I am sorry that I made you confused :|
Maybe I was a bit tipsy. :/
If Gaijin never gave this to the UK but made it US-exclusive with the USA flag and paint. I might be a bit sad, but I might admit it because (with a joke) Brits are not allowed to have things in this game.
But, if Gaijin gave T70 GMC into the US exclusively but made it with a British flag somewhat similar to Ram II
(Which will never gonna happen)
I might be mad about Gaijin’s teabagging.
Yeah, I was unhappy about whole AV-8B+ thing (though that’s arguably different), would have been even worse if they added a USMC one to Italy
-1, the only way I’d support this is if the British also removed explosive filler from their M62 shells. Considering that a few vehicles sporting the American 76mm were used by the UK, it wouldn’t suprise me, although I have not heard anything of the sort.
Well they also didn’t remove the filler from M61 either. There’s a 0% chance of that happening.
-1 for the UK tree, neutral on it getting added to the US. We shouldn’t ask the Snail for more copy-paste vehicles given the rampant copypocalypse of the last two years (Example: everyone getting an M44 and M109, sometimes even at the cost if getting any indiginous designs that one update).
If the T70 gets added it should be US only. Britain has enough homemade tanks that we’ve yet to see in the game. And for the US I would also rather see entirely new designs instead of a slighty different (worse) Hellcat, but at least it’d be a US design for the US.
Why is a deliberate handicap necessary for your permission? Primary sources showing the use of M61 with filler have been provided, the removal of filler in the early war was due to poor fuses, and the explosive could be more usefully employed elsewhere.
I simply prefer each vehicle in the game to offer something new. And while yes, a removal of explosive filler would be a deliberate handicap, it would also (hopefully) necessitate a lower BR, which would in itself provide a new experience over say, a slightly slower M18.
I respect your reasoning, though I could only support removal of the filler if it corresponds with the activity in reality. Though as the vehicle was trialled relatively early then that may be possible, and could potentially even be more realistic.
Of course, I don’t have any sources or supporting evidence to argue the replacement of explosive with concrete in the case of M62 shot, it’s simply the only condition I could think of in which I’d like to see this vehicle under the UK flag.
In some cases the service of British armor in foreign armies allows for the potential use of proper APHE, such as in the cases of the German captured Firefly or various 75mm-armed Cromwell users, but I think the reverse can be true as well, which I would like to represent in-game if possible.
I must take issue with what appears to be the insinuation that only UK vehicles in foreign service would use APHE, as the British themselves did use APHE ammunition and this is clearly shown in the armaments handbooks for 75mm-armed vehicles.
AFAIK, we also used the APHE version of M61 APCBC on our Churchill Mk.7
But Gaijin is so firm in hating the British and gave nearly none of the M61(APHE) to us.
‘Because uniqueness is important!’ (while copy&paste everything in every TT at same time)
Yes. We might removed some of filler in APHE. but limiting to use only solid shot are nothing but artificial nerf.
My bad then, I was under the impression that a preference for additional penetration resulted in service-wide removal of explosive filler from M61 type shells.
Seeing as this is probably different than I first thought, I would not have any issue giving such APHE M61 to the appropriate users in the British tree, regardless of what BR raises may result from it.
RAM was definitely only tested altough a slightly different variant so yeah, I don’t see why it is in the US tree, altough it makes even less sense in the British tree, which had absolutely nothing to do with it.
Absolutely agree that the Skink shouldn’t have been added, especially not after such a long time of being only in the British tree, the domestic equivalent M114A2 should have been added instead and others.
ahem
(for context these are Ram Tanks in british service iirc)
Maybe it was a sin of Wargaming which placed them in their US TT :/
‘based on M3 Lee…?’
The idea the British has nothing to do is wrong. It’s the US tree is makes the least sense in(after nations that didn’t use it at all)
A) British engineers help the Canadian design it.
B) It uses a British gun
C) It a cruiser tank, aka built for British doctrine.
D) The British where one of its 3 operator nations(aka the used it in service which is more then, testing a Ram I and getting a “Late” after the war)
I mean Britain operated the thing. And supplied the main armament. And it was designed for British doctrine. I guess since it’s an M3 base you can make the argument there. They could’ve chosen a 37mm gun or a 75mm gun. But they chose the 2 pr and 6 pr. Take that how you will.
Even better there is a suggestion for them.
Oh sorry then, I thought they didn’t even test them
Iirc they never really saw combat and were used as training tanks on the home islands (as by the time they arrived the sherman was available in far greater numbers). But they were in service nonetheless, a considerably greater service than with the US anyways.