XM166
3 Likes
well this would prob not get added since it’s just the M42 turret on a different chassis. I wonder if it would be lower in br ?
Literally on a cargo carrier, no armour and no mobility. So it’d be terrible. I just wanted to share it.
Well it would be a lower br maybe like 3.0 ish
That’s probably too low for a twin 40mm. It’d probably end up being 3.7
Here’s a more serious list, and there’s still more that can be added:
- T10E1: Likely around 2.7 or 3.0. Has 2x 20mm guns. Uses half-track chassis.
- M34 GMC: Likely around 2.7 or 3.0. Has a 40mm bofors. Uses half-track chassis.
- T60: Likely around 3.3. Has 2x .50 cals and a 40mm bofors. Uses half-track chassis.
- T68: Likely around 3.3 or 3.7. Has 2x 40mm bofors in an under-over arrangement. Uses half-track chassis.
- T36: Likely around 3.3. Has a 40mm bofors. Uses a M3 Medium chassis, completely enclosed.
- T77: Likely around 3.7 or 4.0. Has 6x .50 cals. Uses a Chaffee chassis so it’s immune to MG fire. Though not sure how bullet resistant the glass domes will be.
- T85E1: Likely around 4.0 or 4.3. Has 4x 20mm guns. Based on a Stuart chassis.
- T52: Likely around 4.7. Has 2x .50 cals and a 40mm bofors. Uses a Sherman chassis and is completely enclosed.
- M114A2: Likely around 5.3 - 5.7. Has a M139 (HS.820) 20mm.
- M19 (T22): Likely around 5.7. Has an automatic 75mm cannon with 45 rounds per minute.
- M113 (triple M139): Likely around 6.3. Has 3x M139 (HS.820) 20mm.
- T100: Likely around 7.3. Has 4x .60 cal guns. Has radar, so hard to go lower sadly.
There’s still things like Eagle MADS, T249 Vigilante, Vigilante DAVID, etc.
1 Like
As a M19/M42 who can’t really fight tanks i think 3.0-3.3 is okay for it (it really has no mobility)
I’m fairly sure it is at 3.7 in the dev server.
Forgot to remove that one from my list. Also, is it 3.7 and still only rank II? That’s very disappointing considering all other 3.7 SPAA’s are rank III.
M113 with 2x 20mm Rh 202.
2 Likes
that would be cool, if it gets apds it would be really nice, they did say they are working on more usa spaa so i wonder what will we get
Yeah, just in 20mm vehicles there’s tons.
T10E1 Half-track:
- 2x 20mm Hispano 404
3 Elco turreted vehicles:
- 6x .50 cal & 2x 20mm Oerlikon (on truck)
- 4x 20mm Oerlikon (on truck)
- 4x 20mm Oerlikon & 2x .50 cal (on half-track)
T85:
- 4x 20mm Oerlikon (T19)
- 4x 20mm Hispano (T19E1)
M114A2:
- 1x 20mm M139 (HS.820)
M113 (unsure of official designation):
- 2x 20mm Rh 202
M113A1 (unsure of official designation):
- 3x 20mm HS.820
That’s 9 US SPAA with just 20mm options. This is why I’ve been so against the US having the Skink they never needed it. Gaijin just need to get off their butts and add more domestic SPAA.
2 Likes
but they said that adding the skink doesn’t mean that the USA is going to get more spaa’s, they are working on more.
As much as I’d like to take Gajin’s word for it, ik dam well that they will use the Skink as an excuse to not add domestic vehicle in its br
well I they could just add another SPAA at another BR from 5.7 to 6.7 honestly and I think that’s far better than getting another SPAA at 5.3. 5.3 always is usually 5.7 for me at least.
The Skink shouldn’t even be at 5.3. Its worthy of 4.7 at most.
The WirbelWind also has 4 20mms at 3.7, I haven’t used the skink ever so why does gaijin think it should be 5.3?
armor is why its at 5.3 also it helps to fill the spaa gap
It’s not even that well armoured, it’s literally just a Sherman. CAS players should be use to killing Sherman’s by BR 2.0, since they get uptiered to face M4A3 105’s. CAS only gets better as you go up in BR as well.
Even compared to the Crusader AA Mk II the armour isn’t that much of an improvement either. The Crusader AA Mk II ironically has an even better armoured turret. It has 51mm all round compared to 38mm sides and 25mm rear of the Skink.
Armored for an spaa
not like the yak-9k cares but the skink should not be at 5.3 it should be at most 4.7,5.0