Would the Hungarian 40M Nimród have a place in the game in your opinion?
I mean, its like, 70-80% copy paste, but if it is/was needed, I’m sure it would be fine, but its just an L60 Anti-II
1 Like
Guys we are talking about US TT SPAA.
1 Like
Need to get the M163A2 PIVADS w/ MK149 APDS rounds for 8.3. The APDS rounds increase range a bit but I think the penetration would be around ~60mm, still, every bit counts.
1 Like
-
You are not a moderator
-
That was a single reply, no more over that
-
There’s not many mid-range SPAA’s for USA
Want some vehicles that could be added, here’s two?
T249 Vigalante 35mm rotary gun system, a prototype only, and not enclosed
MIM-46 Mauler, a cancelled prototype vehicle, not fielded, in preference for the VADS
those are the only possible additions, as the rest are either multi-peice, or non-self-propelled
2 Likes
Don’t forget the XM701 GLAADS
2 Likes
Woah chillax dude, you have been talking about more than once. Thats why i said that. But thanks for the extra vehicle suggestions. I would love to see the t249 ingame
What would you suggest to fill the gaps? The T77 (AA Chaffee) might be useful
6 50 cals.
Gets difficult when the jets come in though for all shell firing SPAA.
4 Likes
These vietnam era US SPAAs are quite good vs ground units, since they got 70+ mm pen. Enough to kill alot of common enemy tanks from the side or even frontally. Vs air not so bright, but nothing is perfect. Others might throw more lead into the sky, but are stuck with 49mm pen, which is not enough to reliably pen tank sides.
The question is what is better for a nation’s tech tree? It might be very advantegeous to have SPAAs which might serve as tank hunters. You need these magical 70mm+ pen to be effective vs. most ground units. US has it at rather conviniant BRs. Rus has it. France has it.
Ger for instance has just 49mm / 50mm pen for almost all SPAAs up to 6.0 BR. You fail to pen most tank sides with just 50mm pen. On the other hand Ger SPAAs are more effective vs. air than M-42 derivatives. Guess you can’t have both. Would be unblanced to have both features.
Not in Vietnam , North Vietnam won on 30 April 1975. 40mm VT shells started production some time in that same year.
But the M-42 was in service with the US National guard until 1988, Austria until 1992 and Japan until 1994 (along with several other nations that used them until between 1985 to 89). There are also Thailand, Tunisia, Greece and Taiwan that are listed as using it, but do not have a date of decommission so its possible that they are still in service, or at least maintained as reserve or training equipment .
So I would be surprised if non-of them at least tried using VT rounds in it during that time.
What if they give US more opportunities to leverage air superiority, as it was meant to be
I’m sure they will but I think the spawn cost for achieving the air superiority 600+ points vs. spawning a ground SPAA wouldn’t be as efficient. Not to mention, not everyone plays both ground and air so it’s leaves some without an option.
Maybe if they made it cost no SP to rearm with different weapons a fighter could clear skies then rearm to support ground, any aircraft gameplay is going to feel more fun and active than spaa, they should really lean into it for US. But for everyone who didn’t research US air tree (which is kinda surprising as to why someone would do that bc where US dominates is the skies and it’s what our military is most famous for) there are all the spaa suggestions on this thread
1 Like
About all they are good for .
Yeah, that too, but uh, issue is how it would be in game, essentially making the C-RAM a better choice (I.e. its a fully-automatic system)
Gaijin is too inconsistent on the whole Could use/ did use thing, given that we have the M-19-A1 and M-42 at the same BR and are, for all practical purposes, identical I would suggest that the M-19 stays as it is and the M-42 gets VT rounds and goes up to somewhere between 5.3 and 6.7 to fill the gap and remove a redundant extra SPAA
1 Like
This.
This works SO much better for the US than the Skink would.
The US never used or ordered the Skink, so it’s why Britain got it as they ordered the Skink.
Yes I know the German Airforce ceased to exist by that point, but my point still stands.
The T77 would be around the same BR as the Skink if we go off of the closed top aspect.
Skink went from 4.7 to 5.3 because it’s armoured (also because Britain moment)
2 Likes
The skink has 20mms and the T77 only has .50 cals. Depending on the targetting speed, i think it would be 5.0 max.
Here’s the 20mm:
And here’s the 50cals:
But yeah, at this point, the 50cals are better, add to the fact there’s 6 of them.
Main downsides to the 50cals would be the reload time.
But yeah, depends on the turret traverse and how armoured the T77 is.
I can see the T77 being around a similar BR to the Skink for sure.
I grabbed the 50cal info from the M16 wiki page.
1 Like
Yeah, but the 20mms hit like a truck when they hit. The .50 cals are not as effective against planes.
Also it depends on the 20mm. The 20mms on the skink is worse than the 20mm oerlikon on other vehicles in that BR range.