Tank realism

Could we get gyro stabilizer for the American tanks,
And increase on reload times while moving

10 Likes

Would rather have accurate ammo for the M4A2.

1 Like

I think getting both the historically accurate stabilizer AND the historically accurate APCBC rounds would be good, honestly don’t see a reason we couldn’t/shouldn’t get both.

T-34-85 would have two modes of turret traverse with manual and electrical traverse. If implemented in the game, the effect is the manual one is much slower allowing for more accurate shots while electrical traverse allows much faster turning of the turret.

I wish we could manually load the guns as well through a command where the commander in this case the player, orders which round to load between AP and HE which would be helpful in certain situations like when in combat and suddenly an enemy tank appears where they don’t have to give away their position by firing the main gun and just load AP instead.

1 Like

Been thinking about something like this: When the tank engine is shot, are turrets still able to operate electrically alone with what’s left of battery power? I’m not an engine expert of this era, but I would think manual operation of the turret would be a necessity if the engine just died.

Some tanks like the Sherman had an auxillary generator which would allow for electrical traverse after the engine stalled or died.

1 Like

Yes stabilizer only for american tank, as always crying

should have the crank option, slow but can save it

1 Like

They were not really used during the war, for a variety of reasons, non the least of which was nobody knew how to use or maintain them, and this created a sort of theory they were useless that lasted most of the war.

And if implemented they could have something of a “destabilizing” effect on game play :slight_smile:

Not exactly, the stablizers on the Sherman were only not used early on when the crews didn’t receive the proper training to maintain them. In 1944, all Sherman crews would have been taught to properly maintain them, so they did use them. However for gameplay, it may have adverse effects or not, it is difficult to say how a stablizer might affect American tanks, as they would mainly only be useful against other tanks.

1 Like

I generally do not mind, the m4a1 has such a feature, I just wonder why no one under this thread is not expressed “oh ally whining and demanding a buff”, as it works with any thread about the axis?
The same update where they added the m4a1 76 said the mg34 was “accurate and reliable”, I haven’t noticed its accuracy yet - it’s the most inaccurate MG in the game. Many things don’t match the description.
The game is made by some people, the text is written by others.

Thats inconsistent with my reading on the subject.

In a nutshell at first non of the tank crews were trained on them and the maintaince personal had no idea how to work on them.

And this never really changed, and they were largely “unplugged” and not trusted, and that the problem with them which was largely perception, never really was resolved for the rest of the war.

But were only as good as our sources.

From what I read, the crews were not taught to maintain the stabilizer in the beginning because the stabilizer itself was classified and thus your average solider would have no idea how it worked, which lead to that perception. However by 1944, that issue had been resolved and the stabilizers were received more warmly, especially on the 76mm Shermans. However as you said, we are only as good as our sources, and will thus probably not be able to convince the other.

I don’t know either, but it could be that it is rotated using battery power.