New M4/T26 BR.

[Flak_Dancer 9,733]

I tested this new vehicle in the Dev server and i think 6.0 is a bit high for this vehicle. With the lack of stbz. and regular sherman hull probably is not enough for a 6.0 tank, basically is a more protected but slower M 36 so 5.7 looks like a better BR option for this new tank.

 

What do you think???

[Jarms 1,558]

Yeah, I was thinking 5.7 for this, and fingers crossed, T25 down to 6.0. 

[KillaKiwi 5,478]

Since I'm fine with the T25 being 6.3, 6.0 would make sense.

 

If you think about it, it's just a Super Sherman that fires APHE and has a better protected turret.

 

What holds back the M36 is the weak turret, so you're still quite vulnerable in hull down positions.

 

It's got 500hp so I'll assume it's a M4A3E8 chassis, boosting mobility over the T25 but with a worse reverse speed.

So it's going to be a M36 with a lot more survivability but all the strenghts.

[MiseryIndex556@psn 13,155]

I predict it will be interesting for a while but it won’t be competitive. It doesn’t have APCR, the solid shot is still nerfed, the M82 is a fantasy creation by Gaijin. The M36 at 5.7 at least gets HEATFS, the higher velocity M82 and APCR. 

[KillaKiwi 5,478]

25 minutes ago, MiseryIndex556@psn said:

I predict it will be interesting for a while but it won’t be competitive. It doesn’t have APCR, the solid shot is still nerfed, the M82 is a fantasy creation by Gaijin.

Hope they give it APCR. Would be super weird to not give it APCR o_O

25 minutes ago, MiseryIndex556@psn said:

The M36 at 5.7 at least gets HEATFS, the higher velocity M82 and APCR. 

Yeah but it's slow and dies easily. Not really a great vehicle.

Edited June 1, 2023 by KillaKiwi

[MiseryIndex556@psn 13,155]

11 minutes ago, KillaKiwi said:

Hope they give it APCR. Would be super weird to not give it APCR o_O

Yeah but it's slow and dies easily. Not really a great vehicle.

Sure, the M36 isn’t fast but it’s far more potent of a vehicle. 
 

The M4/T26 is a glass cannon with a nerfed cannon. 
 

@Smin1080p will the M4/T26 receive APCR?

[Smin1080p_WT 60,444]

1 hour ago, MiseryIndex556@psn said:

Sure, the M36 isn’t fast but it’s far more potent of a vehicle. 
 

The M4/T26 is a glass cannon with a nerfed cannon. 
 

@Smin1080p will the M4/T26 receive APCR?

 

It's not planned to at this time.

[KillaKiwi 5,478]

1 hour ago, MiseryIndex556@psn said:

Sure, the M36 isn’t fast but it’s far more potent of a vehicle. 

Not really. The M36 at 5.3 is great because of it's mobilty and cannon while the M36B2 is slower and it's one main selling point, the HEAT-FS, is super situational.

The M36 should be played like an M18 with more firepower while the M36B2 loses mobility and therfore suriviability and firepower.

 

1 hour ago, MiseryIndex556@psn said:

The M4/T26 is a glass cannon with a nerfed cannon. 

So kinda like most medium tanks. Except the turret is still quite strong. It's better than any other medium at 6.0.

Let's not forget that the T20 is also 6.0.

2 minutes ago, Smin1080p said:

 

It's not planned to at this time.

Who came up with that stupid idea? Same people that increased the BR of the T20 from 5.0 to 6.0 and never gave it APCR like the medium with the same gun at 5.7? o_O

Every US 90mm gun has APCR available so why wouldn't this also be able to use it?

Edited June 1, 2023 by KillaKiwi

[MiseryIndex556@psn 13,155]

56 minutes ago, Smin1080p said:

 

It's not planned to at this time.

 

So it gets a fake M82, nerfed T33 and no APCR. Ahistorical nerfs should not be the basis for balance. 

@Smin1080p 

[Whiskey_077 1,785]

2 hours ago, MiseryIndex556@psn said:

I predict it will be interesting for a while but it won’t be competitive. It doesn’t have APCR, the solid shot is still nerfed, the M82 is a fantasy creation by Gaijin. The M36 at 5.7 at least gets HEATFS, the higher velocity M82 and APCR. 

 

2 hours ago, KillaKiwi said:

Hope they give it APCR. Would be super weird to not give it APCR o_O

Yeah but it's slow and dies easily. Not really a great vehicle.

Special Mention to Overpressure by Artilery or HE round. (Loved to bully them with my 17pounder HE)

[BadOpinionHaver 2,092]

6 hours ago, MiseryIndex556@psn said:

 

So it gets a fake M82, nerfed T33 and no APCR. Ahistorical nerfs should not be the basis for balance. 

@Smin1080p 

bearing in mind all US APCR is also nerfed below historical levels and the APHE won't be stock unlike on every single German tank it faces, and that even with APHE you essentially get the same performance as a Panther's gun on a slower chassis with half the armour.

 

Wow, very exciting addition!

[SlayerMkX 9,961]

Having a strong turret would mean something if gaijin actually made maps were you could play hull down, instead of the constant urban and small maps we get.

[BadOpinionHaver 2,092]

35 minutes ago, SlayerMkX said:

Having a strong turret would mean something if gaijin actually made maps were you could play hull down, instead of the constant urban and small maps we get.

The Pershing's turret isn't even that strong at the BR if you aim for the cheeks.

 

This entire vehicle is a worthless addition when the M36 already exists and if Gaijin actually wanted to give the US some mid tier punching power they could just fix APCR and solid shot.

[Abrams_X 1,234]

17 hours ago, KillaKiwi said:

It's got 500hp so I'll assume it's a M4A3E8 chassis, boosting mobility over the T25 but with a worse reverse speed.

It is M4(105) hull with R975-C4 engine. Its engine power will be reduced to 460 hp at 2400 rpm.

[MiseryIndex556@psn 13,155]

26 minutes ago, Abrams_X said:

It is M4(105) hull with R975-C4 engine. Its engine power will be reduced to 460 hp at 2400 rpm.

And that’s another frustrating aspect. The M4 105 hull was just used to test fit the turret. An M4A3 HVSS hull was tested with the T26 turret for over 2000 miles. Gaijin continually gives us the worst variant of a vehicle they can. 

[Abrams_X 1,234]

23 minutes ago, MiseryIndex556@psn said:

And that’s another frustrating aspect. The M4 105 hull was just used to test fit the turret. An M4A3 HVSS hull was tested with the T26 turret for over 2000 miles. Gaijin continually gives us the worst variant of a vehicle they can. 

As far as I know, only one test vehicle with T26 was assembled in Detroit Arsenal in 1944. The project was canceled as it is predicted to take more months to prepare production.

[FlipAllTheTables 61]

6 hours ago, Abrams_X said:

It is M4(105) hull with R975-C4 engine. Its engine power will be reduced to 460 hp at 2400 rpm.

Will it actually get the R-975-C4, or is that just what is expected? Because so far, every single tank that should have the C4 engine ends up with the C1 engine (M4A1 (76), M18, and as far as I'm aware, M4A1 FL10 and M4A4 SA50). The M4A1 (76) is in the exact same position even, as it is also a late large hatch Sherman which only entered production after the C4 engine appeared, yet it still only gets the C1 engine. So I have my doubts that the M4/T26 will actually just get the C1 engine instead.

 

5 hours ago, Abrams_X said:

As far as I know, only one test vehicle with T26 was assembled in Detroit Arsenal in 1944. The project was canceled as it is predicted to take more months to prepare production.

Edited June 2, 2023 by FlipAllTheTables

[Abrams_X 1,234]

28 minutes ago, FlipAllTheTables said:

Will it actually get the R-975-C4, or is that just what is expected? Because so far, every single tank that should have the C4 engine ends up with the C1 engine (M4A1 (76), M18, and as far as I'm aware, M4A1 FL10 and M4A4 SA50). The M4A1 (76) is in the exact same position even, as it is also a late large hatch Sherman which only entered production after the C4 engine appeared, yet it still only gets the C1 engine. So I have my doubts that the M4/T26 will actually just get the C1 engine instead.

Since there is only one vehicle assembled with a late production M4(105) hull, it should be C4 engine. Hull registration number of it is 30103950 which is built in June 1944.

Those with C1 engine are "early production vehicles" according to developer...

31 minutes ago, FlipAllTheTables said:

Thanks, I have never seen that document before.

[FlipAllTheTables 61]

42 minutes ago, Abrams_X said:

Those with C1 engine are "early production vehicles" according to developer...

Exactly my point.

Gaijin decides that they are "early production" even if said vehicles are very clearly not. The M4A1 (76) and the M4A1 FL10 are both large hatch Shermans, and large hatch hulls only start appearing in early 1944, while the R-975-C4 engine replaced the C1 engine in late 1943.

Purely through deductive reasoning, even the very first models of these tanks wouldn't have the R-975-C1 engine (so it being "early production" of these specific tanks wouldn't matter either way), specially the M4A1 FL10 given it is a post war vehicle, or even the M4A4 SA50 which, from what I read, is a post war modification of the M4A4 where, among other things, the multibank engine was specifically replaced with the R-975-C4 (they probably wouldn't even have C1 engines available by the time the tank was built), but in the end it is Gaijin's choice and their decision is to make ahistorical tanks. In fact, not a single tank in this game to my knowledge has the R-975-C4, it's almost like Gaijin just specifically hates that engine.

 

And that can very well apply to the M4/T26, even though the one that we have in the game is based around the June 1944 large hatch M4 (105) hull modified with a T26 turret. We will only know when the tank is in our hands.

Edited June 2, 2023 by FlipAllTheTables

[RooSterRed91 4]

Bottom line is this is a USA vehicle and will be over BR'd and ahistorical to fit Gaijins narrative of making sure USA tech tree is insanely compressed in the 6.0 - 6.7 range. Also theyve based vehicles off of "zekret documents" but when someone posts clear as day history evidence (IE USA APCR) they turn the other way. 

this vehicle will suck because sherman chasis at 6.0 end of story.

 

Also vehicles that fought panthers /tiger 1's will continue to be far higher BR like the pershing and all the T tank series.

T20 -6.0 for no reason without smoke and apcr. UFP nerfed from 76mm RHA to 63CHA. engine performance nerfed so its super slow despite stat card.

T14 nerfed to 4.7 from 4.3. No real reason just cause they could while KV1B and Kv1E continue to slam  dunk at 4.0

t25 stab removed why simultaneously going up to 6.3 making its existence in the game irrelevant.

M26 at 6.3 despite being a more maneuverable tiger. fought panthers IRL and was designed as a USA tiger equivalent. sits a full 1 BR above tigers and panthers, will never encounter the vehicles it was designed to fight because USA is uptiered 90% in matches.

sherman jumbo 76mm cannon variant. sits at 6.3 because gaijin listens to weeaboo tears. despite a multitude of answers to this vehicles armor existing in the game with the introduction of secondary nations like sweden and Italy with the overpressure mechanics and early HEAT and sabot rounds. A tiger 1 can still 1 tap a jumbo  at 500m in the cupola, MG port or anywhere from the side and rear.

2 of the sherman 76mm cannon variants sitting at 5.3 and the other at 5.7. despite the upgrades to these vehicles historically they function exactly the same as their 4.7 counterpart. just enough armor to detonate all charges to be 1 shot from any direction in the hull. higher BR than tigers and panthers, (again for no reason).

 

Bottom line is there is no point to playing any new USA vehicles at this BR because they will be intentionally nerfed and just sit in this overly congested rating. Snails metric for (BR balance) as they call it is battle efficiency . however this is a very loose metric that isnt accurate enough on its own to actual balance the games BR for ground vehicles. someone can literally bring out a vehicle and afk 1000 times and it affects the  battle efficiency. ANother problem is also super rare vehicles that only a couple hundred people actually have, it becomes super skewed .

 

the list just keeps going and going. 

[scorpian 176]

 Anyways, my thoughts on the new Sherman is that, either 5.7 or God forbid 6.0, the firepower is still lackluster for Warthunder style gameplay. Anything the 76 can't pen, neither will the 90 its just the way of how Gaijin models these guns.

 

So we basically have a Sherman, with an unstabilized gun that won't benifit in frontal engagements with Panthers because it still uses the fantasy m82, and it still cant pen the UFP despite the mind boggling amount of reports sent to Gaijin. Not only that, but it's mounted on an inferior Sherman variant when it should be mounted on a M4A3 HVSS hull.

 

The only use this tank will have is a skill check if the German Player knows where to aim at a Pershings turret to kill jt.

[__Renzo__ 2,684]

On 02/06/2023 at 06:35, Abrams_X said:

It is M4(105) hull with R975-C4 engine. Its engine power will be reduced to 460 hp at 2400 rpm.

So even less reason for it to be 6.0. At least Gaijin should move it to 5.7, it's a pretty decent counterpart to the Panther A which is 5.7.

[FlipAllTheTables 61]

14 hours ago, RooSterRed91 said:

T20 -6.0 for no reason without smoke and apcr. UFP nerfed from 76mm RHA to 63CHA. engine performance nerfed so its super slow despite stat card.

This is untrue. The engine of the T20 performs exactly up to specification, 500 gross horsepower at 2600 rpm. You could, however, make the case that the transmission of the T20 is incorrectly modeled, as transmissions with torque converters get extra gear ratios to emulate the torque multiplication of the torque converter, something that the T20 is missing as it has the normal amount of gears (3 forwards, 1 reverse). The M26 and M18, for example, both have 6 forwards and 2 reverse, when in real life it is the exact same number of gears as the T20. However it is difficult to find sources available online besides Hunnicutt, so for now this is how the T20 will be modeled, unless Gaijin decides that suddenly Hunnicutt alone is good enough.

 

14 hours ago, RooSterRed91 said:

M26 at 6.3 despite being a more maneuverable tiger. fought panthers IRL and was designed as a USA tiger equivalent. sits a full 1 BR above tigers and panthers, will never encounter the vehicles it was designed to fight because USA is uptiered 90% in matches.

What it fought in real life does not matter as BR is based on the performance of the vehicle itself. If you want to make this argument, then the M24 should be able to fight Panthers and both types of Tigers (I and II), T-34-85s, maybe even IS-3s. For obvious reasons, no-one actually wants that as that would be highly unfair for the M24 itself, but it is a fact that the first M24's showed up in Europe in November 1944, and these tanks were used all the way up to Korea.

BRs based on historical engagements and historical matchmaking to that degree would be bad for every single person involved, and that would include the "technologically advanced" Germany, since they would face KV-1s and T-34s with their short 75 mm Pz.IVs and short 50 mm Pz.IIIs. We already had this exact scenario that I just mentioned with World War Mode and it was, unsurprisingly, awful.

 

On top of that, the M26 isn't just supposed to be a Tiger equivalent. The armor was specifically designed so the M26 would stop the Tiger's 88 mm while having a gun that could take out both the Tiger and the Panther. If anything, the M26 is a Tiger counter and it does just that in-game, having armor that is, again, able to stop the Tiger's 88 mm (except on weak spots of course) while the 90 mm allows you to very easily take out a perfectly angled Tiger, even with the weaker penetration M82.

Effectively, the Tiger has to actually aim when shooting the M26, while the M26 doesn't (to a certain degree). Given this it makes perfect sense that the M26 would be higher BR.

 

14 hours ago, RooSterRed91 said:

A tiger 1 can still 1 tap a jumbo  at 500m in the cupola, MG port or anywhere from the side and rear.

The Jumbo's cupola and MG port are much tinier weak spots compared to the Tiger H1's cupola, which the Jumbo 75 can also easily penetrate, while also having a much faster fire rate, meaning that if both tanks miss their respective weak spots, the Jumbo will likely get the second shot faster, not to mention the stabilizer making it more likely that the Tiger won't get a first shot to begin with.

Besides, I don't get how the Jumbo being killable from the sides and rear is an argument. Isn't every single tank at this BR like that? The Jumbo's own 75 mm will kill a Tiger H1 or E at 500 meters from the side.

 

14 hours ago, RooSterRed91 said:

2 of the sherman 76mm cannon variants sitting at 5.3 and the other at 5.7. despite the upgrades to these vehicles historically they function exactly the same as their 4.7 counterpart. just enough armor to detonate all charges to be 1 shot from any direction in the hull. higher BR than tigers and panthers, (again for no reason).

M4A2 (76) is 5.3, which is the same BR as the lowest Panther (Panther D) and lowest Tiger (Tiger H1). The Panther D has horrible turret traverse, and the Tiger H1 is fairly sluggish and has the awful cupola as already mentioned. The M4A2 (76) does have it's own issues, such as the mobility being a bit sub par, but it is fine at 5.3. I also don't get how 5.3 is suddenly higher than the Panthers and Tigers, when that's exactly the lowest BR where there's a Panther and Tiger (baring the VK 30.02 (M), which has much less reliable armor).

 

M4A3 (76) is 5.7, which is the same BR as the Panther A and G and Tiger E, and all these tanks offer upgrades over their previous variants. The Panther's get actual turret traverse (although they lose some mobility, and now have to worry about an MG port weak spot), Tiger E has a slight bit more horsepower (from 650 to 700, a 7.7% increase, 11.3 to 12.2 hp/ton) and has a better cupola among other slight improvements, and then the M4A3 gets a massive jump to 500 horsepower, from 410/400 of the A2 and A1 variants.

That's a 22% to 25% horsepower boost, giving you 15.5 to 15.2 hp/ton on the M4A3 (76) depending on if you take track armor or not, compared to 12.4 on the M4A2 (76) and 12.2 to 12.5 on the M4A1 (76) (again, track armor). This gives the M4A3 (76) great acceleration, as it actually reaches 40 km/h faster than a Panther D/A/G/F or even a T-34-85 in a straight line.

 

While these Shermans do still have the same rough playstyle as the A1 (76) variant, they do improve on it, specially the M4A3 (76). Besides, you could also say the exact same thing about the Tiger E compared to the Tiger H1, that they function the same, yet that does not mean that these tanks should be the same BR as the Tiger E is very clearly superior due to the improvements it has.

 

7 hours ago, scorpian said:

Not only that, but it's mounted on an inferior Sherman variant when it should be mounted on a M4A3 HVSS hull.

No. The only photo of an actual M4 with a T26 turret is a modified M4 (105) VVSS, and not an M4A3.

I'm not saying that Gaijin couldn't have made an M4A3 T26, just that the only real photo that Gaijin can base their model on is that of an M4 hull.

Spoiler

The highlighted area shows the engine deck matching that of an R-975 equipped Sherman, meaning it is either an M4 or an M4A1. Given the hull is made of welded plates rather than cast steel, it can be concluded that this image shows a base M4 model.

Again, at least to my knowledge this is the only real life photo of any Sherman with a T26 turret. I have seen people even in the War Thunder forums themselves call this tank an M4A3. They are just wrong, for the reasons provided above, unless there's proof that the tank was modified to have the Ford GAA, which in all fairness could exist, but I haven't seen any I find unlikely that I ever will.

 

Edited June 5, 2023 by FlipAllTheTables

[MiseryIndex556@psn 13,155]

The T26 wasn’t intended to counter any specific German tank. The army just felt the T25 was too lightly armored for a tank that carried the 90mm gun. 

[FlipAllTheTables 61]

21 minutes ago, MiseryIndex556@psn said:

The T26 wasn’t intended to counter any specific German tank. The army just felt the T25 was too lightly armored for a tank that carried the 90mm gun. 

Never said it specifically was, just that it works like it due to the specifics of how it was made, like how the UFP stops the short 88 as it was designed to have roughly 170 mm of protection using US basis armor curve, and having a cannon that can punch through the armor of the Tiger rather easily, even if perfectly angled.

Edited June 5, 2023 by FlipAllTheTables