Thats not the argument being made. Any sober look at the countries show Australia as being more powerful, but they are what one would consider “minor powers”. But they are closer to one another than the 5x needed to put Australia in the ballpark of France.
I am however making fun of you putting Australia, a country of 7 million at the time, in the same ballpark as France, and Italy. Arguing it is a “medium power”.
Ignoring that France and Italy are only minor in the sense they were the “minors” In the Washington Naval treaty. Do people forget what France is in 1939? Put every dominion under britain and it does not amount to the power Italy is.
A partially completed soft steel prototype is a somewhat lackluster basis.
Edit:
In the way you did and with the effort put in to do so? No, not really. Its a catchy title, its accuracy isn’t exactly Important
Ok, I’m not saying Australia was as powerful as France or Italy. I obviously know that they were more powerful than Australia, I’m just saying Australia can be viewed as being at the bottom end of the more ‘medium’ powers category. Or at the top end of the ‘minor’ powers. Besides, the best part of the A.C.IV is its gun, which was just a British gun that they installed. If the Germans would have given Hungary the Panther’s main gun to use on the Tas, then it would undoubtedly be better than the A.C.IV. Anyways, I left it open to the reader’s opinion and discussed both ways, and why I think the Tas is better either way.
It had 2 prototypes in construction; the soft steel one that you mention and a fully armoured proper prototype. And they had the hulls and chassis fully complete and functional, the turrets were being built, possibly even close to completion, and the 75 mm gun was already made and the 80 mm gun was made but being further developed and improved. I say that it was mostly finished, close to the Chi-Ri for example, which nobody has a problem with.
It wasn’t much effort. Anyway, the accuracy is important to me, you don’t need to care, but how is it a problem if I do?
Understandable, however, the reason why there is a TAS tank destroyer myth existing is because, there were two samples/vehicles worked on. It was mistakenly assumed that one was a TD and the other was the medium tank. The ConeOfArc video talks about it.
Yes, I’ve seen that the O-I has been passed to the devs. Considering it reached a similar stage of completeness as the 44M Tas, and that project was simply abandoned because it was too impractical and unrealistic, whereas the 44M Tas was far more realistic and could easily have been completed, I think the 44M Tas should have an even better chance of being passed to the devs than the O-I. If the O-I got passed, then I see absolutely no reason why the 44M Tas shouldn’t be.
I just saw that the Kranvagn/Emil Swedish cold war prototype heavy tank has been passed to the devs. Just like the O-I, it reached a similar stage of completion as the 44M Tas; the chassis was fully complete (like the 44M Tas), but the turret was never made, whereas the 44M Tas’ turret was under construction and thus partially finished. Like the O-I project, the Kranvagn/Emil project was simply abandoned because it was unfeasible and unrealistic, whereas the 44M Tas was far more realistic and could easily have been completed, but was ended by being bombed during wartime while Hungary was invaded by the Soviets, so it was ended by an external war situation rather than because the project was flawed or unrealistic.
So if the O-I and Kranvagn/Emil got passed to the devs, then I suppose the 44M Tas (which was slightly closer to being completed than either of these) should have an even better chance of being passed to the devs. But I guess we’ll have to wait.
If your suggestion passes premoderation it can already be passed to devs, though “passed to devs” doesn’t mean it will be implemented to the game, just that devs will look at your suggestion and either consider it as a possible addition or throw it without even notification to you.
I think they tried to buy Centurions before the Emil project, but because it would take too long to acquire the Centurions they decided to make their own domestic design. Probably because of multiple reasons to be fair, but it was still more feasible and realistic than the O-I project.
Yeah, I know, I’m just saying “it’s about time it gets passed”. I mean most suggestions that I’ve seen get passed to the devs have way less views, replies, interest, popularity, votes, and a worse yes/no vote ratio than this one. On top of all of that, many of the suggestions that get passed are far less necessary/needed for a certain tree than this one (first researchable heavy tank for Italy?). I’m really just wondering how it is decided what should and shouldn’t be passed to the devs and what about this one is holding it back.
And some of the blueprints for components like the transmission and suspension…
…while on that topic, I see these images are “no longer available”… do you know why and how to get them to display again?
I have fixed the gun sight images, but I don’t remember and can’t find where we found the blueprints of things like the transmission, gearbox, running gear, etc. Do you know where we found these?
By the way, images 13 and 17 are in a nice large size and good quality and have their original names so I could easily replace them, but all of the other images are too small and low quality, and I don’t have their names so I have no idea which is which and how to replace them.
I don’t need images 1, 3, 4, 9 (or 13 and 17 since I have replaced/fixed them), but for the rest, could you see if you can upload them in the same way as you did for images 13 and 17 so that they are larger, better quality, and have their names?
Also, for images 2, 11, 14, and 16, could you describe what these are showing/simulating so that I can give them a caption/description?
