M4A2 hvss used by canadian after WWII for training purpose, then used by the reserve.
Some shameless self-promotion:
M4A2E8: Out of the 76mm Sherman, the UK could get its the best and the worst. Best as in it’ll fit nicely in the 5.3 line-up(which, if you have premiums and events, is one of the best line-ups), worse as in it’s both foreign operated(unlike the A1 76s they could get) and C&P(unlike others), a setup hated by many UK players. It also didn’t see combat and just stayed at home, unlike its brother.
M4A3E8: This one has my favour, but wouldn’t have a line-up. It saw combat and was modified, even if most are minor in WT terms, bar the 200+ shells it could bring. Making it a bit better pick in most people’s eyes, but still not great.
Note: Yes, those are the names Canada called them by, no, I don’t know why.
1 Like
Or just British Sherman IIA’s (M4A1 76mm).
i’d rather to see a 5.3 M4A2 (76) with a lineup than a 5.0 M4A1(76) without a lineup personally,
I want the Sherman II DD.
2 Likes
Grizzly I too
We have a TT Ram, which frankly I thought near impossible. Perhaps a Grizzly I in the future?
With fuzed M61 APC!
The cleaner look of the barrel on the M4A1 76 is better for me and a slight increase to 5.3 because of Brit players is likely
If we get our Sherman IIA in one day in future.
Maybe M4A1 76(W) [USA] remains 5.0/5.0/5.0
while Sherman IIA [UK] maintains 5.3/5.3/5.3
Maybe because of one of two.
Potent 1 - Typical Gaijin Logic
Because M4A1 76(W) isn’t Sherman IIA.
Just how F-86A-5 [8.0/US] isn’t CL-13 Mk.4[8.3/ITA]
Potent 2 - Some silly extra ammunition.
Because we got the M93 shot (APCR) somehow, which we didn’t ask.
Just how our Sherman II maintains a higher BR(3.7) than the M4A1(3.3) because of the T45 APCR shot.
And the only time you would use T45 is when you are trying to still enjoy British APHE at a much higher BR
No you see? It has an American gun that fires American ammunition!
You mean a British tank firing damage-less solid shot…?
As someone that has been fighting this issue for years, number 3 is objectively not true for the US tree.
What ammunition issues have you identified on the US side?
I don’t know. I have reports over 8 years now that were “FWD as a suggestion” and still not implemented. I’ll report back after 10 years and let you know. :D
1 Like
Ed shared a doc saying it was fitted to a tank. What it looks like though is anyone’s guess. Document said Cromwell with Comet turret, but early in Comets design it was referred to as Cromwell. So… ?
Incredible that there is a whole website and team built for bug reporting, and yet the process of implementation seems so slow.
I’ll say it again, the solution isn’t to add APHE to the British, the solution is to give them realistic damage, and while we’re at it, make the APHE fuses fail at certain angles, just like APCR and APDS break (in some cases even unrealistically).
Like that will happen. The German, American and most Soviet mains rely heavily on the APHE cause of skill issue or low pen (like with the M3 75mm) and all the complaints about 35mm being too OP would be gone over night with the balancing and proper implementation