And what exactly are you trying to say with that?
That’s a rather hollow statement in the discussion about the performance of the M44.
The Chaffee saw hardly any use in WW2 and I doubt a vehicle on the Chaffee chassis carrying a 155mm would have seen service as well.
At least I never heard of such vehicle.
This whole topic about service time is stupid anyway.
Other than the fact that the M44 simply outperforms any WW2 SPG in terms of either mobility, RoF and shell velocity.
the date of use of a vehicle doesnt mean much in this game, which is a good thing.
It has the same exact round, explosion and almost same velocity as the M109 which is almost three entire battle ratings above it
well, yeah, the M109 comes with the advantage of a rotating turret and technically better survivability.
Hardly makes a difference when technologywise, it’s got WW2 firepower and terrible armor, relying on mobility save its arse (which is a bit more difficult given it’s casemate nature).
Alright, and the Maus simply outperforms any WW2 heavy tank in terms of armor and firepower. The Chaffee outperforms most WW2 light tanks in terms of most stats. The later Pershings outperform most WW2 mediums in terms of survivability and firepower.
The M44 is above pretty much every other WW2 howitzer bar the Sturmtiger and Brumbarr(iirc) BRwise anyways, exactly where it should be.
I have used the British one in Br 7.7 and it has worked quite well for me. M44, Centurion Mk3 and Conqueror, all 50s tanks.
That is your opinion on it. I find them still very relevant and good.
And which of those are able to fulfill their proper roles instead of being hamfisted into something they’re never meant to do? :P
(It’s the M44, having to direct-fire against tanks with far better armor and rates of fire)
…Also, people bring absurdly low-tier tanks to top-tier all the time and do fairly well with them. Does this mean the BT-7 F-32 should be 12.0?
An interesting idea is to add fixed targets like trenches, buildings, etc. that could be destroyed beyond the distance of the map, and that it was with the SPH that you could destroy them. It would be like giving the artillery the same type of use that the bombers have in the air battles.
What I would do is that there would be targets to destroy outside the map, in different areas and each time further away, so that the SPH would have to move around the map to reach those areas, and not be still in the respawn shooting all the time. When breaking an area, another more distant area would appear, which would force the SPH to advance further ahead, with the risk of being attacked.
No, let’s see, it’s clear that they can’t raise the Br that much, but they could a little, since if used well they can be lethal. For example, 155mm tanks with laser rangefinders could have a lot more Br than they have.
Every prototype vehicle always outperforms the competition.
That’s like why they were developed.
Except most of the time their superiority comes at unreasonable expenses or the Soviet Union would have built nothing but Object 279s.
So they stay prototypes, which never saw any mass production.
When the Tiger II or Ferdinand showed up, they also didn’t have any direct competition.
Few months later and it looked different.
A Maus wouldn’t have been a serious threat when 17pdr APDS and 90mm APCR existed.
nope
kinda as the point of Maus and the E100 was to be death machines
All I’m saying.
That’s the general idea but strike aircraft were actually pretty ineffective in destroying tanks.
We are just too used to CAS blown tanks up in WT with bombs, that we forget that there are a lot of mechanism at play which aren’t modeled in the game.
The fourth part is easily the most important part. In a dive the bomb must be released at 1km or more, to give the fighter time to pull up and clear out of the bombs blast.
If the bombs are released to late, the bomb hits the ground too early and it won’t trigger the fuze and bury itself into the ground. Where it will either stay or explode after a delay with much reduced effect.
At low level, bombs will bounce from the ground and will miss any tank sized target, unless the bomb hits the tank directly and is stopped.
In WT bombs will magically stick to the ground the moment they hit the groud.
They will however bounce on water. Which is actually great for accurately hitting ships with bombs.
While rockets can be effective in disabling a tank, they are often not enough to destroy it.
While a gun on the ground can fire at the same target generally over and over, the random damage from cannons or shaped charged rockets from the air, with limited ammunition, is often not enough to destroy the tank out right.
Of course the Maus being as massive as it is, would be much easier to hit by skip bombing at low level and any damage to tracks and wheels would disable the tank much longer than lighter vehicles.