Oh mate, that is completely incorrect.
That is a straight example of ‘myth by Gaijin’.
Imagine that we literally left things at Dunkirk and Americans gave ammunition for 75mm M2/M3 that can also be used in OQF 75mm
Do you really think that we dump the APHE version of M61 APCBC into Dover offshore and illogically captivated to use Solid shot version of M61 APCBC only?
You can find proofs that we used those in the discussion thread about that
It is not us who didn’t use APHE
It is Gaijin that didn’t give us APHE
“OH TECH TREE UNIQUENESS IS IMPORTANT AND 17/20PDR DOESN’T HAVE APHE, SO- Remove APHE from OQF 75mm and only keeping those in Sherman II and Churchill NA75 that uses 75mm M3.”
it was done on occasion, as APHE didnt really give much benefit over a solid shot shell, and thats if the fuse even worked (aphe fuses were notoriously unreliable) but we still very much used the APHE in our QF75mms and m3 75mms.
“APHE shells for tank guns, although used by most forces of this period, were not used by the British. The only British APHE projectile for tank use in this period was the Shell AP, Mk1 for the 2 pdr anti-tank gun and this was dropped as it was found that the fuze tended to separate from the body during penetration.”
Since the british evaluations of APHE were poor, it makes sense that, when the british used M61 and other aphe rounds, the he filler was removed just due to how expensive the explosive fillers were.
Hmm, not a single inert M61 APCBC shot found here, only M61 APCBC/HE. By April 1944 the British were solely using APHE with their 75mm guns, because that’s what they got from the US.
The difference is the British didn’t make anymore APHE rounds after the 3-Pdr and 2-Pdr, they still happily used what was delivered.
It’s kinda funny that the later war British tanks with the QF 75 have a better claim to US APHE rounds than their earliest Shermans used in North Africa.
A big issue I have with the current implementation of “copy” vehicles is that, in many cases, they actually should have distinguishing features that could set them apart from their preexisting counterparts, at the very least visually. These little features can offer something for players to get invested in, which is exactly what I’d think Gajin would want for a new addition they might’ve spent a good chunk of time and resources modeling.
But routinely, effort is not invested into modeling these distinctions. This illustrates a lack of care or forethought behind the addition of these redundant vehicles, making it more difficult to believe that there is a deeper rationale to their addition beyond just checking a box. At that point, pushback to redundant vehicles is only natural when the playerbase feels their concerns or requests are disregarded.
Here’s some specific examples just to illustrate my point:
The Finnish T-34 is missing various external modifications and German/Finnish ammunition
The Leopard 1BE is missing its Belgian ammunition [Link]
The Washington B.Mk.1 is missing its British ordnance [Link] and is unable to use its ground radar
By extension, just about every US plane in the British tree should be able to use British bombs, but they are largely limited to their US ordnance currently
The Israeli Imp.Chaparral is missing a front pintle mg [Link]
I know, it’s hilarious. This is why I wish Gaijin put more years next to vehicles and then limited them to that ammunition.
You could have a Sherman II (1942) with M72 Shot and M61 Shot, then you could have a Sherman II (1944) with the M61 Shell. Plus all the other differences like smoke launchers, better rotor shield, quick-fix applique or large hatch casting, eliminating the gunners turret weakspot, etc.
the m44 didnt fill any gap the dicker max and sturer emil were already there + putting a different gun on a chassis that has already been in the game for years (nashorn) can not be that hard for you guys to do
Ohhhh I seee! So thats why the Sd.Kfz.234/4, Fw 189 A-1, Ar 196 A-3, VK 45.01 (if we have the panther prototype, why not the Tiger?), Sturmtiger, Sd.Kfz.251/22, Sd.Kfz.234/1, Sd.Kfz.234/3, Panzer III N (which the Italians get in their TT for some reason. It should be premium for them, not us), Sd.Kfz.140/1, and plenty more vehicles in other Tech trees like the M8 LAC for America. How bout you guys do some good copy and paste and put some of these in the TT. Germany needs the Sd.Kfz.234/4, cause the Sd.Kfz.234/2 is good and all, but that gun isn’t the best at 5.7. Just slap a cool camo on the premium ones and give it some division attached to its name, like the T-34 1st Guards Tank Brigade.
In the case of the M44 and M55 they made the decision to add them to all possible trees. For Germany they don’t help much, but for other trees they are more useful.
