we’ve been using 105mm howitzers since before ww2
2 Likes
They had Howitzers in the Napoleonic war but it has nothing to do with War Thunder old chap.
The M52 SPH began production in 1951, and was based on the M41 Walker bulldog chassis.
In summary, do your research before spouting off inaccurate statements.
1 Like
Yes that is 6 years after WW2 ended and and as long as WW2 actually was. Like saying a BT5 is a Pershing. 6 years is a long time in tank development.
Personally, i would see this maybe being a 5.7 (without HEAT), or 6.0-6.3 with HEAT (same as M4 105), due to its poor protection and rather large silhouette.
Ehhhhhh. Technically speaking, by the time it began production and entered service, it was deployed alongside late WWII-era tanks. So, from a gameplay perspective, it’d make sense to stick it at 5.7-6.0. After all, it’s just a lighter, less armored, and more mobile M4A3 (105). It really shouldn’t affect gameplay too much.
1 Like
Hopefully not
Did you not read anything he said? The M4A3 105 has similar firepower at a much lower BR, with far better armor.
I don’t think the game is going to suffer by not having this .Thanks anyway.
I don’t think the game would suffer much without any of the Tiger tanks. It’s a good thing the game doesn’t rely on such opinions.
It’s a good thing it doesn’t rely on your opinions
So what’s the point of you even coming to these posts and acting a fool by doomsaying? War Thunder was never a historically accurate WW2 game, and never will be.
you really wanna put this thing up against T-34-85 D-5T and T-34-85 lol, Also make it play against tigers?? How would it even kill anything if the M109G already exists at that BR range?
1 Like
I am not the only one who feels that way.Many are mourning the death of WW2 vehicles in lower tiers due to the flood ill fitting vehicles.
1 Like
No thank you. It’s just a faster but less armored M4A3 (105) that also has limited turret traverse. It’s mobility isn’t even that fantastic despite being on a Bulldog. It’s just barely on par with the Chaffee, which isn’t good for something of this size and armor thickness. No greater than 4.7 WITH HEAT. At 6.0, it’d be worse than all of its contemporaries by far.
1 Like
Death of WW2 vehicles? What WW2 vehicles are dead?
German heavies still have FANTASTIC guns and volumetric-bug-prone armor. As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, the Tiger’s 88mm Pzgr shell overpressures anything it pens, and even if the Tiger II can’t quite do the same that 88mm is still amazing and fires quickly to boot.
Russian heavies tend to be armored to hell and back, even bigger volumetric masses, and have downright apocalyptic HE filler for their APHE as well as wacky sloped/angle pen.
Mediums of both nations are pretty damn good, with the Panther having a trolly mantlet + yet another amazing sniper gun and T-34s/44s generally having good guns and workable armor
4.7 With HEAT? You want this thing to face T-34-57s which would 1. reload wayyyy faster 2. have good enough armor to stop most shells and 3. This is the same tier Flakbus exists at and Dikie max is very good at; don’t ruin the ballance :)
BR 5.7 and ruin the BR more
I agree with that ,It’s just observation and well put
I just have to ask you ,do you even play this game at 6-7 BR ? To to even ask this question?
Yes 4.7 with HEAT because it would be even worse at 5.0 to 6.0. 130mm of crappy HEAT pen is not enough to fight Panthers, Tigers, and IS-1/2s let alone vehicles with more reactive ability. That’s without even considering uptiers.
It being at a similar BR as the FlakBus and Dicker Max is irrelevant. Those vehicles trade mobility and armor for consistent and massive damage output. The M52 trades consistent and massive damage output for mobility. The M52 simply has nothing worth putting it at 5.7.
1 Like