a beefed-up M22, that describes it well. i like it
4 Likes
oni-chan locust LOL
4 Likes
Given that this is the American 57mm, I’d assume it would use the US 57mm ammo, including M70 AP and M86 APCBC with 41.16 grams of TNT filler. These are used by the T18E2 Boarhound. +1 for some tech tree 57mm APHE.
1 Like
nope. this tank was made before those rounds was in services and before the US adopted the 57mm. it was a older british 57mm with british rounds
Aw dangit…
2 Likes
+1 M22 big brother…
2 Likes
M22 gets too fat due to the all American diet.
2 Likes
So its a Light-Medium Tank neato.
1 Like
it was not yet a medium tank, but right after the turret was rearmed with a 75mm, it was qualified as a medium tank and accepted to services as the M7 medium tank.
the M7 was slightly heavier too. but the reclassification was considered long before.
That’s why I said it was a Light->Medium. It’s a Light Tank but has qualities comparable to a Medium.
So it is in a sub-class of vehicles. Which are established as such. Gonna add some examples.
Light Tanks
Light-Medium Tanks
Light-Heavy Tanks
Medium-Light Tanks->Chi-He, Chi-Nu
Medium Tanks->Chi-To
Medium-Heavy’s->Chi-Ri I/II
Heavy-Light->a Heavy Tank but lighter on the armor profile. Or is it fast for a tank of its weight and class
Heavy-Mediums
Heavy Tanks.
for me, there is the weight classes. which is pretty much just for the logistics.
- Light
- Medium
- heavy
then there is the role
Reconnaissance
- high mobility
- low firepower
- low protection
- small profile
Infantry fighting vehicles
- good mobility
- suppress fire
- limited sustained AT capacity
line-tank
- good survivability
- decent firepower
- limited mobility
cruiser
- good mobility
- good firepower
- decent armour
brawler/assault tank
- Excellent protection
- decent firepower
- low mobility
glass cannon
- high firepower
- long range
- low survivability
tank hunter
- good mobility
- high anti-tank capacity
- low survivability
assault gun
- excellent armor
- good firepower
- slow reload
self-propelled gun
- low survivability
- high firepower
- slow reload
light Anti-aircraft
- fast rate of fire
- low range
- small damage
Medium Anti-aircraft
- medium fire rate
- medium range
- medium damage
- Dual-purpose land and air targets
Heavy anti-aircraft
- slow fire rate
- high range
- high damage
- more effective against land targets
of course, there can be variations in their feature but I used each vehicle according to a tactic based on his class and not his weight. like that you do not make the mistake of thinking because something is light it’s fast or because something is heavy it’s protected. sometimes those things are deceiving.
of course, some vehicles can be used in other roles but may not be as suited as the real vehicles adapted to the specific role.
That’s the standard, Sub-Classes are a tricky thing since they are technically homebrewed as a designation. But at the same time aren’t because of how tanks were developed and were often derived into a class such as TD’s(Tank Destroyers) or SHTs (Super Heavy Tanks).
yes but the Superheavy class aren’t always performing the say way.
the FCM 2C is a super heavy,
The Mauss is a super heavy
the T95 is a super heavy
yet they are not played the same.
the FCM 2C is a line-tank for me. his job is to hold the line and prevent the enemy from pushing while you can also led the assault. but not good without isolation.
The Mauss is a Brawler, it can fight isolated and take a beating against multiple enemies while taking them out one by one (as long there is no HEAT rounds)
the T95 is an assault gun. it can sit and fight in a single directly, and take out anything but it’s not made to fight in all directions or be flexible in the battle.
if you play those 3 based on their weight, you will feel like only the Mauss is good.
but if you play them according to their class, suddenly they all become decent
I would say the T7E2 is more of a cruiser than anything. it would be played like the Cromwell or the Panther in a fight. but can sometimes replace the line tanks like the sherman and the T-34 or reconnaissance like the M24 or AMX 13.
that makes it a rather flexible tank which would be easy to play.
Performance isn’t always how vehicles are classified.
Sometimes it’s classified by armor, gun, or weight. Just depends on the nation.
Case by Case Example. the Chi-Ri was classified by the US as a Heavy Tank, despite it being classified by the Japanese as a Medium Tank.
they are classified by their role. not the performance.
the weight was mostly created from a logistic point of view for most countries. In the battlefield, carrying vehicles around, and having them capable of taking certain roads and bridges is a very important detail.
The vehicles were mostly classified for their roles regardless of their performance or weight. such as cruisers, breakthroughs, infantry tanks, reconnaissance vehicles, battle tanks, and such.
Japan classified their vehicles by weight. Not performance not by role.
The US classified their vehicles by role, but it still doesn’t change much.
Germany classified their vehicles by gun. Ex: Panther, which would have been classified Heavy tank by other countries and to an extent was.
Germany classified their vehicles by their roles.
The Panzer II been an infantry support tank later reconnaissance tank
the Panzer III been a medium tank which was intended to be the back bone of their army
the Panzer IV been a fire-support tank, later reclassified as medium tank in replacement of the Panzer III
the Panzer V panther been a cruiser tank
the Panzer VI Tiger been a battle tank
and so on.
Germany did not classify their tanks by their guns but their guns were attributed to their role. Germany in particular, during WW2, was known to be extremely specific for the role intended for each tank.
Japan classified their tanks by the roles as well. the Type 92, Type 95, type 97, Type 98 and Type 1 were all having their role and they had their weight class.
the Type 89 was an medium infantry tank
the Type 92 was a heavy armored car for the cavalry
The Type 95 was an light infantry tank
the Type 97 was a medium tank replacing the Type 89
and so on
they also have battle tanks, cavalry tanks (equivalent to cruisers) reconnaissance tanks, tank destroyer, artillery tanks, propelled guns, and amphibious tanks. they were definitively classified by their role.
there is almost no country who create a tank specifically for their weight. a country who do that would be pretty much not knowing anything about how to use a tank. some tend to get versatile tanks, capable to forfil many roles, some go with extremely specialized tanks for specific role.
Not the first time we’d see time traveling ammo to be fair.
For the people, by the people! +1!