Not only that, the M4A5, is nothing more than an official designation given to it. Was nothing more than a M3 Lee, not a grant but the Lee. That was heavily modified.
I don’t get what point you are trying to make here? Having an American M3 Lee chassis does not change the fact that the Ram II was completely redesigned to Canadian specifications, for Canadian use.
Provided we both agree that Canadian vehicles are more suited to the British tree as a result of being Commonwealth, the presence of a US chassis should not justify America receiving this vehicle over the UK.
2 Likes
Regarding the Skink, do you recommend using the adjustment of fire or unequipping it? because sometimes more bullet spread is better
1 Like
Having an M3 Lee Frame means it was the reason why it was on the US prem/event lines. This is why the Canadian Leopard is on the German Prem/Event Line. They go by Country of Origin but also take into consideration the percentage produced in the country that is going to use it.
There’s a reason, the Ram II consists of->Majority->US, minority->Canadian modifications.
So it’s going to the US Tree, however for the Brits->The Skink besides the engine and transmission->British Tech Tree. Since very very little of it is still of US Origin.
However, because of that, it means the Skink going to the US Tree was because of the engine and transmission. It’s also cheaper than as i stated paying 4 months worth of wages just for a new vehicle to be added.
1 Like
Yeah but there are PLENTIY of other spaa that i would want rather than the skink
The guns are spread quite a bit vertically and horizontally already, I think it has enough spread. Plus, with how low the velocity is, having them be reliably accurate at least is a must.
General Oerlikon/Polsten/Skink question: Is the fairly low velocity correct? Are any better ammo types available? Ammo comparable or worse to the velocity and range of the wirbel at a much higher BR really hurts…
It’s pure laziness. They had years to address the US SPAA gap with tons of domestic US designs. Here’s a list of ones with 20mm’s.
T10E1 Half-track:
- 2x 20mm Hispano 404
3 Elco turreted vehicles:
- 6x .50 cal & 2x 20mm Oerlikon (on truck)
- 4x 20mm Oerlikon (on truck)
- 4x 20mm Oerlikon & 2x .50 cal (on half-track)
T85:
- 4x 20mm Oerlikon (T19)
- 4x 20mm Hispano (T19E1)
M114A2:
- 1x 20mm M139 (HS.820)
M113 (unsure of official designation):
- 3x 20mm HS.820
There’s likely more as well.
3 Likes
As one of the players that advocated for the Skink to be brought into the game to start with I’m really not happy with adding it to the US tree. There is no historical support for this and it just has the effect of dumbing down the game more. Not every faction needs to have a vehicle in every category at every BR. The US is a great faction to play with tons of great vehicles. It doesn’t need the Skink and having it only in the UK tree makes playing UK more interesting. There has been a crazy about to sprinkling vehicles across factions in the last few years. Everyone gets an M18, M24, M36, M44, M109 etc. All this does is make any one faction less interesting and the game as whole less.
3 Likes
Copy paste is killing this game.The good thing about nations was diversity and almost as much about what a nations didn’t have as what they did have.
So for example Italy/Japan had no heavy tanks. OK that’s the whole point.Diversity.
UK had no solid shot, it s pain but its a challenge.
Same with the maps,all the same now.
Basing tech trees on history actually worked in a weird way but the dumb side of the player base just doesn’t get it and has to scream unfair or nation bias. Now we have the same tank on every side.
I would even say in the confusion of battle now its even becoming a problem especially in CQC in towns where opposing teams all have the same tank.Like playing an 80s video game
4 Likes
Such a huge chunk of the vehicle suggestions in the suggestion page are just for copy-paste just because the nation the poster mains trialed one once.
It wont end unless there is an actual standard upheld for vehicle suggestions.
Sim is a mess with opposing sides getting the same tanks too, Good luck finding out if that M18 bushed up looking at you is American or Italian before it shoots you.
2 Likes
I normally disagree with not adding copy-paste vehicles for nations who used them, but Sim really should ban them totally unless they’re all on the same team.
In ground RB, copy-paste causes more diversity not less, cause lineups exist.
For air, it’s more about vehicles in ranks that are usable to fill the rank.
@ShermyDragon
I mean… IFF exists for radars, and if you’re going guns you’re in-range to the auto-detect range anyway.
I’m speaking more for Ground Sim- With how many Shermans, Pershings, etc are around these days, I hear it’s down to machine-gunning one of them to tell who’s friendly and that can often give away your position.
WRT to vehicle diversity, yeah, “copy-paste” vehicles makes the game more interesting than always having certain vehicles be exclusive to certain nations. Plus, it allows smaller nations like Thailand to be represented and gives slimmer trees like Japan more meat for Close Air Support.
1 Like
Well ground sim has IFF for all tanks as well, I forgot to mention that cause I don’t play sim ground much at this time.
C’mon Alvis you are doing the silly Alvis thing again : )
Giving the same tank to every nation causes more diversity not less.
OK lets just leave you to justify how that works and how that comment makes sense
What tech tree can have an Abrams, Merkava, HSTVL, M60 AMBT, and F-111F all in one lineup?
Not Israel, it’s an entirely unique lineup to USA.
we came from this and we are returning to this : )
Wait until you find out this is what most wars are like in history.
T-14 was even designed as a tool to fight export T-72s and T-90s [which is all T-14 can do in the future anyway due to having an unarmored turret].
It’s one of the primary reasons why radar IFF systems even exist. Nations expect to fight same-equipment to the point that they have to rely on IFF again.
Wargames feature same-equipment battles as well as different-equipment battle simulations for that reason as well.
Welcome to realism. It might not be a realism you like, but I hope you’re honest enough to say “I don’t like that particular realism.” if that’s the case.
1 Like