Sharknado.
Fun fact.It’s a hugely destructive artillery round that shouldnt be directly fired in a tank game. 60s 80s artillery firing at WW2 tanks is ridiculous
Been playing the israeli M-51 a bit today for the battlepass thingy.
It’s nowhere extensive experience but…
That thing? It doesn’t shoot heat-fs. It shoots HEAT, with all the ballistics issues it has.
You know what else shoots HEAT? The 3.0 Pz III N!
3.0 german permium has 3.3 second aced reload rate, 100 mm pen at any distance at moderate angles. It has significant bullet drop, but at 3.0 that’s not that big of a deal. The post-pen is horrible, but we got 3 seconds of reload - we can easily place 2-3 shots before a KV-1S finished reloading their second shell
Anyway.
M-51. It fires HEAT shells, not HEAT-FS. The post-pen is basically the same as if I was using a challenger with APDS, with the added benefit that it OPs open-top vehicles without ammo switching.
The challenger can frontally pen tigers easily and has a 5.1 second reload rate at 5.3 BR and is about as survivable as an M-51 to getting hit by its peers. The M-51 has better reverse and the gun feels less bouncy, but otherwise feels about comparable in mobility (its frontal speed sucks compared to chally and comet) while being a significantly bigger target. The challenger is a WW2 tank.
Now, let’s look at the Charioteer. It’s a post-war tank, so I suppose we should remove it from WW2 BRs as well. It’s an even later design than the centurions (1948 for the 7.7 mk3, in fact! Charioteer is 1952 at 6.3)
The charioteer’s gun has basically the same pen as the M-51, it just falls off faster at moderate angling but it’s not like 308 mm is not gonna be enough even against an angled surface provided you don’t get a shell shatter.
So I ask.
What’s so bad about the Israeli M-51 that tigers complain about it, when the Challenger can achieve the same and a charioteer even outperform it? Because the charioteer, in addition to being able to penetrate an angled tiger anywhere from 500 meters, is also incredibly fast to the point it can compete in 7.7 matches as back up for cent mk3?
Playing the M-51 to me felt like playing a weaker british WW2 tank in terms of firepower.
1 Like
Why shouldn’t it be directly fired? Did the makers of SPH allow their guns to depress to direct-fire angles for no reason?
What’s so overpowered about this 60s-80s artillery? Their armor? No, .50 cals can pen it and detonate their massive ammoracks. Meanwhile, T30 is a heavily armored WW2 tank with the same round…
Their guns? Firing WW2 ammo…
Their mobility? It’s alright, but in combination with almost no negative gun depression and slow-turning turrets it means they struggle in using it.
1 Like
My only real complaint about artillery is the same as milk trucks. They can eat shells without it hindering their performance. However, as seen with Sholef - gaijin is trying to fix that by actually filling in all that empty space with machinery and fragile things to break.
4 Likes
HEAT rounds and HEAT-FS rounds use the same post-pen damage effects.
For all intents and purposes there is no difference in damage or penetration between the M-51’s HEAT and something like a Leopard 1 105 mm HEAT-FS.
Proof
Edit: Additionally the HEAT-FS damage preset has multipliers which depend on residual penetration and caliber.
Since both those values end up shared between the M-51’s HEAT and the Leo 1’s HEAT-FS (both have identical penetration and caliber), again there is no difference in damage.
Yes, explosive filler does not matter for HEAT damage.
3 Likes
Still, HEAT as a technology has demonstrably existed in WW2 with the Pz3 carrying one. I’ll concede they do deal the same damage, but heat-fs feels like it arcs much less.
I’ve had a game on sands of sinai where I was basically lobbing HEAT shells in the m-51 like some artillery from behind a sand dune when aiming for ~500 meter distance.
With the charioteer’s APDS, you barely need to account for drop at such distances.
I mean british apds are basically railguns
Well yeah. 105 mm HEAT-FS is significantly faster (1174 m/s compared to 800 m/s).
The M-51 specifically fires the same rounds as those of the AMX-30 but slower because they made the casings smaller (likely to make reloading inside the Sherman turret easier).
However the Charioteer (specifically the 84 mm) is significantly less accurate. And that’s not really something you can account for, it’s just completely RNG.
Just as an example, the 84 mm has almost 3 times the maximum dispersion of the M-51’s cannon, 0.06 degrees vs 0.021.
4 Likes
Thanks !!! but sadly even showing this the legion of incompetent M51 players can still repeating the M51 HEAT is worse and useless and blablabla.
It is not worse or useless, however it’s on a much worse platform.
The M51’s gun rocks like a cradle, it has terrible armor, and mediocre mobility. It’s not stabilized at low speeds like other M4s, it is literally just a gun platform.
1 Like
And all this BS is based on what??? in your ZERO battles played with M51???
M51 is a beast for his BR and should be move up.
What he said is true. The gun is just really good. And yes it should get moved up.
1 Like
Congrats on a great game but this isn’t evidence that the tanks needs to be moved up a BR.
1 Like
In not only one great game.
KV-1s can face a tank can lolpen and oneshot T-54s for God sake!!!
This tank have a overall good perform and is insane 5.0 heavy tanks can face this abomination. This tank and m109 need move up asap!!!
1 Like
This a Poor as heck argument,
I do not think that when the Tiger II or Jagdtiger for example of Heavy/breakthrough Tanks, were being built they were in the knowledge of HEAT or HEAT-FS with 200-400mm of pen
e.g.
e.g.
e.g
Vsing this in a WW2 tank where most of the players are enjoyers of WW2-era tanks and then we make them not fight Cold War-era tanks is silly.
It is not unreasonable for us to accept that WW2 should be split from Cold War-era tanks,
This Miss match of WW2 and Cold War era tank battles makes the players of WW2 feel outclassed in the game of Armor as they have a Tank that relies on the armor to make it work,
I see no difference in that argument when people say Non-thermal tanks vsing Termal equipped tanks or Lazer rangefinders vs non-lazer rangefinders,
it’s not much fun when you are so outclassed by someone and there is almost nothing one can do to defend oneself.
I will agree best armor is not being seen then not getting hit then not getting penetrated then not being killed if penetrated. but if there is such a mismatch of tanks and capabilities then that whole saying in the game setting doesn’t mean much.
2 Likes
Which ones? Only ones i know of are the german upgunned one and the new swedish one. I dont think any tech tree kv1 can see it.
1 Like
Yeah, but the KV-1s can also lol-pen the M-51.
1 Like
Kv-1 can lolpen RU-251 so lets move the RU to 6.0 right??? Stop using that stupid argument please.
But you started it… am I mssing something?
KV-1s can face a tank can lolpen and oneshot T-54s for God sake!!!
1 Like