Jump to content


M60A1 & 2nd American Medium Branch Campaign HQ (NA)


  • Please log in to reply
273 replies to this topic

Avalon304 #261 Posted Jul 11 2018 - 02:14

    Major

  • Players
  • 18533 battles
  • 7,891
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

View PostNot_Connery, on Jul 10 2018 - 03:30, said:

 

Can I just say, if they WERE to make the T20 a premium, anyone who currently owned it should be given the premium (in effect, just be able to keep it).  I have the T20 and have come to love it, and I would HATE for WG to take it away and make it a premium that I'd have to buy again; and I don't think that I'd be the only one who would feel that way about it...

 

I'd be all for making the M26 a tier 7 tank, though...

 

Yes of course if they did make the T20 a premium people who own it should be able to keep it. I wouldnt be too fussed if they didnt however, I like the T20, but not enough to care if I got to keep it as a premium.

 

View PostYANKEE137, on Jul 10 2018 - 10:00, said:

M60A2 Tier 10 TD. No missiles, just handling buffs to 152 gun and a nice HEAT round.

 

 

 Why a TD? There isnt even the excuse of it playing like a TD. Would fit just fine as a Medium Tank its also the same gun at both the T49 and XM551 have so... it wouldnt have a "nice" HEAT round... just a 152mm pen HEAT round and 2 different HE rounds. I dont even thing it can qualify as a tier 10.

 

View PostYANKEE137, on Jul 10 2018 - 10:02, said:

M48A3, 90mm (Vietnam war era) Premium T8 stats just like the T95E2

 

This would pretty much be identical to a Stock M48 Patton at tier 9... theres no reason to include it at tier 8.



RanLSX #262 Posted Jul 11 2018 - 13:54

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 672
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016
I'm sorry, the number that you have dialed is no longer in service. Please leave a message and we'll get back to you...never.

Soren_tyto_gahoole #263 Posted Jul 11 2018 - 16:18

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 15 battles
  • 12
  • Member since:
    12-28-2014

View PostNot_Connery, on Jul 10 2018 - 06:59, said:

 

Any source on the claim that they're going to bring in armored cars?

 

Yes this: https://thearmoredpa...ews-08-12-2017/ , though I am aware that this is to be taken lightly and not too seriously since insiders are not the most accurate.

 

 

 


ThatTrafficCone #264 Posted Jul 12 2018 - 17:37

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 36212 battles
  • 114
  • [200IQ] 200IQ
  • Member since:
    06-11-2011

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Jul 09 2018 - 21:54, said:

So what's the latest consensus? (Save me some work)

 

I've been against the M60A1 before, but given the game's current change in direction (see: powercreep) I think it could have a place. I'd rather see it instead of the M48A5 at Tier X if Wargaming wants to give the tank a strong turret. At least use something historically authentic, no?

 

I have a post over here about a fan-made revision to the US tech tree at large. Personally, I'd like to see the M46 Patton renamed to the M47 Patton and dropped to Tier VIII, simply because the M47 has more module options available to it. With the M46 turret as a stock option, you basically incorporate everything there is for the M46. The M46 KR can remain as a premium for all I care. Then push down the M26 Pershing to Tier VII. I think everything has already been said about that.

 

I'd like to see the M48 Patton at Tier IX reflect the M48A1 and M48A2 (there is a variant of the M48A2 fitted with the 105 mm M68). The M48A5 I'd like to see as a worse M60A1 at Tier X, as premium/reward tanks should be in my opinion. A completely stock or first-production run of the M48 Patton might also work at Tier VIII as a premium tank as a kind of fat medium tank, leaning more on the heavy tank side of things.

 

There's also a few other Patton and M60 tanks I'd like to see added to the game, along with some changes to the T20. I go into more detail on those on my blog:P



PrimarchRogalDorn #265 Posted Jul 12 2018 - 18:31

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 25 battles
  • 1,393
  • Member since:
    01-03-2017

View PostSoren_tyto_gahoole, on Jul 11 2018 - 10:18, said:

 

Yes this: https://thearmoredpa...ews-08-12-2017/ , though I am aware that this is to be taken lightly and not too seriously since insiders are not the most accurate.

 

 

 

>TAP

RanLSX #266 Posted Jul 14 2018 - 16:54

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 672
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

I find TAP to be a superior game reporting platform which reports information often before the news is officially released. It's much better than "those other guys" who are often just a collection of shills that hangout together and agree with each other solely for the purpose of group therapy.

 

Hell, I place TAP right up there with Exposing WOT!



PrimarchRogalDorn #267 Posted Jul 14 2018 - 18:34

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 25 battles
  • 1,393
  • Member since:
    01-03-2017

View PostRanLSX, on Jul 14 2018 - 10:54, said:

I find TAP to be a superior game reporting platform which reports information often before the news is officially released. It's much better than "those other guys" who are often just a collection of shills that hangout together and agree with each other solely for the purpose of group therapy.

 

Hell, I place TAP right up there with Exposing WOT!

 

So a blog run by a homophobe and racist that has no actual insider connections as well as one championed by liars are better than Status Report and TDB? Yea nah mate.

RanLSX #268 Posted Jul 14 2018 - 21:29

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 672
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostPrimarchRogalDorn, on Jul 14 2018 - 12:34, said:

 

So a blog run by a homophobe and racist that has no actual insider connections as well as one championed by liars are better than Status Report and TDB? Yea nah mate.

Link or it didn't happen.


Edited by RanLSX, Jul 14 2018 - 21:29.


PrimarchRogalDorn #269 Posted Jul 14 2018 - 21:40

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 25 battles
  • 1,393
  • Member since:
    01-03-2017

View PostRanLSX, on Jul 14 2018 - 15:29, said:

Link or it didn't happen.

 

OK

PrimarchRogalDorn #270 Posted Jul 14 2018 - 22:23

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 25 battles
  • 1,393
  • Member since:
    01-03-2017
Well now I know what kind of person you are. Any and all opinions can be disregarded.

RanLSX #271 Posted Jul 14 2018 - 22:54

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 563 battles
  • 672
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016

View PostPrimarchRogalDorn, on Jul 14 2018 - 16:23, said:

Well now I know what kind of person you are. Any and all opinions can be disregarded.

 

That's preposterous, I'm the Ran!

rivit #272 Posted Jul 15 2018 - 16:13

    Captain

  • Players
  • 14073 battles
  • 1,504
  • Member since:
    01-19-2012

View PostRanLSX, on Jul 14 2018 - 16:54, said:

 

That's preposterous, I'm the Ran!

Yes you are. And I bought you a years subscription to TAP and WOT Exposed so you can learn stuff. That's my boy!



Avalon304 #273 Posted Jul 19 2018 - 22:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 18533 battles
  • 7,891
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    09-04-2012

Getting the M60A1 into World of Tanks, with only a minor rework should be a relatively simple concept.  The following idea combines bits of the first two options from the original post with a minor side branch proposal alongside it. Sorry no flashy pictures. This proposal is a basic outline and wont delve too deeply into detailed stats and balance of tanks, but will rpovide a guide WG could use to get the M60A1 in game easily.


The main US Medium branch:

The main branch of the US mediums has always been a bit higher tier than they shoudl have been. With the upcoming T26E3 Eagle 7, this seems to confirm that, as a more historical M26 Pershing at tier 7 makes more sense than it does at tier 8. So, this branch rework starts at:


Tier 7: M26 Pershing

The Pershing is dropped from its current position at tier 8 and loses its top gun (the 90mm T15E2M2) and loses a slight bit of its turret armor to better accomodate its position in its new tier. This will put it alongside the upcoming premium Pershing and help better position the line for the 2nd part of this proposal. Dropping the Pershing to tier 7 means Ive displaced another tank so lets address that one really quick.


Tier 7 Premium: T20. 

This is a relatively simple solution, but one that could be used to great effect by Wargaming. By making the T20 a premium and allowing those who already own it to keep it, they gain some great PR and players get a good tank as a premium in a good tier. The tank recevies no changes in its move to premium status, but gains the incrased credt bonus common to normal premiums as well as the crew training ability.

 

Theres another alternative to the T20, and thats to drop it to tier 6 and have it come off the M7 as a cross branch jump to the normal US medium line, but Im less keen on this option. Doing this however, means very little as all it would need to lose is its top gun, and perhaps an engine.

 

With the T20 addressed, this leads to the nest tier:


Tier 8: M46/M46E1 Patton

This is, essentially the tier 9 M46 Patton dropped to tier 8. It loses the 105mm gun and (and perhaps a minor bit of its turret armor), but otherwise retains its characteristics. Other than the gun, there should be no major changes needed to the tank.

 

That moves us on to tier 9:


Tier 9: M48A3/M48A5 Patton

This is, again, the tier 10 M48A5 Patton dropped to tier 9. And heres the first smei-major addition to a tank. This tank gains the old M48 Patton turret (the one with the giat cupola) and a 90mm gun to represent the M48A3 in its stock form. Its upgraded M48A5 turret and 105mm M68 stay where they aren and the rest of the tank pretty much stays the same. I would again, expect minor armor losses on the turret face, to undo some of the nonsensical buffs the M48 Patton received to sit at tier 10.

(An aside: I chose the M48A3 instead of the M48A1 for this tank because the M48A3 has the raised engine deck and since we dont yet have the alternate hull feature this would keep the hulls consistent acorss models represented. This is  also why I chose the M46E1 at tier 9, rather than the M47 Patton).

 

Finally we come to tier 10:


Tier 10: M60A1 Patton

The culmination of the main part of this rework is the M60A1 Patton, with its distintive needlenose turret. As far as this tank goes I dot see any reason why it wouldnt inherit most of the stats from the current M48A5. It would, essentially be a model swap, with the appropriate changes where needed to armor and other stats based on the tank itself.

So thats the main portion of the rework, getting the M60A1 in game reltively easily with only a minor rework to one branch in the US tree, that has been needed ing a minro rework for a good long while right now. But theres one more thing we can do with this:


US Protoype Medium Mini branch:

This rework opens the door for a quick minibranch of US prototype mediums. Starting at tier 8, this line would culminate in a 120mm armed US medium.


Tier 8: T42 Medium

This is, essentially, a prototype of the M47 Patton (and indeed the turret later went on to become the M47 Pattons turret). At tier 8 it branches off from the M26 and has the same gun as the M46 Patton KR (the 90mm M3A1) along with an upgrade in the form of the 90mm T119. Along with an appropriate engine upgrade if needed. A simple tank, that lets us move on to the two really interesting tanks.


Tier 9: T54E2 Medium

One of two new tanks in this mini-branch. The T54E2 is a 105mm armed medium with a conventional turret (unlike its brother the T54E1). This tank is already mostly in game in various piece scattered about (the gun and hull from the T54E1 and the turret from a tier 10 thats been sitting in the client for ages). So lets cobble them together and use them. While the T54E1 suffers from bad gun handling and low penetration due to its autoloading 105mm gun, this tank ideally would not, being a more conventional tank.

This lets us move on to the final tank:


Tier 10: T54E2 (120)

Now, before anyone goes nuts, Im aware the T54E2 (120) was never a designation used by any tank the US Army designed (at least that Im aware). But... Im not averse to using a little creative liberty to make things work.

Back before the M60 was the M60 the US army put forth a proposal to arm it with a 120mm gun. The gun used with the 120mm T123E6. In order to test if this was even feasible, the army took the turret of a T54E2 and mated it to the hull of an M48A2 and gave it the 120mm T123E6. So the T54E2's turret was clearly capable of mounting the 120mm gun. In fact this very tank exists in the client right now as the M48A2/T54E2/T123E6, which is a mouth full. And is why Im calling it the T54E2 (120), as thats essentially, what the assembled tank was (as the T54 US Medium series use M48 Patton hulls anyway). So lets make use of a tank thats been sitting in the client files for ages twice (once to cobble together a tier 9, and again as a full tier 10.

 

I dont see this tank needing many changes from its current iteration. Infact we could add the 105mm from the tier 9 if we wanted as having a 2nd viable gun option on the tier 10 isnt a bad thing and adds a slight variety to the tank that it otherwise wouldnt have.

 

So there it is a quick and easy way to get the M60A1 in game, and a small addition in the form of a mini-branch, because everyone loves new tanks.


Edited by Avalon304, Jul 20 2018 - 00:49.


PrimarchRogalDorn #274 Posted Jul 20 2018 - 02:36

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 25 battles
  • 1,393
  • Member since:
    01-03-2017
Looks good




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users