BR3 a big gun with good armor much like the 105 Sherman no turret but harder to find and shoot. sorry missed it
BR1 Less a lion and more a kitten if anyone would be willing to use this car.
BR1 a great for BT1 tank with an open top and no mug would be great to kill tanks and soldiers but also vulnerable to everything.
BR2 just like the AB41 but with a 47MM gun would fill the same place as the AB41 at BR2.
BR3 a 90MM gun with full turret traversal but weak armor and no enclosed turret keeping it out of br4, why not br2 its a long gun able to pen anything br1 to br4.
we should forget about realism and start introducing paper tanks, because all these proposals for the introduction of vehicles with their unique range of armored vehicles almost always do not go beyond 3BR due to the fact that they did not have better equipment, but it was only on paper, which should be introduced
That would not help italy, i added everything italian ww2 and before. everything else in the ‘Italian tree’ was german, or hungarian. Or was made after WW2 i am not as opposed to paper tanks and guns ‘entirely’. But when it comes to cold war one keep it separate from ww2 or keep it separate from the game.
That means keep t54 out of berlin or from figting tiger tanks. having a grease gun in korea or vietnam fighting ak 47s is fine. i dont want to play cold world war 2. cold war weapons belong in cold wars, ww2 weapons that did not leave ww2 do not belong.y
a third to half, some are event some for premium i mean three wheeled tank destroyers might be a bit much
and 13 vehicles in br 1 2 3 would be a wee much
there is also paper and there is paper, if its multiple schematics and various designs if its one thing. if its one quickly drawn picture or a list of requirements its another and might as well be made up entirely. https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/mitsu-104/like the mitsu 104 which would not even count as a paper tank, second ok so you dont have much in way of br 4 5 this is not warthunder this is ww2 the point is not to add material just to add material
No to both, first as stated that’s a 105mm howitzer vs a 47mm howitzer. If you want the. Them both to shoot 47mm you be you but no one has even s 75mm gun in br1. Second riders need to be limited to open topped vehicles without protected turrets and machine guns.
That is an armored car with a 20 mm cannon a tank, riders need to be vulnerable to infantry weapons not just at weapons tanks planes and grenades like tanks are. As they don’t tank up a tank slot and could be used without limit. Rider vehicle can include bikes, trikes, Jeeps or other open topped vehicles not armored cars.
Even in warthunder that’s rank 2 and br2 in enlisted
No it’s not it’s a br1 tank
Tanks are limited 2 per team there is no rider limit
Riders are meant to be like calvary in the old West like a man on a horse
The crew need to be killa me with
Mgs, smgs, rifle, impact grenades, frag grenades, knives, bayonets ect ect in simple terms of it can kill a rider on a bike it needs to be able to kill a rider in any other vehicle
It’s why gamers want trikes and jeeps added there rider vehicle and not light tanks
That’s the point we gave infantry and tanks with only two tanks per team
Tanks have enclosed armor, and cannons and mgs
Apcs with one exception that is controversial are either unarmed or use infantry weapons they are also open topped letting any weapon kill the crew
Riders so far are bikes letting any weapon kill the crew
Only tanks have cannons , backed up by mgs have a n enclosed crew or turret
Even that apc which shall not be banned is open topped. Ab armored car could be included but it would need to be open topped with an mg. Only that German apc and the universal carrier have a cannon which is a boy’s at gun and infantry weapons
So no it can’t be a rider vehicle
