I love using them as a fast jagdpanther to gain ground and wait for the heavies to push up. Such a scary sight for those opposing.
It’s a real shame that Gaijin decided to only introduce the original T1E1 prototype with identical armament to the M6A1 heavy tank with the 76mm and not the unique 90mm T7 cannon plus the coaxial 37mm M5 cannon that was outfitted to one of the T1E1 pilots at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds in 1943.
I hope this could be included as an optional researchable armament modification perhaps in the future for the T1E1.
The U.S Ground Forces tech tree at around mid-tier could benefit well with more 90mm armed tanks at around 5.0-5.7.
1 Like
You could easily suggest that but this is about the current state of the current tree vehicles.
That’s kind of funny to say right now considering the T1E1 we have is basically identical to the M6A1 currently with worse cast hull armor and only a better reverse speed with an electric transmission.
“True that in 1943 the pilot T1E1 was rearmed with a 90mm gun, although that was rejected by the Armored Force and that an even heavier tank, designated M6A2E1 was completed in 1945 with thicker frontal armour and a 105mm gun in an enormous turret, but this was ultimately built to test fire the gun for the proposed T29 heavy tank so it doesn’t really count.”
It had a 76mm, and the 37mm it has in game.
Where does that quote come from?
Either way this topic on the old forum talks more about the M6 heavy tanks, their armor, and specifically the M6A2s with 90 mm cannons.
Of course, i think this is a real “strong” argument :
1 Like
Dismissing 180+mm pen APCR is hilarious, I do not have an argument against someone unwilling to learn how to use the ammunition available to them. It’s like saying HE shells are bad because they have low pen, it’s not my job to educate you on how to overpressure light tanks. I presume someone taking the time to post on this forum has at least basic knowledge of the game.
KV-85 is NOT going back to 5.0. It was landfill material there, I remembered it going jack sh1t at 5.0. It had no line up, KV-1S hull with massive unangleable 40mm weak sopts to the sides, 34 km/h top speed despite using a KV-1S hull, IS-1 turret with worse vertical guidance. NOT 5.0 worthy.
HE rounds are actually useful though, and do have a meaningful use over the APCBC rounds.
They will one shot or severely cripple any open top vehicle that they hit, even if you hit something like a track, and the biggest HE rounds don’t even have to actually hit the enemy vehicle to kill, just landing next to it does the job.
The advantage that APCR rounds offer is significantly more niche and less useful. Increased muzzle velocity and flat penetration at close to medium ranges with the disadvantage of actually worse high angle penetration and significantly worse damage.
What tank is there, at the BR range of the Pz.IV H, that you actually benefit from using APCR when facing it (i.e. the area that you can penetrate from the front is increased by a significant amount)?
The only one I can think of is the Churchill Mk VII. And even then, I actually don’t know if the APCR round would penetrate because of the new shattering and penetration mechanics of early APDS and APCR rounds when facing multiple plates of armor, so the APCR could even shatter due to the fact that the Churchill gets track armor over the front.
So no, they aren’t dismissing APCR because he is “unwilling to learn how to use the ammunition available to them”. They are dismissing APCR because it is just the least useful, and most niche rounds in the entire game, with a use case scenario that is so limited that you might as well just not load this round.
KV-85, IS-1, Churchill lol
Yes HE rounds are more generally useful at a BR range where open top tanks are still prevalent. APCR is still the difference between penning / not penning some tanks frontally.
Maybe I play too much American or French I can’t lolpen every tank with explosive rounds I have to carefully place my shots and if I have to overexpose myself to place those shots, well penning the cheek of a panther is gonna be more efficient.
You cannot face an IS-1 with the Pz.IV Hs current BR (5.3 compared to 3.7). Even then the APCBC round can go through spots like the lower front plate and cupola.
And the KV-85 you can kill just as well with the APCBC round. In fact, it is easier to do so with the APCBC due to the fact that the explosive filler opens up weak spots like the cupola, and can utilize the 40 mm turret ring better. Not to mention that the overall hull armor just isn’t thick enough to actually stop the APCBC round in the first place.
So, with 2 of the tanks you mentioned, there is just no advantage to be had from loading APCR against them, and the 3rd tank is the Churchill, which I had mentioned in my reply.
1 Like
The original discussion of balance was the German captured KV variant which can face the IS-1
Yes, depending on the tank firing the APCBC / APCR
APCR isn’t about advantage it’s about consistency. Knowing your round will penetrate versus trusting weakspots and Gaijin’s modeling.
No, APCR isn’t the end all be all round
No, APCR isn’t a worthless round which shouldn’t be noted as being on a tank
The addition of APCR to the german captured KV-1 isn’t the only feature to justify its placement at 5.0 but it is still a part of that
Recently I had the opportunity to play with US’ T92, which is a pretty fine tank, but has APCR as it’s stock round.
Let me tell you something, that round is definitely worth it’s bad reputation, shooting at literally any angle is out of the picture, and even if you find flat piece of armor, penetration damage is ridiculously low.
I’ve had that round go through Panther’s turret and just making the gunner red and commander orange, simply atrocious.
You’re talking about a stock round being forced on a tank to a round which can be used situationally.
If your only option was HE and you didn’t have a 100+mm gun I think that would suck too.
I’m just stating my experience about APCR shells. In my opinion their bad reputation is more than justified, incredibly situational rounds that might not work properly even in best case scenarios.
No one here has stated they are not situational rounds.
As I said, even in those situational, best case scenarios, they might fail to work properly, which puts them even lower in the “shell ranking”.
The only reason it would fail is if it’s absorbed by Gaijin’s modeling or you miss.
It doesn’t need to be absorbed, as I said above, I’ve made penetrating hits but damage was close to zero.