What is the difference between M4A1 and the next tank M4?

[rolypoly]

I look at the tank cards (RB), and I see no difference. I look at the modifications, and they have the same option of shells.

What is the difference between these two?

[Katokevin]

The turret is better protected. The M4 has a proper mantlet insted of the M4A1's bolted on plate around the gun with a small verticle plate that moves with the gun. The M4 also has an 88.9mm thick piece of armor protecting the gunner and commander. Simply put, the M4 has far better turret protection.

[NAF-5th.Legion-Waffen.Div]

Originally posted by vegans save planets:

I look at the tank cards (RB), and I see no difference. I look at the modifications, and they have the same option of shells.

What is the difference between these two?

the hull

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

M4 has much better hull, the curved edges of M4A1 hull are major weakspot, one shot diagonally through there or from front at slight angle and usually it's bye bye Sheman.

[Datname]

Originally posted by Rumpelcrutchskin:

M4 has much better hull, the curved edges of M4A1 hull are major weakspot, one shot diagonally through there or from front at slight angle and usually it's bye bye Sheman.

Not that the sherman gets onsgotted by everything already

[rolypoly]

I never thought the Sherman's strengths was armour anyway? Decently fast, manueverable, and that ungodly gun depression makes for some excellent turret - and even sometimes - hulldown work over hills and obstacles.

... just so long as the gun is good enough?

[Katokevin]

Originally posted by vegans save planets:

I never thought the Sherman's strengths was armour anyway? Decently fast, manueverable, and that ungodly gun depression makes for some excellent turret - and even sometimes - hulldown work over hills and obstacles.

... just so long as the gun is good enough?

The first two are not bad for where they sit, but ones like the M4A2 (76) are bad. At that point, anything can penetrate you, easily 1 shot you, and your gun and ammo are 'meh' at best. Prepare for a long grind once you get into late Tier II and early Tier III.

[Rumpelcrutchskin]

Originally posted by Шогк наяdег Комгдdе☭:

The first two are not bad for where they sit, but ones like the M4A2 (76) are bad. At that point, anything can penetrate you, easily 1 shot you, and your gun and ammo are 'meh' at best. Prepare for a long grind once you get into late Tier II and early Tier III.

I have every single Sherman spaded including Jumbos and lets just say that once you hit 5.0 the fun factor goes downhill like bus full of weight watchers with no brakes.

[rolypoly]

But do the later US heavy tanks make up for that?
And if it's not fun at 5.0 with US, what nation is it fun with?

[Katokevin]

Originally posted by vegans save planets:

But do the later US heavy tanks make up for that?
And if it's not fun at 5.0 with US, what nation is it fun with?

It gets a bit better for the US once you hit the 90mm guns (like the T25, M26, etc) as you stand a better fighting chance a lot of the time with the much needed firepower improvement. 5.0 range that I like is the Germans, mostly the Tiger H1 and Panther D combo at 5.7. You're going to need to try each nation at that BR to find what you like though. I also don't mind the Brits in the later 5.0 range.