The M18 GMC is a tank destroyer on BR4 in the US tech tree, and it’s known as a glass cannon - with a very heavy emphasis on the glass part. This tank has next to no armor, being open topped and with only 12-25mm armor being the average values, most tanks even at low BR can destroy you without a problem. While it is very fast at 80 KpH and has a decent cannon for the BR (although not the best, considering what it can face), it still has no reason to be used. Both the M4A1 (76) and M4A2 (76) Shermans are on BR4, and due to the combined factors of having servicable armor, not being open topped, having the same gun and a coaxial machine gun, the M18 is completely obsolete.
At BR3 however, it will be a much better vehicle. There, it’s main competitor is the M10 GMC, which is similar in many ways, but would still have a vastly different playstyle. The M10 actually has much more armor than the M18 does, 50mms on most surfaces + the sloped hull gives it much better survivability, but also has the open topped weakness the M18 does. The M18 would be significantly faster than the M10, with it’s max speed of 80 KpH being nearly double compared to 48 KpH. Despite the two having different names for their main guns, both have the same shell stats.
I think that moving this down to BR3 would be a valuable change to this vehicle, as it is now it’s heavily obsolete, but would be a well balanced and fun vehicle on BR3
I understand the reasoning, but the poor M10 already barely has enough of a reason to be used as is, you’d effectively be killing it. M10s deserve love too.
Hellcat will always be in a stupid spot because it has no armor but a BR4 gun.
How do you balance having no armor? You could just as well move it to BR1 without it being OP, its performance will practically be the same everywhere just BR5 and some BR4 tanks will survive its hits.
An argument could be made that Panzer IV J/H does have very simmilar penetration values, so the US 76mm guns are actually not that powerful in comparison. That being said Panzer IVs are also glass canons.
M10 is in a good spot, and since we have Jackson with its 90mm gun, there really isnt any reason to use M18 at all.
People who say its unfair in BR3 because of its mobility should also fear Pumas by the same logic.
To be honest the hellcat sucks in enlisted because of the trash linear map design it can’t leverage its mobility this is a problem for all light vehicles in Enlisted, we need more open maps with usable flanking routes like we use to have on invasion of Normandy before they “fixed” the map and removed all the flanking routes.
Great idea, but with Dark Flow’s slow progress, I reckon this thing’s just gonna gather dust for years.
Its high mobility doesn’t really shine here either. It’s squishy with a 76mm cannon—might as well add the cast hull M4A1 76mm at BR 3.
In War Thunder it’s at 5.7+ because the maps are huge, and it slaughters newbies facing the German zoo.
But here, the maps are small; open-top + thin armor makes it really weak. Plus the 76mm doesn’t have enough HE, making it like a fast M10.
And since the M10 is already at BR 4, if the M18 gets lowered, I don’t think DF will agree—because the M18 would take the M10’s place as the anti-BR4 tank, making the M10 barely used.
Also, the obstruction settings for stone walls, trees, wreckage, and other objects on the maps really need to be adjusted. Right now, even the slightest collision with them instantly drops the tank’s speed to zero.
These are tanks weighing tons—how can they get stopped dead by stuff like that? It’s so frustrating.
That’s another big reason why high-mobility tanks can’t perform properly here.
The M10 should have stepped aside ages ago. It’s not the backbone of BR3, and it shouldn’t be treated as the only viable tank at that BR either.
Let me ask you this: most players only have one tank slot. Are they really gonna use the M10 just for anti-tank duty, or go for a more all-around Sherman? The M10 is old. It’s usable, sure—but just look at BR3: there are already four Shermans. When you’ve got the 105 Sherman and the thin-armor cast-hull Shermans together, do you complain that the later models are stealing picks from the early ones?
Right now the M18 is in a way worse and more awkward spot than the M10. Why don’t you put yourself in my shoes for once?
Kinda applies to every tank on progressive TT.
Why use KTP if you can use KTH ?
Anyway, bottomline is regardless its not all that great in its BR, does lowering it fk up something else ?
If you move M18 to BR3 then the M10 is “useless” so what shall we do with it then ? Move to BR2 where its obviously way too good.
Id rather see equipment being uptiered and being less useful than being downtiered and being better than rest of the said BR.
A mouse is hard to catch out in the open, but put it on sticky traps or in a narrow maze—and it’s as good as caught. That’s exactly what the maps are like here.
I’ve seen Squad 1944: a 76mm Sherman can take out six Tigers just because the maps are huge. But in this game, where it’s mostly head-on brawling, our whole playstyle has to change. It’s like how line infantry tactics became useless once machine guns were invented—same logic.
Another way : adding a br 6 for tanks/ guns (mainly proto sf ) who are to strong to fight against br4. By this way, br4 will be more “viable” against br5
