The Sd. Kfz. 251/9 is an APC but I believe it should be changed to the “tank” slot. Halftracks that were converted to infantry support vehicles no longer could ferry infantry. They had to sacrifice their space for a weapon system, a crew, and all its ammunition. They couldn’t even fit a squad of infantry
The “tank” slot itself isn’t really a tank slot but more of just a combat vehicle slot. Traditional tanks, tank destroyers, self propelled guns, flame vehicles, SPAA, etc. A good standard is, if its armed with just a MG its a Rider/ Transport vehicle, anything bigger its a combat vehicle.
When we look at different cases you can see my argument. The Sd. Kfz 234/4 is an armored car with a heavy AT gun. It basically is the damage of a panzer 4 in the thin body of a car. Why would the Sd Kfz 234/4 be a rider vehicle while the M2 Stuart is a tank when this car has more power than most light tanks. If we go further down the power pipeline we might as well say any other vehicle that’s not a King Tiger isn’t even worthy of being a tank. The point is that all armed vehicles are in the team’s vehicle slot and you choose what vehicle you want to use to support the team, whether its a Panzer 2, Flakpanzer, Flampanzer, or Tiger
To reiterate, if its armed with just a MG its a Rider/ Transport vehicle. If its armed with
autocannon
tank gun
flamethrower
artillery
AA
then its in the vehicle slot, which many just lump as the tank slot.
The Sd Kfz 251/9 is the only erroneous halftrack so it should be corrected, then as we move forward we keep the standard as it should be
HOW to transform nice vehicles too useless in 1 way …
We already have the exemple with the sdkfz 234/4 wich praticly no one is playing.
We don’t need more useless “tank”
Who would play an apc with gun without turret, open, without armor and the MG is overheating quicker
than most of mg tank. ?
No point adding that, having two slots vehicles being locked with “smart ppl” is already enough, we don’t need them have some “tank” shittier than the normal
Why would you want to waste the limited number of tank slots that we have by forcing us to use those slots for APCs? Your suggestion reduces the limited flexibility that we do have.
Just for the record, APCs aren’t supposed to be used as “tanks.” They are spawning vehicles—which means you shouldn’t be firing the onboard weapons unless it’s absolutely necessary because you give up your position to every enemy on the map. End result is you end up losing a valuable spawn point.
While I’m on the subject, all you excited players who like to blow the horns on the APCs are just advertising your position to the enemy too. Same end result.
Anyway, I don’t think we need tank slots removed for APCs. It serves no purpose.
As I said, its not truly a “tank” slot but just a general combat vehicle slot. It’s not a “waste” since the system already means anyone can spawn any vehicle. A Stuart and Pershing share the same slot.
Yes, the original halftracks. Halftracks that were upgraded with advanced armaments did not carry infantry, ie just a combat vehicle
Nothing is removed because its just another vehicle added to the arsenal that one can spawn.
I get your point and I agree, more or less for the same reasons. First and foremost, the idea of having the Sdkfz. “Stummel” released as an APC was a very rushed idea, imo. Because meanwhile it’s “counterpart” from that event. The Universal Carrier (which is the absolutely ideal APC and works as it should) it’s a perfectly balanced vehicle. It’s vulnerable, it’s exposed and most importantly, it has weak guns, which makes the player use it in it’s intended role as a mobile rally point, instead of sitting behind the gun. Despite it’s size and how comical it is to spawn a 9-man squad out of such a small vehicle, it is technically an APC. In my opinion, Axis should’ve been given another Sdkfz. variant instead of the Stummel. Unfortunately, that boat has already sailed and changing it back or removing it’s APC status would be a very drastic change.
However, I propose the existence of a “Support Vehicle” class. This should deserve it’s own post with a detailed description of all the vehicles which should be reclassified based on this technicality, both currently in game and ones that could be added in the future. But in short, what I’ve been thinking is that all SPG vehicles and mobile AA should be within this “Support Vehicle” class. Now, this class should be altogether different from Rider Class in my opinion, as I believe Rider Class should focus on fast-moving but highly vulnerable vehicles used for recon and cruising around the battlefield such as Bikes, Jeeps, Kubelwagens, etc. But that’s a different topic for now.
For this to work properly as it should. Support Class vehicle should be it’s own unique slot within a battle, so it doesn’t interfere with the other two tank slots. This way we could also make AA vehicles relevant across all tier matches. But first and foremost they should add more AA vehicles and more SPGs within the tech three of all nations. Some premiums and some as part of events, that’s reasonable.
On a different note, but related to the topic. We should also reconsider what classifies as an APC within the game. For example, I’ve always thought that the “Special Landing Forces Pack” with the initial release of the Pacific, was a wasted opportunity of introducing APCs for the first time in the game. Both the LVT (A)-1 and Ka-Chi should technically be APCs, if we were to be based on the Stummel. And now thinking big, imagine boat APCs, which could make our dull old Pacific maps more enjoyable (Yes, I’m talking to you Gavutu) Think people! There’s miles of content here
The thing is, its only got 4 crew members, so if you try to use it as an apc - you will be left with a very small infantry squad - while if you try using it as a tank you will be basically left with a non armor open top SPG with a no HEAT BR2 gun stuck in BR3.
Its neiter a good tank nor a good APC, but for the uniqueness of being able to give some infantry support its fair and sitting in a good spot.
That being said, best APC is still without a doubt the bren carrier because its small enough you can hide it in buildings - however again, the initial crew is also small, so I guess this is balanced again…
Exactly. That’s what I’m going for. If the Sdkfz. “Stummel” had only the functionality of firing same as a tank, because of its firepower it would be classified somewhere in BR-2. But because it has a crew carrying specialized weapons (usually much better armed than the average tank crew) that suddenly makes them BR-3 somehow. And yes, the UC rules as an APC.
Nope it’s already underpowered at BR3 with it’s useless APHE shell we don’t need to kill it completely. It has only 4 crewman which make it even worse so i don’t really use it outside of BR3. At BR5 i have paras and Assault engineers to build rallies.
Well I do agree with him that the idea of armed APCs is dangerous and can lead to terrible balance problems - though I think it sits in a good spot right now.
I like the 75 truck
Because I can use smoke and high-explosive bombs to cover my teammates from the front and at the same time let my teammates get off from beside me and attack.
Functionally it is irreplaceable
Convertible tanks are just a ridiculous topic
Almost all open tanks in the current game have been ignored and abandoned by players due to defense issues.
I agree that riders should have vehicles carrying howitzers
But their mobility should be guaranteed rather than a bunch of open-air parasites hiding behind and waiting to die.
Historically, it seems that the Grant can also be used as an infantry transport?
I don’t think it would be too much of a problem to change one of the 2 Grants to a level 3 troop carrier in the development tree
Or provide a dedicated version for events
I think the US military and the Soviet Union will definitely like this full-coverage transport vehicle.
in exchange
Tank gun ammunition capacity halved
This vehicle won’t be a terrible OP
Because any level 2 anti-tank weapon can easily penetrate Grant’s front
yes and no if we use it as a spawn vehicles it’s a very nice add, he can self def himself with the 75 mm HE
wich is a very nice but you can’t use it for attack or AT it would result the end of the mobile spawn
We can’t just only care about the strongest best of the best most powerful vehicles. There’s a reason why they call it BR 5 power creep, if all the devs care about is adding more and more endgame weapons
There are plenty of “lesser” vehicles that should be added, because this game isn’t just BR 5 and it adds more and more variety
they already have 7 crew
