Jump to content


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


  • Please log in to reply
287 replies to this topic

CK16 #201 Posted Jan 20 2016 - 00:29

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 1,870
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011
What do you guys think would be good for a new article for Rita? Taking suggestions M60A1/American medium related :D

Jarms48 #202 Posted Jan 20 2016 - 06:55

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 117 battles
  • 1,337
  • Member since:
    06-21-2015

Support 100%, would love to see Option 1 implemented.

 

You could keep the M46 (M46E1 when fully researched), then make the production model M47 Patton a premium (as it had a redesigned hull), as an alternative to the M46 Patton KR.

 


Edited by Jarms48, Jan 20 2016 - 07:13.


CK16 #203 Posted Jan 24 2016 - 21:03

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 1,870
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011
Would more US camo's be something that some would want to know about?

CK16 #204 Posted Feb 04 2016 - 00:26

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 1,870
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011

Off of today's Q&A. 

Block Quote

 

Q: Is there a chance that we will see the M60A1 introduced into the tech tree for the USA, to help update it a bit to a current standard of other nations with vehicles from the 1960's (T-62A, Leopard 1, AMX-30B, ect.). As well as make the US tier 10 medium competitive with other nations.
-Not A1:)) smth else, I really want to improve US med line.

 

Very good news in away, just have to wait and see :)

 



Flying_Pancake_V173 #205 Posted Feb 05 2016 - 07:15

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 29046 battles
  • 164
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014
"Not A1 :) " the way he phrased that makes me think that whatever they're planning will be another M60 variant, but which one could it be if that's the case? The Starship would be out of place, I thought that the A3's laser rangefinder disqualified it, and the Super 60 would be way too new, right? Is there an M60 I'm missing, or is it more likely that they're going to use a different tank entirely?

ToothDecay #206 Posted Feb 05 2016 - 07:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 26964 battles
  • 6,014
  • [NARC] NARC
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

OP, that was an amazing job you, and all who helped, did.  Kudos.

I personally would prefer to see it as an alternate heavy to the E5.

Increased rate of fire might compensate for Alpha damage.

But hell, I WANT THE M60A1 ( the tank companies start with "H" ).  My tank's name was "Helpless" (nod to cb&n).  Our M113 was named "Hors D'oeuvre".

 



CK16 #207 Posted Feb 05 2016 - 08:21

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 1,870
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011

View PostToothDecay, on Feb 05 2016 - 00:57, said:

OP, that was an amazing job you, and all who helped, did.  Kudos.

I personally would prefer to see it as an alternate heavy to the E5.

Increased rate of fire might compensate for Alpha damage.

But hell, I WANT THE M60A1 ( the tank companies start with "H" ).  My tank's name was "Helpless" (nod to cb&n).  Our M113 was named "Hors D'oeuvre".

 

 

Who says it is over? :) I am still working on this Campaign, it is there is only so much can be done on the forums. 

ToothDecay #208 Posted Feb 05 2016 - 21:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 26964 battles
  • 6,014
  • [NARC] NARC
  • Member since:
    06-29-2011

I wasn't trying to imply anything.

It's just straight talk.



Legiondude #209 Posted Feb 06 2016 - 08:28

    Major

  • Players
  • 20522 battles
  • 23,193
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011
Should probably add at this point, Option 1's possibility of giving an M26 at tier 7 the T15 is not something I'm continuing to advocate

CK16 #210 Posted Feb 06 2016 - 09:12

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 1,870
  • Member since:
    02-26-2011

View PostLegiondude, on Feb 06 2016 - 01:28, said:

Should probably add at this point, Option 1's possibility of giving an M26 at tier 7 the T15 is not something I'm continuing to advocate

 

Fixed. Its off the list. 

SoukouDragon #211 Posted Feb 06 2016 - 18:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 13943 battles
  • 3,482
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

Lots of great work. Naturally plus 1.

 

"Not A1 but something else" doesn't sound so good though. No idea what could be more satisfying than M60A1. Also would love to have a Tier 8 M47.



DrScubaSteve #212 Posted Feb 06 2016 - 19:55

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 16831 battles
  • 33
  • [GRIMY] GRIMY
  • Member since:
    03-30-2012
Great idea. It doesn't seem like it would be too hard for WG considering that most of the chassis,guns and a few turrets already exist in game.

Parasitic_Angel #213 Posted Feb 14 2016 - 17:43

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 20259 battles
  • 57
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012
I would like to see option 2 or 3. I loved to M60 when I was in the Marines 80-88.:izmena: Semper-Fi

_Haruhi_Suzumiya_ #214 Posted Feb 15 2016 - 05:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 40429 battles
  • 2,541
  • [MAHOU] MAHOU
  • Member since:
    09-24-2011
I got an M60 this campaign, what about you fellas? :)

HitMe_2015 #215 Posted Feb 15 2016 - 14:01

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 10260 battles
  • 538
  • [BIBLE] BIBLE
  • Member since:
    04-03-2015

View Posthector1470, on Feb 15 2016 - 05:30, said:

I got an M60 this campaign, what about you fellas? :)

 

The M60 in-game isn't the one everyone wants, the M60A1 is.

Blackhorse_Six_ #216 Posted Feb 15 2016 - 20:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 51430 battles
  • 10,030
  • [HHT] HHT
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

The entire M68-armed series belongs in the tech tree ... Period.

 

Put the M60A2 up for the CW crowd.

 

All this time, WG should have been putting-up all that phoneywaffen trash for CW Prizes and opening the tech tree for iconic production tanks like the M60-series. That way, the phoneywaffen trash would have been a non-polluting rarity.

 

Those of you who advocate jumping right to the M60A1 are ignoring the reason why the A1 was produced - the Slick 60 is an important step in that process, and it belongs in the tech-tree ahead of the A1, or as the first turret on the stock M60A1.

 

Why hell, just for the M60 alone, WG could go all the way back to those three M48 concept tanks from which the Slick 60 was developed, and which later served as the base concept for the M48A5 program at Aniston Army Depot.

 

Those of us who crewed them would probably prefer to see the Slick 60 as it's own end-item.

 

CW Prize be damned ...



Xx1Tommy1xX #217 Posted May 05 2016 - 02:00

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13294 battles
  • 820
  • [-XBK-] -XBK-
  • Member since:
    06-13-2011

View PostCK16, on Feb 03 2016 - 18:26, said:

Off of today's Q&A. 

 

Very good news in away, just have to wait and see :)

 

What do you think it could be?



favrepeoria #218 Posted May 05 2016 - 16:36

    Captain

  • Players
  • 32357 battles
  • 1,718
  • [RATM] RATM
  • Member since:
    06-08-2011
So the proposal is to down tier the American meds again so we can fit one more recent tank? I remember when T23 was in the game still as tier 8 :)

spikenightjammer #219 Posted May 05 2016 - 17:27

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9500 battles
  • 150
  • [BOND2] BOND2
  • Member since:
    06-17-2015
looks cool good info

armando30 #220 Posted May 21 2016 - 17:02

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 7370 battles
  • 76
  • Member since:
    09-22-2011

it's true that the US tech tree needs rework and that includes the medium line and in recent Q&As they told the work already started (on the medium line)

 

I think your idea is interesting but you are aproaching it from the wrong "angle", intead of moving tanks that are capable enough at their tier (M26 and M48) why not simply rework it to keep a certain "consistency" in gameplay through out the whole line, that of course would require multiple lines

 

1st line

tier 6: Jumbo>> tier 7: T25 (or T26, without M26 top guns and only the M3?)>> tier 8: M26>> tier 9: T26E5(152mm of frontal armor, same guns as current M46)>> tier 10: M48

it would be sort like a heavy hitter line with decent armor, powerfull guns but worse mobility

notice that there's also no reason to remove the top guns on the M26 since post-war the 90mm M3 was replaced by a more powerfull gun (I think called T54) that was similar to the T15E2 90mm gun in terms of performance

 

2nd line (mobility line)

tier 5: M7 or T20 (as it was istorically)>> tier 6: Easy 8 or T22>> tier 7: T23>> tier 8: T42>> tier 9: M46 or M47 (possibly even the M47E2, 105mm gun)>> tier 10: M60 (wichever version availatble)

 

3rd line (auto-loader rework?)

not much to do except expecting the T77 medium as tier 10 or possibly the T54 with conventional turret and auto-loader wich should be a bit stronger than the T54E1 turret (I don't think it was actually ever built but since the hull was based on the M48 hull the turret should at least have similar armor values) and the hull is the same as the current tier 10 M48

I don't know if there's any other autoloader that was designed but not built that could fit tier 10 instead of the T77 with it's 120mm gun, of course it would receive a massive nerf in terms of number of shells per drum

 

it might also be possible to add a 4th line with the T54E2 and some T95 variants, or the Yoh tanks and many other "paper tanks"


Edited by armando30, May 21 2016 - 17:07.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users