Remove M72 shell, and provide M61 shell for USA BR2 tanks

Suggestions Vehicles
1
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

This suggestion will affect the following tanks

BR2 M72
BR2 M722060×317 662 KB

Currently, these tanks use M72 AP shells for their 75mm guns. Which is a solid AP shell without high explosive fillers.
image

Normally, when it hit enemy tank, things go like this:

m72hit
m72hit2008×441 920 KB

In most cases, your first three shells will kill one enemy each time, and when you hit the right spot, it will kill two crew. It can never achieve the same effect as APHE shell, and cannot even compare with 45mm and 50mm APHE shells.
As the number of enemy tank crew decreases, the killing efficiency will become lower and lower. In the most extreme case, you may need 4-5 additional shots to kill the last crew member (you cannot ignore it because it still has the ability to shoot back)

The loading time of Grant and Lee’s 75mm gun is 4.8 seconds, but the installation position is bad, and the target of the vehicle itself is way to huge, making it vulnerable to preemptive strikes(Considering that it has a larger ammunition rack, the chance of ammo detonation will be greater).
The M8A1 has a loading time of 5 seconds and excellent maneuverability, but it is a open-topped vehicle that is easily destroyed by high explosive shells and aircraft cannons.
The M24 is currently the most “standard” tank who still firing M72 shell, but its loading time is 6.5 seconds. When it fires 2 rounds, other BR2 tanks are already sufficient to fire 3-4 shells.

Compared to their enemies in BR2, the Panzer IV has equally poor lethality, but a much faster firing rate(3.3sec reload), while the Panzer III J1 and PUMA’s 50mm guns have better lethality while firing faster(3.7sec reload). Ho-I lacks an advantage in anti tank firepower, but almost all shells can be used to against infantry (it has an APHE shell with 470g charge; once penetrated, it will kill everything) while having much better survivability (especially when facing Bazooka, it can withstand many shots).

Providing M61 shells to these tanks can improve the problem of insufficient AT firepower of the USA BR2 tanks. Of course it brings some problems, such as the need for Ho-Ni III down to BR2 to improve the AT firepower of Japanese BR2, but that’s another topic.
image

Any way, the M72 shell is no longer suitable for use due to its bad performance, and USA BR2 tanks need a better APHE shell.

8 Likes
2

Have been asking for better rounds for m24 since i bought it 2 years ago

2 Likes
3

No to m24 apcbc… i use it all the time and really just do not find it hard sniping the gunner… moving quickly then hitting it again.

Also, comparing the reload of a long 75mm to 50 mm or short 75 is disingenuous.

1 Like
4

Oh, by the way, don’t forget that British tank that was sent to assist the Soviet Union. This thing is now so rarely used. A single shot from it has extremely low lethality. It’s even worse than the 50cm long cannon of Germany. I strongly hope that at least the M3 can be obtained first. Lady Sherry at least paid for it, so she deserves to be treated fairly. Everyone should be treated equally.

1 Like
5

The long 75mm gun that fires M72 shell is actually far inferior to the 50mm and short 75mm guns.
Unfortunately, there is no intermediate option between M72 and M61

2 Likes
6

You can compare 75 to 75 then and it’s still much worse. And incase you haven’t noticed, all the german short 75s perform better than the m24 and has just as much penn

1 Like
7

Better reload + HEAT and apc rounds… no wonder.

8

Right…so why is it unfair to give m24 a better round when german tanks perform just as good as m24 with m61?

2 Likes
9

Stop worrying about historical accuracy. Because of the ammunition they use, these two tanks are practically way too weak — way too underpowered. If you like it, just go and demand to keep solid shot for them. Look at Germany’s low-tier tanks now — the short 75mm guns have already all been given new shells. Why can’t these older tanks get new ammo too? The Sherman got its M61 shell updated ages ago, after all.

1 Like
10

It’s not about historical accuracy it’s because i think it’s fine where it is… i have no problem with it and quite frankly have bad feelings towards it as one person has been specifically spamming this over and over and repetition is annoying.

11

Well, if we’re talking specifically about the M42…

Germany already has HEAT shells for its short 75mm guns at Battle Rating 2.0 — you know, the kind of premium ammo that used to be exclusive to the paid Pz.IV E during the Moscow campaign. Now that it’s available in the tech tree, it’s basically everywhere. This isn’t like some rare high-penetration 50mm round — the HEAT shell’s explosive filler is serious business. Against tanks like the Crusader or M3, it can pretty much disable them in one shot.

Now looking back at the tanks mentioned in this post… they still haven’t received updated ammo. It’s just that they were introduced too late — even the Pz.IV has been updated, but they’re still stuck with old shells. At this point, seeing them in-game is practically a rarity. They weren’t strong to begin with, and not giving them better ammo feels… excessive.

As for the M42 — honestly, even if it got updated ammo, I don’t think it would shake things up too much. As a premium tank, I think it’s fine to let it have shells comparable to the Sherman’s. After all, its hull can still be easily destroyed by a 50mm gun — it’s no Tiger in terms of toughness. German anti-tank weapons can still take it out without much trouble.

…Oh, wait, I just realized you mentioned “spamming.” I didn’t see who was spamming — I only just opened this thread for the first time and noticed the mention of this tank. I had honestly forgotten it even existed. Haven’t run into one in ages, and I’ve never really thought about advocating for its buff.

1 Like
12

he made an account to post here but since obviously more people have suggested it other than that person so it’s not fair to have such a bias… it would make the tank on apr to other ones i suppose even the pz 3 m

1 Like
13

Although it’s not just him suggesting this — how do I put it? If someone posts a thread and nobody responds, it gradually gets forgotten, and no one cares anymore. But if multiple people keep bringing up the same topic over time, I think that’s actually a good thing — it means more and more people are paying attention to it. Maybe he specifically came here to post because he’s been struggling with this vehicle himself and feels it at least deserves better ammunition.

Wait, which tank are you referring to? Are you talking about the British twin-turret Grant? The Panzer III M at least has some capability — it can somewhat engage a KV, even if not very effectively. But that British tank… without a decent explosive shell, it really has no chance to survive. A Panzer IV could easily tear it apart.

As for the Chaffee — it’s an American tank, and a 1944 model at that. It should definitely have access to the M61 shell.

1 Like
14

Are you talking about this post, perhaps? Give the m24 m61/apcbc It only mentions the M24, but now this post covers all BR2 tanks, including the Grant, M3Lee, and M8A1 tank destroyer.

However, my suggestion is to include all BR2 tanks.
Among these shells, it’s particularly ironic that the M8A1 doesn’t get the M61—its penetration and post-penetration effects are inferior to the original, and its only advantage is shell velocity. But slower shell velocity isn’t entirely a drawback either. Honestly, this thing isn’t great when it’s available, nor is it particularly missed when it’s removed. It’s just pointless through and through. What are your thoughts on British tanks?

2 Likes
15

ok if the ap is already good then surely apcbc shouldnt make that much of a difference

16

crazy that u admitted urself you are against this only cuz of a person. means youre not a very objective person even if you pertend to be

17

maybe if you didn’t mention it every given chance and post it in multiple different formats all trying to achieve the same goal i wouldnt be so biased against it . just a thought.

18

What on earth are you talking about? I can’t follow, but in this thread, are you arguing with about three people? The original poster, the one with the purple username who commented first, and then the second person who replied to you. This is the issue—when problems accumulate without being resolved, they’ll keep resurfacing. That’s just reality. New posts are made every day, and while older suggestions might have been valuable, they get buried due to lack of attention until everyone forgets they ever existed. In the end, those threads die, lingering unresolved and meaningless. But if something is truly important, it will keep coming up. Plus, this suggestion is actually a good one—it covers all 75mm guns at BR 2.

1 Like
19

I’m specifically put off on this topic because of one specific someones incessant mentioning of it on the reddit which what can i expect right… i also disagree because it is long 75 even if its worse than kwk40… on principle.

Other tanks sure… premiums are notoriously down or sidegrades to tech tree… and this is such with m24 and scott.

20

God forbid a popular suggestion was mentioned multiple times. For some reason that means you lost all ability to use logic and now have an irrational hatred against the m24 chaffee