in the Image you can clearly tell they are much thicker then the brens
im 90% certain they will be 7.62mm M1919 Machine guns, as those were the guns fitted to the hull of the standard Lee’s and Grant’s (if they had them)
really?
correct but I voted yes cause why not?
1 Like
What are those holes supposed to be for then?
dunno but they are missing on this one.
which is the Grant model
machine guns that are currently removed also that’s not a normal M3 lee
which Image?
second one is an m3 lee (usa) and the holes are for removed machine guns, first one was likely British IDK but it looks f’ed up
There where Several diffrent ones of the first one. Apparently it’s the American models of the welded Hull instead of riveted.
They were 2 driver fired .30 cals. Many early M3 and M4 mediums had this. Not unique to this vehicle. Though they were never used because they were useless.
Ah.
Soviet M3.
M3 in what I assume is North Africa.
Ditto.
Sherman Michael. It’s hard to find many Sherman’s with them as they were deleted very quickly in production.
Thats my thoughts on that sherman
Here’s a better photo with both guns actually fitted. Likely US testing.
Ah yes America adding an unesscary amount of machine guns cause we can.
The difference between this Grant ARV’s 7.7mm Bren MGs and the M13 MGMC’s 50cals is night and day. The dual 50cals have adequate combined RoF, deal far greater damage against planes, and they have the penetration needed to kill or at least disable many low rank tanks. That’s why you don’t see people complaining about the existence of the M13 MGMC, but do see backlash to this suggestion.
Due to WT’s emphasis on direct combat over other aspects of war, like logistics and intelligence, not every vehicle with an armament is fit for the game. You can give the Grant ARV all the gimmicks in the world, but at the absolute best, it will still be a barely-workable, unfun support vehicle.
1 Like