It is massive, I learned not to angle the hard way when I got penned by some stuart at that spot. People are not dumb and know where to hit.
I’ll stand by my comment that has been removed… Where does CAS come into the equation when you’re having trouble with the tank itself…
This flagging of comments is actually being abused and I find it absolutely dumb that we can’t call people out for throwing absolute ‘whatsboutisms’ into ANY debate that isn’t pandering to thier absolute victimhood…
Absolute ignorance, and merely arguing to keep the argument going.
(False flagging as per the usual…)
3 Likes
Well then if your comments get flagged, maybe you should consider changing them or even stop being rude to everyone you’re talking to.
I wasn’t actually rude, but the CAS comment was a whataboutism when we’re talking of how to survive with the M6A1, and the flagging was genuinely abuse…
1 Like
Maybe you don’t want to be, but most of your posts always end up getting rude to a vast majority of people.
That, for example, feels like a personnal attack to anyone that disagrees with you, so that lead inevitably to flagging.
I agree that flagging is out of control as it appears that two flags is enough for the comment to be hidden, but maybe you’d have less problems if your comments didn’t appear as general insults.
Because the issue is the ignoring of the points raised…
The post that got removed was about a CAS ‘response’ to being told to hide the tank from the shots from a tank, in a tank thread…
The continuance of the argument gets tired after a while especially when you’re nitpicking the advice constantly, then throwing out a ‘OH BUT WHAT ABOUT THE PLANE BOMBING YOU!’…
It literally shows there is no counter to the argument to have someone try and bring that into it.
And as I said, there’s no insults, it’s just you misconstruing them for the sake of it.
I got flagged for saying ‘your ignorance leads you to die’ when it’s about the ignorance of the mechanic, but someone reported that as an abuse… Which is not my actual problem, and whoever flagged it and whoever removed it, should’ve read more of the thread rather than trusting the flagging from those who were being responded to, and referred to.
1 Like
M6A1 is fine at 5.0.
1 Like
By what metrics
Despite being a heavy tank, that designation is misleading. It’s not a tank that relies on its armor.
It has superior acceleration to the M4A1 (76) while still having the stabilized 76 mm, in addition to the 37 mm and additional hull .50 cal machineguns.
Having a 3 km/h lower top speed doesn’t matter much because the M6 can simply get up to speed faster in the first place.
So it overall has quite decent mobility coupled with the very workable 76 mm cannon.
2 Likes
Yes everyone who plays it understands this. Irrelevant of how it needs to be played being classified as a heavy tank means not having access to artillery. Being a heavy tank without effective armor means you’re left with its other features. Its other features are no better than a medium sherman w/ a 76mm.
It can not turn on a dime.
This is factually incorrect compared to the vehicles its facing. The only tanks its mobility is comparable to is the PZ IVs and those you stop facing at ~4.0
Marginal and niche weaponry does not justify its placement at 5.0
The M3 Lee has a 75mm and a 37mm, should it be 3.7?
You can lolpen any American tank other than the Jumbo and facing Soviet flat armor you have a very capable APCR round. Your refusal to utilize it does not change the tank’s equipment.
With less armor, worse mobility, and much less pen.
I don’t play boring nations. I do fight it quite often around that BR range.
M6 is fine at 5.0 but i would much rather see it at 4.7 because it’s far from OP and also because there’s no 5.0 lineup
I disagree it is outclassed by all of its contemporaries.
not at all it’s got good firepower, .50 cals, a stabilizer and good mobility
but it would be better at 4.7
So does the KV-85, the VK 3002 (M), the ARL-44, the Tiger H, the Panther D, the IS-1, the Avenger, the T-34-85, the only single heavy at its range that it performs better than is the Churchill VII which is one of those really annoying to balance tanks because its armor is just too good but its gun is really poor.
The M6A1 is a M4A1 (76) W with marginally better armor and a 37mm secondary gun. For this it should be classified as a heavy. It does not justify a 0.3 BR increase over the tank it is equal to.
1 Like
APCR is useless. You dont know that becuase you never played before.
M6 have better movility and more pen.
Thats is not a valid excuse, you are extremly biased and for that you think the German one is superior when is similar or worst in several aspects.
Both are fine in 5.0 and KV-85 should join to 5.0 aswell.
1 Like
lol
lol!
Better armor, better pen, I was actually wrong on mobility it has worse hp/t
“fine” isn’t a strong argument for denying access to a lineup imo
Your interpretations based on your problems with it, doesn’t make anyone elses opinions less based.
1 Like
Considering the VK is a medium while the M6 is supposed to be a heavy tank.
“worse armor” its 60mm angled at 55 degrees giving it 100mm of effective thickness, The M6 is 82mm angled at 20 giving it 88mm effective aside from the few volumetric traps near the hull MG.
Thats also ignoring the hull corner weakspots.
Turret armor is not that different, its 2 50.8mm plates on the M6 vs 1 100mm plate on the VK
Sides on the M6 are only 4mm thicker.
The VK has RHA on the ufp while the M6 is CHA, CHA is 6% weaker than RHA.
It has better hull armor with similar turret armor.
“less crew” its off by just 1, 5 vs 6 crew wont make that big of a difference most of the time when getting penned by any APHE, Especially with how the crew are a little more tightly packed in the M6 than the the VK.
2 Likes
People are used to the fact German WW2 mediums have better frontal armor profile than some heavies from other nations, while still retaining benefits that medium tanks have.
1 Like