Please gaijin add USA T71 "m36 b1,b2 " Gun Motor Carriage RB 3.7

[EDSmike74]

This would allow us to face KV1 and T34 from a historical point of view in RB 3.7.
Gun 90mm and M2 Browning .50 Cal with armored canopy above the open-topped turret.

The first M36 prototype was completed in March 1943.

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/M36_tank_destroyer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBwNaJcwvtc

[jr83]

Originally posted by EDSmike74:

This would allow us to face KV1 and T34 from a historical point of view in RB 3.7.
Gun 90mm and M2 Browning .50 Cal with armored canopy above the open-topped turret.

The first M36 prototype was completed in March 1943.

https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/M36_tank_destroyer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBwNaJcwvtc

"We" already can face KV-1s and T-34s with what the US lineup has now. You're not shooting them right. As soon as you learn where to shoot them they become nothing. The US does not have an issue against the early KV-1s and T-34s in that BR range.

[FireFromBehind]

Also, uf you want Gaijin to see tbese recommendations, go to the offical forums.

[EDSmike74]

What good is the steam forum for the game, if they don't care about their community? it's not all very professional.

[FireFromBehind]

Originally posted by EDSmike74:

What good is the steam forum for the game, if they don't care about their community? it's not all very professional.

Ummm, they don't read stam. That is what OFFICAL FORUMS is for. They aren't being unprofessinal.

[-NODER-_Novastorm_]

This game br is not much about dates but more about balance, good example would be tiger1 facing 3.7 stuff if this was made according to historical dates.
Look at bit higher brs, ww2 goes vs korean and cold war stuff.
what you are asking might come at higher br than kv1 for sure.

[EDSmike74]

Originally posted by FireFromBehind:

Originally posted by EDSmike74:

What good is the steam forum for the game, if they don't care about their community? it's not all very professional.

Ummm, they don't read stam. That is what OFFICAL FORUMS is for. They aren't being unprofessinal.

I posted on Feedback and Suggestions that's what it's for, we'll see, if it is not used to post the suggestions and although it all simply removes this category from the forum.

[EDSmike74]

Originally posted by Novastorm:

This game br is not much about dates but more about balance, good example would be tiger1 facing 3.7 stuff if this was made according to historical dates.
Look at bit higher brs, ww2 goes vs korean and cold war stuff.
what you are asking might come at higher br than kv1 for sure.

it's just that we no longer have anti tanks between 3.3 and 5.3 in RB and no heavy chard between 2.7 and 4.7 in rb.
I think you understand the problem if you see what we have to face.

[Rommell8]

this is not BR problem. I'd assume he OP wants a TD that wont die from airplane machine guns in 3.7

[biomike]

Originally posted by EDSmike74:

Originally posted by Novastorm:

This game br is not much about dates but more about balance, good example would be tiger1 facing 3.7 stuff if this was made according to historical dates.
Look at bit higher brs, ww2 goes vs korean and cold war stuff.
what you are asking might come at higher br than kv1 for sure.

it's just that we no longer have anti tanks between 3.3 and 5.3 in RB and no heavy chard between 2.7 and 4.7 in rb.
I think you understand the problem if you see what we have to face.

You can still use the M10 at higher BRs
Oh yes heavy tanks not like there are nations that dont have any in the tech tree, if they can work without them then so can the US tech tree

[EDSmike74]

Originally posted by biomike:

Originally posted by EDSmike74:

it's just that we no longer have anti tanks between 3.3 and 5.3 in RB and no heavy chard between 2.7 and 4.7 in rb.
I think you understand the problem if you see what we have to face.

You can still use the M10 at higher BRs
Oh yes heavy tanks not like there are nations that dont have any in the tech tree, if they can work without them then so can the US tech tree

why do you mind me asking gaijin to fill a gap in the american tree ?, Other nations can do the same if they want vehicles.

[Космонавт]

There is no way 90mm with proper roof and no significant disadvantages will be at 3.7. If you don't understand why that is so then you have absolutely no idea how this game is (and will be) balanced. Year of production doesn't play a role in this at all. You can ask for it every day for the next 10 years - it will never happen, because this is stupid.

[EDSmike74]

So clean and so true there is a Russian bias by the game developers ?

[FavoriteBully]

I think pairing the vehicles according to their year of introduction would be lots of fun, even if its not balanced

[FireFromBehind]

Originally posted by FavoriteBully:

I think pairing the vehicles according to their year of introduction would be lots of fun, even if its not balanced

Panzer II facing KV-2. Yes, I want to see that. They should also add realistic models like transmission failures and fires. It would be so much fun /s

[EDSmike74]

Fuel shortages too. XD