yeah right
Why should I punch a couple of pixels? Japanies paper tank? or KT (H)
that’s why I’m sure the game is biased Axe
E - series
and once again I am convinced that the players for the German side are the most unskilled
KT (H) - few? the tank is too weak
Any gun above 105mm has uncomfortably long reload limiting infantry support potential.
Superpershing is the superior tank because it’s reload time should be the same as the Pershing not IS-2 or worse.
if the german side is that unskilled you shouldn’t have problem with killing KT right ?
are we playing the same game ? how many solution you have to kill a KT ? Don’t have much plane for that ?
why no one talking about the same problem with the jumbo ? because thoses tanks are well armored front and just need to flank it’s funny how us main want to pen all tanks ez in the front. so they should give all BR V rank 300 mm pen so no one as prob ? Just pathetic .
we can’t follow a logic like that german were persuaded that the heavier is better. URSS and USA as show us the contrary with their respective Firefly, M4 with a 76 mm and T34-85 those 3 are medium tank made for killing heavy tank even frontally
Sherman Jumbo - have 235 armor penetration with OP APBC ?
and 80mm armor side
which by the way is another example of bias Axe side
Maybe US side have - AT Granade Lainchers with 220 and 200 mm armor piercing - like Ofenror or Panzerfaust 100
I wouldn’t mind a grenade launcher T74 or rocket T59
The developers don’t care so much that they can’t even fix the sights on the M9 which they took from an airsoft model 
and yes I found the original
http://www.90thidpg.us/Equipment/Reviews/ZLM9A1/index.html
just look at this disgrace
3 Likes
You do know that both Tiger I and II has 80mm side armour right?
i’m not talking about the pen of the jumbo or something i’m speacking of frontal armor effectivness and KT has 80 mm armor side for 76 mm in jumbo not so much difference right ?
they really took an airsoft sight model ? 
if yes it’s a little sad must admit
Realy 
and again - American tanks use wet ammunition stowage + instead in chemical composition APBC used Ammnium picrate
Other names: ammonium trinitrophenolate, explosive substance D and dunnite (in military use in the USA). Chemical formula C6H2(NO2)3ONH4, molecular weight 246.14. Nitrogen content 22.77%. Oxygen balance with oxidation to CO2: -52%. Two forms: stable yellow and metastable red. Obtained by the neutralization reaction in an aqueous solution of picric acid with ammonia in the form of a gas or aqueous solution. Ammonium picrate is one of the first high explosives that began to be used in the 19th century for loading ammunition, the name dunnite was received from the surname of US Army Major Dunn, who proposed using it in shells. Under the name Explosive D (explosive substance D) it was and is widely used in the USA
Ex USSR
Chemicla Formula
A-IX-I - 95% hexogen + 5% phlegmatizer
A-IX-I- 80% A-IX-I + 20% Al. (Al - alluminium pounder)
I could be wrong - the Germans used it RDX - hexogen in APBC
This configuration should have a positive effect and somewhat reduce the probability of shell explosions
in enlisted i get the impression that us tanks explode from a firecracker or a sneeze
I even cared so much that I found 2 types of M9 sights - Early General Electric T43 - called Bar Sight and standart T90 Polaroid
not that agree because I find that all gun tanks are way less powerfull than normally bugged HE are still here it’s the worst for the IS-2 and KV-2 and light tank like stuart wich have 37 mm gun if i’m not mistaken feel less usefull than the grenade rifle
Damn, why does the game really count 76 
If I’m not mistaken, the side is higher than the tracks closed by 2nd armor
38mm - standard sherman both armor + added metal welding steel pnate
2 armor plate 38 + 38 - it’s a not one pice steel plate 76mm
The M4A3E2 was converted using the M4A3(75)W hull that Fisher had been producing since February, 1944. The M4A3(75)W upper hull had 2.5 inches of armor plate on the front, 1.5 inches on the sides and rear and .75 inches on the top. The lower hull had 1.5 inch sides and rear, and a .5 inch floor. Using the same technique as would be employed for the M4A3E2, another .5 inch plate was welded on to the front of the belly plate to provide the drivers with additional protection from mines.
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/manufacturer/m4a3e2jumbo/m4a3e2.html
Thats right
My memory is fine
ok in WT the same bag model
even if the 76 mm aren’t made in 1 piece wich made the metal less harder if i’m not saying to much bullshit we theoricaly have 76 mm on the side
no no no
It’s one thing when a projectile passes through a solid steel plate, another when there are 2 plates
from a durability point of view, this configuration should be better
This is a very interesting topic that needs to be raised
besides armor German tanks is baffed
The armor of most German tanks Rolled homogeneous armour (RHA) x1.00
for example M4 Sherman armor Cast homogeneous armour (CHA) x0.94
and with the same armor thickness 100mm, armor resistance will vary 100 and 94
But is it really true that the armor of German tanks corresponds to the declared characteristics?
About the tank tiger B / King Tiger
according to the report and chemical analysis of the armor Tiger aust. B significantly inferior to the English cast
again, according to the research results, this is armor of medium hardness
i.e. 80 mm side will have actual resistance 75.2
if we take for example the coefficient WT СHA 0,94
we can’t see your photo or it’s only me ?
P2W best armor and best guns isn’t a good idea
2 turtle without turret and hull mg for one and commanger mg for the other. Not sure the reload would be fast too. just 2 bomb magnet tank xD. IDK if we can put this as P2W
Not necessarily. There are multiple factors that go into the time it takes to reload a canon. Not just caliber
1 Like