I do agree with that the Jumbo 76 could do the job of great bruiser tank(plus its already in the files, ive drove it around). My only thought against it is that it has less weak spots since it could only be killed through the machine gun port(AKA it would be the perfect anti Tiger tank). Meanwhile the M26 has a more powerful gun but more weak spots for the Germans to Exploit(plus if you angle in a German tank you are much harder to kill even with the 90mm). But otherwise yes the Jumbo 76 could fill that role as well.
(side not the Jumbo 76 has a stabilizer in War Thunder and I wouldn’t be surprised if Gaijin decided to give it the stabilizer in Enlisted as well. Can confirm Germans would suffer if they did that.)
I cant think of a time playing Enlisted that a plane actually went after or destroyed a Tiger or Panther. I without fail EVERY game ive every played(unless im in a discord call with pilot) have to destroy those things with my Firefly, and the only time im successful is if they dont see me when I start lining up on them. So if allied planes on my teams did their job I would agree with you.
1 Like
I never found any sources that said that they used it only sources it said that they did not use it, and I was looking because I need the information for a project I was working on.
In this article, the chieftain goes into some detail, as he shows most of the crews were not even trained on the device, and the maintenance crews weren’t trained on it either, and while there was some use of it by far and large little or no use was made of the gyro stabilizers, and only a very small percentage of those that would be trained to use tanks and maintain them wherever really educated about them.
When I did the research on this one of the key concerns for balance in the game it was for was that doing this might be destabilizing, no pun intended, If American tanks were given a capability, they didn’t really have beyond what was already being allowed, namely the use of HVAP, ammunition and in quantities that were completely unrealistic, this imbued American tanks with a capability they did not have in the real world to deal with the heavier German cats.
Further, buffing them with an ability to Fire and maneuver, simultaneously, that they only really had in theory, again, given that the vast majority of American crews had no clue on how to use the device or properly, maintain it even up until the end of the war, was felt to of been a bit much from a play balance perspective.
It’s not worth noting if a standard issue piece of equipment is used. There are no sources that say they fired the pintle mounted .50 cal, or the hull mount .30 cal. Can you say they were never used? People tend to only mention things when there are issues with them.
If you read the Chieftain article, you will see that he ends the article with the statement:
“So, you recall that survey above of the 786th Tank Battalion? They were given an 8-hour preliminary instruction, and then observed for 2,268 hours of gyrostabilizer operation, firing some 300 37mm rounds, 500 75mm rounds, and some 40,000 rounds of machinegun ammunition over the next five weeks. Once the test period was over, they were asked another question.”
followed by this image:
From this, you can see that once the crew had gotten proper training with the gyrostabilizers, they loved it and from the results of the poll conducted, most likely used the things in combat. Note that this training first happened April of 1944, meaning by D-day many other tank battalions would have also undergone the same training. From my research, they ended up in a similar state as the 786th. Thus, you cannot assert that the American tank crews “were not even trained on the device, and […] little or no use was made of the gyro stabilizers” when your own source explicitly states otherwise.
1 Like
i see it all the time
Im probably just unlucky but thats just how it goes when I play unfortunately.
1 Like
As I said way up top’ish, a few of my “books” state they were not used by far and large, and while the Chieftan certainly sights a couple of examples of units that did use, he also mentions they were kind of the exception, and that in reality very few of the personal responsible for these systems and Maintenace that were in Europe in the closing months of the war actually were tainted in it’s use.
It kind of comes down to this though, Do you want to use it in game or would you rather not see it modeled.
Personally I would rather things be more realistic in games like this, so for me that would mean there would really be no HVAP for the US, and basically no APCR for the Germans late war.
And by extension no Stabilized Guns because they were by far and large not made use of.
Looking at both of things from a gameplay/Balance perspective, and setting my personal preferences aside, Having some limited amount of HVAP for the US in game makes some since and without it the US 76 mm would be kind of useless and the late war German Cats Frontally, while this would be realistic, it would not necessarily be good fun in game.
If we look at the Stabilizer, it could be argued that enabling it in game might further imbue the US with an ability that they really did not poses during the war and be a Buff they don’t need and put the Axis at some disadvantage.
Again, you only heard one side of the story, because no one says anything if it works, but everyone complain if they don’t like something. There are also records of Tank crews swapping out their .50 cal on the roof for a .30 cal, but no actual records of them firing it in combat. Does that mean they never used the .50 cal in combat? The same is true for the gyro. If you look at the sources, the complaints tended to be from the period between 1942 and 1943, with the training beginning in 1944 as noted in the article taking place as a result of those complaints. The sources I have note at least half a dozen other trainings between the first one and D-day, and how it became a part of basic tanker training.
The article only mentions how units prior to the training were like this, and Chieftain has been noted stating that after these trainings in other places, the crews loved their stabilizers.
They quite literally did posses it though. If you want to argue balance, fine, there is an argument to be made but you cannot argue they did not posses an ability they literally had and used.
1 Like
here is a fun fact that i got by a US army tanker: if you badger the armorer enough they will let you take anything you want as long as it fits in that tank
I mean, that’s the case for most American troops, if you were persistent enough, you or the armorer could “acquire” just about everything in the US catalogue.
1 Like
When will the ally mains stop whining ?
Can we have a upgrade to shut them up ?
Even scott can penetrate tiger but they are still not satisfied
And create even more inaccuracies than “Er ist wieder da”
It’s already as bad as that, the Luftwaffe still exists as an effective fighting force and has enough fuel to send Ju 188s on tactical scale missions. Historical accuracy went out the window well before the Jumbo was even added so what is your point.
1 Like
Bro just tested to make sure and no the scott cant pen the tiger unless you shoot the side(every tank can pen the side of the Tiger so I dont get the point). And the reason for not being satisfied stems from German tanks being able to point and click ally tanks without much worry about death themselves. Now I dont have a problem with that 100% I would just like to see a tank for the allies that the Germans have to actually aim for weak spots and not just point and click while also being able to fight back(the Jumbo is amazing but the 75mm is depressing, and yes I know why the 76mm Jumbo would suck as a German player. I would know I play Axis and Allies). I just felt the M26 filled the role nicely. It has good armor so it can tank a hit if you don’t take a second to aim, but many weak spots for any German player to exploit. Also the Gun(if like it is in war thunder) wouldnt be able to just shoot through the Panthers front plate or Tiger if angled, you would have to aim for weakspots just like the 76mm(its just less likely to bounce). And may I add as and EQUAL part Allies and Axis player I want to use and fight this tank(every time I play Germany as a tank there is no challenge, I want something worth fighting).
1 Like
If we are totally out of historical boundaries
I have a better idea than
But as you can see on comments nobody accepted.
And for counterbalance, now you have to add tiger 2.
T-29 is closer to an IS-2 than a KT, so why not go with either the Jumbo Pershing or Super Pershing if you really want to push balance. Both are closer to the KT.
1 Like
Yah but unlike the M26 the T-29 doesn’t never saw combat In ww2. It might be cool in its own separate sandbox like mode, but it has no basis in reality being in a ww2 scenario(“Maybe” and thats a big maybe the T26E1-1 but that would have to be in a new campaign with probably the Tiger 2 H on Axis). The entire reason I recommended the M26 was it was on the same level as the Tiger and Panther in combat ability and can be taken out by lower tier tanks because its armor good, not invincible(So if im in a Panther or Tiger its a challenge but there can be back and forth probing for weakness’s in the opponent, and in the M26 it would be the same thing). The T-29 would be not feel WW2 anymore in my opinion unless its in an event or some new game mode I don’t think it should be added.
1 Like
Pershing has no place there at Normandy. /end. Tiger has more rights to Tunisia than that. Rather than use the dev’s mistakes as foundation for your requests, lets help them get things right? ¯_(ツ)_/¯
1 Like
There was no M26 in Normandy therefore such a request in Normandy is nonsense anyway they barely saw the war just a couple of months before the war they were used. They arrived in Belgium but saw the most fighting in the invasion of Germany only a couple of hundreds they were, was too heavy for the bridges of Europe.