Not to mention it has a 12.7 as well.
Its only a a 12.7 to get range of a target so only has a couple of rounds before reload so it isn’t good against targets but it still you be more accurate with your shots.
I love how just you ignore every good for M-51 and jsut cherrypick all bad.
Is the same !!!
I done in this topic, keep M-51 in 6.0 looks like the are average WT player need 400 mm HEAT for deal with 5.0 heavies.
Blud legitimately thinks the gameplay is as accurate as the protection analysis.
Lol. Lmfao.
2 Likes
I am not saying the M-51 is bad. Just explain why the SPZ is better and isnt really a good comparison to the M-51. Also I dont really see anything M-51 does better than the SPZ apart from protect it from autocannon and machine gun fire which honestly play smart enough and hopefully you dont get machine gunned in the side to death while using the SPZ.
A better comparison to the M-51 would be the M36B2 (worse gun but still can pen all the heavies at its BR), or even the Type 61, ST-A2/1. I feel like they are all in similar spots with HEAT/HEATFS that can pen all the heavies but have crap armor, pretty mid reloads and mid mobility.
HEATFS on the SPZ has slightly Explosive Mass/TNT Equiv. I feel like I have more luck with recoilless rifles than heat, I know my buddies do aswell. Protection Analysis isnt really the best to go off because it can be inaccurate and cant properly represent what happens ingame.
3 Likes
The M51 literally is balanced. You people are trying to cripple a tank that’s not a problem.
4 Likes
I wholeheartedly agree! As I mentioned in my original point the only thing good about it is its gun, with a shell that is bonkers at best, ass at worst. Otherwise as you said anything can cut through it with ease.
4 Likes
Firstly, the Panzer IV tanks have a massive BR flaw. They are inconsistent and share the same BR as objectively worse models of their own vehicle.
The Panzer IV F2 and G share the same BR despite the G having significantly better armor. While neither can stop shells at its BR, the G can withstand rounds from 50 caliber weapons such as the M2 and Dishka.
The Panzer IV H and J share the same BR despite the J lacking the turret speed advantage these vehicles have. The H model is objectively better, and the J is arguably worse off in most aspects compared to even the G and F2.
Secondly, the German Tree isn’t the best to be pointed at when looking at Tank Destroyers. They have two separate “Tank Destroyer” trees. They also have the issue of inconsistent German classification.
As a general rule of thumb, the Left Lane of the German Tank Destroyer Tech Tree is the true TD line. It shares the most with conventional Tank Destroyers. These vehicles get their firepower advantage early for trading mobility and armor. The Right Lane, however, is more unique to the German Line. The focus of its tanks tends to jump around from rank to rank and folder to folder. This has more to do with the desperation and brain rot of the German designers later in the war and isn’t a good benchmark to look at.
No one ever said the M4A1. You specified the 75mm gun.
The Leopard 1 uses HEAT-FS, not HEAT. The DF105 does share the same shell, but it’s autoloaded and on a highly mobile and extremely durable Marder platform. HEAT-FS has a pretty big advantage over HEAT.
Not everyone can remember hundreds of tanks and the exact pixels they need to shoot. Not everyone can remember the exact distances or lead on moving targets. Your opponent won’t always be sitting still head on and point blank.
You did call it bad though. You specifically said it was a “Bad Platform”.
This is far from the truth. The M4A3E2 Jumbo is an upgrade on the M4A3 (75), which we do not have in game. It’s not an upgrade over the M4A1 because the numbers in the M4A(X) series don’t indicate upgrades, they indicate the factory model. An M4A1 was produced at the same time as an M4A2, M4A3, M4A4, and M4A6.
The M-51 isn’t a platform downgrade. All it has is a better gun without a stabilizer. Other than that, there’s basically no change. The M4 series just isn’t very mobile in-game because tanks that should be slower than it, such as the T-34 and Tiger, are allowed their perfect uncapped speeds. The M4 Sherman was not afforded that luxury in-game.
You’re not making sense. How can you earnestly try to convince people that the AMX-30 and M-51 are equals. The M-51 lacks the armor, mobility, gun stability, targeting speeds, and so much more that the AMX-30 has. Your argument is horrifically flawed and completely backwards.
It’s not. The 8.8cm gun is a better weapon at 6.0. It reloads faster, has better handling, and kills in one shot. Hell, the Tiger is also faster than the M-51.
Stop crying about the M-51. I’ve played hundreds of battles against it and have NEVER died to it. EVER. It is not a threat and you’re whining about a nonexistent problem. This is the exact reason why people look down on German Players. You cannot comprehend something being better at raw penetration than your “Super King Tiger Ultra Deluxe Unbeatable Super Weapon”.
And you know what’s worse? I’m a German Main. You make me look bad by sharing your stupid takes. Get over it. Your Tiger performs better at everything other than penetration in comparison to the M-51.
5 Likes
Richtofen, go back to asking for the removed German Tanks. You’re saying stupid combinations of words again.
3 Likes
Minor sidenote: The Waffenträger has the long 88, but it reloads slower than the M-51 due to the single loader. I’m not disagreeing with you, so keep your takes rollin’!
Edit: Disregard this message. I now know what you’re talking about, now that you’ve reminded me lmao
I was referring to the Tiger E, which shares the BR, and is, although a pointless comparison, more relevant to this discussion than the, admittedly, shitty Waff.
The German Mains here are screaming about their Tigers dying to it, which is the only reason I’m even comparing them.
2 Likes
Ah, right.
Yeah. I’d normally not compare a Heavy to a Tank Destroyer LARPing as a Medium Tank, but I kinda have to in this case since they won’t shut up about the “OP M-51 slicing through their Super Tiger”
3 Likes
Okay then, but only because I want to and not because you told me to.
Btw, I updated one of the threads:
You mean people like you, as I actually like large maps. Means I can use the Super Sherman’s singular strength as effectively as possible.
Also you didn’t even shoot the same place. Nice failure on a static target.
1 Like
So can the F2? Only the front hull armor is changed between the F2 and G, with the G having extra 30 mm plating. Even still the F2 has 50 mm of armor which is enough to stop such guns from the front.
Your right. My bad.
Either way, the G is better than the F2.
Couple things with this photo.
First of all if I recall correctly the fuel tanks are not consistent. As you can see on the first picture all the explosive filler is caught on where the fuel tank was, then the second one it went straight through and hit the engine which sometimes happens sometimes wont. From playing top tier I can tell you from experience that fuel tanks are very hit and miss and thats with APFSDS. Once you start using even more inconsistent rounds like HEAT and HEATFS the inconsistencies will probably happen more.
Second of all what point are you trying to prove? You have just messed up your own point, you tried using protection analyst to prove your initial point and now you have just proven for all of us that it is not accurate. Nice.
4 Likes