shares the cannon of the M46 and it only gets the 210mm pen HEAT. If someone can clarify or correct me, please do!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, PcBit said:

 

I read somewhere that the US HEAT-"FS" is actually just the HEATwith 210mm of pen. It makes sense since it shares the cannon of the M46 and it only gets the 210mm pen HEAT. If someone can clarify or correct me, please do!

 

Read the whole 3 pages first.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

44 minutes ago, Sirchby said:

 

Read the whole 3 pages first.

 
 

 

yeaaaaaah just did that... I gotta read before I speak. So the 210mm penetrating HEAT is supposed to be 300mm?

 

Answering me might just be wasting space on the thread and I now understand the error in the shell.

Edited by PcBit
0

Share this post


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

 

yeaaaaaah just did that... I gotta read before I speak. So the 210mm penetrating HEAT is supposed to be 300mm?

 

Yes.

An early HEAT-FS.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1 

This has my support !

I also have some suggestions on where to place the M36B2 along with the other M36's on the tech tree.

 

590110117007c_Capture1.jpg.3183c54585ee9

M36

Rank: III or IV

BR: 5.7

59011047f0aff_Capture2.jpg.b2cc34b3fd46f

M36B1

Rank: IV

BR: 6.0

5901107a8914c_Capture3.jpg.e5d465d41366b

M36B2

Rank: IV

BR: 6.3

 

(Armor is a bit thin to go up against Rank IV vehicles. Puls the ASU-85 is at BR 6.3 on the Russain tank tree and has a 300mm HEAT-FS shell.) 

 

 

 

Edited by Capt_D_K_Marcus
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. with @Capt_D_K_Marcus on this one.  Other nations already have better armed vehicles at those BR's.  It would also depends on RoF fire, if Gaijin ever decides to re evaluate the RoF of US 90mm Guns. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Conraire said:

I agree. with @Capt_D_K_Marcus on this one.  Other nations already have better armed vehicles at those BR's.  It would also depends on RoF fire, if Gaijin ever decides to re evaluate the RoF of US 90mm Guns. 

 

8 RPM, at standard.

0

Share this post


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

8 RPM, at standard.

 

In comparison, L7A3 should be 10rpm with maximum-skilled loader (burst rate so should be reduced to 8rpm after a certain number of consecutive shots).

Edited by Results45
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Results45 said:

 

In comparison, L7A3 should be 10rpm with maximum-skilled loader (burst rate so should be reduced to 8rpm after a certain number of consecutive shots).

 

That is its maximum RoF.
While 8 RPM for M3-based guns is a standard sustained RoF, with 15 RPM at maximum.

 

 

But I agree that Expert should have sustained RoF while Ace should have maximum RoF.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the problems with the M36 series TD's in game is current max reload aced is 9.5seconds.  A full 2 seconds higher than the sustained max reload for the gun.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sirchby said:

 

That is its maximum RoF.
While 8 RPM for M3-based guns is a standard sustained RoF, with 15 RPM at maximum.

 

But I agree that Expert should have sustained RoF while Ace should have maximum RoF.

 

I mean even after Ace/Maxed/Expert crew the burst rate of 10-15rpm should only be within 3 to 5 shots one right after the other before being reduced to a sustained rate of 8rpm.

 

And from experience, Ace is kinda like mods where you have to get it for each tank while maxing-out or Expert crew takes way longer.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Results45 said:

 

I mean even after Ace/Maxed/Expert crew the burst rate of 10-15rpm should only be within 3 to 5 shots one right after the other before being reduced to a sustained rate of 8rpm.

 

Or make it RNG instead.

 

5 hours ago, Results45 said:

And from experience, Ace is kinda like mods where you have to get it for each tank while maxing-out or Expert crew takes way longer.

 

Not that close.

It's like researching the tank itself. But costs twice the point.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.