If you want some advice for GB, @Morvran will be someone who can give you a LOT of great advice for the Brits 👍
Mr @Morvran if you have any comments for our friend here. AND in case he does decide he would like to purchase a premium GB ground vehicle, what would you recommend. Probably Rank 4 or 5, I need to check how far down the GB tree he is.
and we should actually have APHE on a number of tanks as well
Wont help for some, but will help for a few and yeah. They nerfed AP to make it “realistic” and then put it to a vote to nerf APHE to be realistic and the community said no. So now they should buff AP to be stronger
So basically it was put to the vote if AP shells should to made to actually work and the vote was no. Don’t know which is worse, Gaijin having a vote for it or that people voted no to one, yes to another.
Ground fun BRs : germany 3.3, GB 3.0, russia 2.7, US none of note as yet
Solid shot vote= no is where Im at rn XD which equates to a broken game.
2 weeks of hit simulator has left a sour taste.
There needs to be a simple list of stuff to not use to save others the pain. Without Morvan I would of probably continued using the ram hoping it would get better (it wont)
You are trying to frontally pen an arl44 acl1 with the british 57. That wont work too well.
The turret is 100mm and the hull is 60mm sloped. Your round isnt going to pen the front hull and will barely pen some spots on the turret front.
Its sides are very weak though so you need to get an angle where you can hit its side.
What is the problem here? Im assuming it was AP doing the AP thing of not nuking crew sometimes.
You hit mutliple layers of plates which caused a non-pen.
With time, you will learn the limits of your shells and where to hit. Premium wont prevent your issue from happening. Though it is a good investment if you get it on sale.
M4A5 is the USA designation for the Ram ll. It pisses me off beyond belief cuz it is literally built on M3 Grant chassis, not a Sherman Chassis. Call it the M3A1 Lee. Even that would be more accurate for gods sake. I love Shermans and I hate that that imposter gets the same designation as the Shoimons
the only proof of this i can find anywhere on this internet is an article on tanks encyclopedia where they also claim its called a sherman 6 in some birish docs. @StormRyder13 will probably be able to verify as he is very much a Canadian tank nut.
if this british empire tank was to get an american designation i do think M3a6 and m3a7 for the ram 1 and ram 2 would have been more appropriate.
well technically so is the sherman. but this is only the gearbox and hull floor, the rest is bespoke.
i like shermans too but find it an insult to the rams individuality to be lumped in with them.
It’s not even that. It’s a name the seem to only exist in docs after the US stopped testing the Ram I (they call it “Canadian Medium tank” in footage found, and from what I found, the “late” Ram II got after the war was called a Ram II.)
Tho what’s really bad(after the major misinformation spread by the name) is even if it can be proven that M4A5 wasn’t ever meant to be used, the fact that it won’t be fixed under “that’s what the US would have called it” means: Host tree > Operator nation for vehicle names.