If be seriously, as I understand it, Decard was bantering on another topic about the t-60. All this was at the start of the OBT.
“You have created machine-gun tanks of the first shooting range, but the T 60 with its 35 and 25 mm in the forehead is no good. I demand one or more of what I offer:
1)Reducing the Armor penetration of the 20 mm TSHN cannon to 10-14 mm
2) Reduction of the hull armor to 20-25 mm (ey, even the second tank of the Germans for some reason does not penetrate the armor of this tankette)
3) Increasing the penetration of the 37-mm KwK36 gun to 35 mm so that it is possible to fight the t60 because it shoots you head-on calmly and you again have to aim a small pixel of the mask for penetration.
4) the impossibility of getting into the rink of a player with a tank of the second shooting range to the first shooting range, and so on. that is, the tanks of the first shooting range T60 and Pz2c are kneaded among themselves, t26 and pz3B among themselves and bt7 and pz3E among themselves.
Thank you for your attention.
P,P. Not the whining of a German, so I grind both the Soviets and the Germans, and I know what ez games on the t60 are and how difficult it is to resist it”
The Sten submachine gun and the M3A1 are actually inferior to the M1A1 submachine gun, the former only does 6.6 damage and fires too slowly, while the latter fires less than 500 rounds per minute, except for the Lancaster
When you fire with the M1A1 Thomson, you will find that your gun shakes erratically like a seizure, and the M1 Thomson will let the sight hit you straight in the eye
I swear I’m trying to understand, but I’m not sure anymore what you mean, since in one post you appear to imply that Thompsons are better than Sten and ME, while in another you appear to imply the opposite.
