Interestingly, the F-5 is used by the US Air Force and Navy as aggressor aircraft to simulate the fact that US pilots won't likely go up against aircraft with identical characteristics to theirs.
Are you trying to earn yourself a one-way trip to the Hague? I mean, the Netherlands is a nice place to visit, but I doubt you'd want to stay there under those circumstances.
"You know, there are some weapons that had promise but for some reason, usually politics, doesn't get accepted. Others are neat novelties that failed to gain traction due to factors such as reliability, cost, and practicality. This pistol belongs in the latter category."
- Forgotten Weapons by Ian McCollum, 2030
Basically an M4 with lengthened barrel, extended but not full length Picatinny handguards, and most importantly, a continuous-recoil system designed by Jim Sullivan, not unlike the system used on the Ulitmax LMG.
Jim Sullivan was part of Stoner’s design team for the AR-15. @Carbonfox1
@satanplane Except that artillery of that capability has worse accuracy than a stromtrooper shooting at Han Solo, and the degree which the Land Yamato is balanced is also questionable.
@satanplane It's a massive arty target and would probably get seriously by the Imperial Japanese Navy's land Yamatos, but even the Waffletractor E-100 can find a building or hill big enough to hide it, and while a Land Yamato could delete half it's health, the Waffle could delete all of its health.
@satanplane Tbh, it's pretty difficult to balance something with many extremes.
This thing has a turret with less armor than a laundry machine, and is bigger than the house you'd usually find one in.
However, it could drop pretty much everything in one go.
I think they figured that they'd rather replace it with a new machine with a different character, than change an existing vehicle and possibly alter the character which made it appealing.
@Rodrigo110 Well the original got almost a hundred, and the maker basically got the equivalent of 13 upvotes on that through this, so I figure it passes.
@MrVaultech Of course the Tiger had a much bigger gun than any WWII-era Sherman.
As for the casualty count, I’d say you’d rather be in Armored Corps than anywhere else involving shooting.
The US Army lost 1,470 tankers throughout the entire conflict, a 3% casualty rate.
Approximately a third or a half of these casualties happened outside the tank; likey on sentry duty or gunned down after getting out of a tank.
It’s not the greatest tank ever, most certainly. But as far as options in World War 2, you can’t go wrong with a Sherman.
For the sake of argument, I chose the M4A2 and M4A3 Sherman families and the Tiger E. The M4A2 and A3 were the most common variants, and would be prudent to use the latest variants which saw wide service. It would be imprudent to compare less common early variants after all.
I wouldn’t compare your quality of builds from when you first started, after all.
The many flaws the initial Shermans had were largely solved by early 1944. The base M4A3 began production in 1942. The wide-track modification to the 75mm began production in February 1944. The M4A3(76)W began production in March 1944. I believe by the time the M4A3(75)W was made, it would feature wet stowage.
Remember, D-Day was in June 6, 1944. And the performance of the Sherman tank was considered excellent by all contemporary records.
I don’t thing the Tiger’s many flaws were rectified to any degree. It didn’t have a wide-angle gunner optic to help acquire targets, the ergonomics was sub-optimal, and the maintenance never got any easier. At least it got an illustrated manual which was something most people wouldn’t mind reading.
Interestingly, the F-5 is used by the US Air Force and Navy as aggressor aircraft to simulate the fact that US pilots won't likely go up against aircraft with identical characteristics to theirs.
"Dispensing biological or chemical agents."
Are you trying to earn yourself a one-way trip to the Hague? I mean, the Netherlands is a nice place to visit, but I doubt you'd want to stay there under those circumstances.
"You know, there are some weapons that had promise but for some reason, usually politics, doesn't get accepted. Others are neat novelties that failed to gain traction due to factors such as reliability, cost, and practicality. This pistol belongs in the latter category."
- Forgotten Weapons by Ian McCollum, 2030
Welcome back.
@Dllama4 I see you're embracing your inner American with all the outsourcing you did here.
@RocCrafter101 A nose gear would probably be better than the current arrangement tbh.
It has my stamp of approval. Especially the ventilated railed fore end.
It has my stamp of approval. Especially the ventilated railed fore end.
Hence why I don’t do that type of bow. @BlazeInfinity
Maybe helping with the bow might help too.
I don’t do that type of bow much. @BlazeInfinity
Depends on the ship. For this kind of bow, I would recommend getting @BlazeInfinity ‘s help. @doge
Paneling. @doge
@DeathStalker627 I know a lot of countries make the G3, licensed or otherwise.
Nah, the semi-fictional Sullivan M25 SAR.
Basically an M4 with lengthened barrel, extended but not full length Picatinny handguards, and most importantly, a continuous-recoil system designed by Jim Sullivan, not unlike the system used on the Ulitmax LMG.
Jim Sullivan was part of Stoner’s design team for the AR-15. @Carbonfox1
@Aeroman77 gIT GUd
@ThomasRoderick Np!
Thanks! @Texasfam04
@Coolfungame I was referring to a video game.
The FN SCAR, AR-15, and AK platforms in real life are all good. They hit hard, shoot straight, and are quite lethal in their own right.
I wouldn't want to get shot at by any firearm, and those are atop the list I don't want to get shot at with.
@ZackAttack5050 Neat.
@satanplane Except that artillery of that capability has worse accuracy than a stromtrooper shooting at Han Solo, and the degree which the Land Yamato is balanced is also questionable.
@RocCrafter101 suddenly nuclear bunker buster crashes through
@satanplane It's a massive arty target and would probably get seriously by the Imperial Japanese Navy's land Yamatos, but even the Waffletractor E-100 can find a building or hill big enough to hide it, and while a Land Yamato could delete half it's health, the Waffle could delete all of its health.
@RocCrafter101 Idk. I don't think dying from radiation burns is fun.
@satanplane Tbh, it's pretty difficult to balance something with many extremes.
This thing has a turret with less armor than a laundry machine, and is bigger than the house you'd usually find one in.
However, it could drop pretty much everything in one go.
I think they figured that they'd rather replace it with a new machine with a different character, than change an existing vehicle and possibly alter the character which made it appealing.
@Dllama4 Ah.
@satanplane Ahh, the Waffletractor E-100.
How I hated dealing with this.
@AircraftoftheRedStar It's still on console WoT I believe.
Couldn’t they be moved to the other side of the ship? @Feanor
@RocCrafter101 Or or or
You could not give a 2nd lieutenant the ability to start World War III.
Shouldn’t the runway be angled the other way?
@RocCrafter101 Or get it deleted by Paternian 155mm howitzers while forming up in a rear staging area.
@RocCrafter101 It also has neither the range to hit anything of value, nor the accuracy to hit anything if the range permits.
Heck, a 120mm mortar team could easily knock it out.
@RocCrafter101 Pershing II batteries are under the command of a captain or major.
@YuukaNeko It's this gun.
@YuukaNeko Actually I think you've seen it.
@YuukaNeko Neat.
I did have a revised Colt 9mm SMG for you if you needed.
Do you want a Second Lieutenant to start World War III? Because that's how you get Second Lieutenants starting World War III.
@YuukaNeko Sure! I've got a revised version of this in the works tho.
@Rodrigo110 Well the original got almost a hundred, and the maker basically got the equivalent of 13 upvotes on that through this, so I figure it passes.
@Rodrigo110 It's a reskin.
I’d still rather have a SCAR though. @Abdknight
@Dllama4 Ikr.
@BlyatMan Hello.
@MintLynx Ever since I made my MP5 build.
This takes me back to Counter-Strike.
Well the gray to blue full-auto AR is based off the M4... @Abdknight
I've got many newer gun builds I think would do this better.
Matter of fact, I could update the old Rocker.
@Line That means it can't be fired. Firing pin in the hammer was filed down and the hole where the firing pin protrudes was filled with hot steel.
Barrel was plugged with hot steel, and the chamber faces welded up to prevent loading of live cartridge.
Such weapons in Paternian service are marked such with blue-painted grips. This example is a post-service modification for display purposes.
This particular weapon has since been deactivated for training purposes. @Line
@PyrusEnderhunter lol
@MrVaultech Of course the Tiger had a much bigger gun than any WWII-era Sherman.
As for the casualty count, I’d say you’d rather be in Armored Corps than anywhere else involving shooting.
The US Army lost 1,470 tankers throughout the entire conflict, a 3% casualty rate.
Approximately a third or a half of these casualties happened outside the tank; likey on sentry duty or gunned down after getting out of a tank.
It’s not the greatest tank ever, most certainly. But as far as options in World War 2, you can’t go wrong with a Sherman.
For the sake of argument, I chose the M4A2 and M4A3 Sherman families and the Tiger E. The M4A2 and A3 were the most common variants, and would be prudent to use the latest variants which saw wide service. It would be imprudent to compare less common early variants after all.
I wouldn’t compare your quality of builds from when you first started, after all.
The many flaws the initial Shermans had were largely solved by early 1944. The base M4A3 began production in 1942. The wide-track modification to the 75mm began production in February 1944. The M4A3(76)W began production in March 1944. I believe by the time the M4A3(75)W was made, it would feature wet stowage.
Remember, D-Day was in June 6, 1944. And the performance of the Sherman tank was considered excellent by all contemporary records.
I don’t thing the Tiger’s many flaws were rectified to any degree. It didn’t have a wide-angle gunner optic to help acquire targets, the ergonomics was sub-optimal, and the maintenance never got any easier. At least it got an illustrated manual which was something most people wouldn’t mind reading.