Running without threads would be a great improvement in WT it would make the BT-5 series tanks and a few light tanks more invulnerable of being tracked.
It would be an interesting feature, having worse cross country capability vs faster on road speed and as you say no longer worrying about being detracked.
@@Toreno17 Yes, but sadly, this and the gun barrel collision will never make it into the game. A fancy new high-tier premium will always solve better than some true game-changing feature that affects multiple vehicles if not all of them. What do you think about the Gun Barrel collision idea?
I think gun barrel collision could be interesting, but I think some people would struggle with it in game, especially in tight urban or forested areas, so I doubt we will ever see it implemented.
@@Toreno17 Adopt, Survive, Overcome. It would be a realistic feature bit it won't be an annoying thing as you can use your brain to take the guess my gun barrel will be problematic or not. And btw in my experience people tend to avoid clipping their gunbarrels anyway. It would also be funny in some situations and let weak players leave Normal people adopt and overcome.
Mildly disappointed that my favorite Christie design, the M1932, wasn't mentioned, but the balance on a vehicle allegedly capable of 60mph on tracks and a whopping *120mph* on wheels would be, uh, difficult.
I would like to add 2 things: The 1st one would be that Christies Marine Corps tank would be modified each year from 1921-1924, with the 1922 design being the one shown in the video. The 1923 design could go at 18knots and was still an open topped vehicle, with it having the option for either a M1897 75mm Howitzer or a 37mm cannon, as well as an additional set of tires. However the 1924 design or the Marine Corps GC-2, weighed in at 6.8 tons, it had a maximum armor thickness of 6.35 mm's, it could swap between tracks and it tires. With the top speed with it's tracks being 24.14 kph, meanwhile on wheels it could go 56.33kph. It however could only do a middling 14 knots when in the water. It now had a closed top design, and still had the 75mm howitzer from previous designs. The next thing would be the T3E2 design. As it is a completely different looking vehicle to that of the T3 Medium. With it being 12 tons and armed with 5 7.62mm Machine Guns, with a variant replacing the main gun for a 6th one. As well as it having a 37mm cannon. It had a maximum armor thickness of 12.7mm and could go 65kph on tracks, and 111kph on wheels as it was powered by a 435 hp engine. It looks a lot like the T-34 just worse. I just felt those two vehicles were worth mentioning.
Honestly, I think M1922 and up-engined M1921 could potentially be viable at 1.0 BR, given that (lack of) mechanical reliability isn't accounted for. (Otherwise Panthers, Tigers, and T-34-76s would be breaking down a lot.)
The jeeps if they did it be cool to see dismounted crew firing it. If they did that one step closer to APCs dismounted infantry squad that could set up and ambush
I hope Gaijin adds in the jeep with a number of armaments. We’ve already seen some vehicles like the LAV-AD that can change their preferred armament before a battle. Maybe gaijin could give the jeep the ability to use rockets, .50s, and maybe even a recoilless rifle. There’s quite a few options, it would just be kinda neat I guess…
It's great but still overall sad commentary that one of the best series on Interwar Tanks period is actually about War Thunder There's more about the T-90M operational manual that the CIA had to go to the WT forums to learn how to drive theirs than there is about interwar tanks.
I have seen photos of both US and UK trucks, from WWI to the interwar period (and French and German vehicles also) armed with 75-77mm guns as AA trucks. These would be pretty sweet to add IMO. Google Antiaircraft Truck Mount Model 1917 for 75mm Field Gun Model 1916
I don't play War Thunder, but your vids are well-presented and very well-researched, full of historical info. Did you consider prototypes like the Skeleton Tank or the 1918 Studebaker tank? Both were equipped with armed turrets, at least at some point during their testing (though maybe fake guns representing real armament).
The current M3A3 Stuart is completely wrong in WOT. Wrong tank trees, armor, and engine combination. M3A3 had armor similar to upgraded M5 but retained the single radial air-cooled engine, not the twin Cadillac engines of the M5. M3A3 was sold as Lend-Lease to China but never issued to US troops in the field; it was used as training vehicles in the states. 2 of those training vehicles are parked next to an M60 Patton on static display. Amazing size difference. The Stuarts are complete; I crawled up cooling duct and inspected engines, and they are complete. Turret basket and seats are still in tact.
WoT pretty much gave up accuracy for "BaLaNcE" a long time ago. I remember how they kept changing the Tiger 2's lower front plate or how they gave the Leopard 1 a fictional HE round.
@DarkButz Yah, I agree about them balancing the tanks. But they could at least get the tank history specs correct. There are 2 M3A3 on static display in the town I was born in, and that model was never used by US troops in battle, training only; lend lease for the Chinese. A diesel version went to the Soviets. The displays have similar armor to the M5 but retain the gasoline radial engine. Those 2 tanks would be great candidates to get running again and have a museum with "Tank Days" to drive them around. I crawled up the cooling duct and took pics of the engine and a pic through a hole to see the turret basket and drivers seat; they are both complete. US army still owns them. I wonder if WOT would be interested in sponsoring those tanks? Would have to build a museum for them, but the park they sit in has plenty of space for a test track, museum, and host tank days. Stuarts are much cheaper to operate and store than other tanks. The M60 Patton next to them still runs but is huge.
@@jhoncho4x4 Unfortunately, I don't think the devs really care at this point. They're too busy making another napkin drawing, horribly OP Tier X clan wars reward tank, discussing another celebrity crewmember contract and designing more terrible tank skins that make them look like mobile garbage dumps.
@DarkButz Yep, it seems like they are just looking for ways to sell you something now. I was surprised they didn't jump on a "Turtle Tank" skin when they started being added for drones over in the current conflict. They have done some good work for the restoration field; the FV4005 is kinda neat. I don't care much for playing it in the game, though; reloading too slow and boring.
Are you referring to the T-18 HMC? It started development just before America's entry into World War 2, so I will probably cover it when looking at the World War 2 tanks.
They are and could be used in War Thunder, I didn't cover them as they and a few other tanks all had broadly the same armament, armour and crew numbers, only being different in top speed by a few mph, though I might come back and look at them again in the future, or include them in the World War II episode.
I would either start Battle Ratings from 0.0 or bump all exisiting tier 1 tanks up 1.0 or so in order to fit World War 1 and interwar tanks. I would also like to see the BR spread from reduced 1.0 to 0.7.
@@Toreno17 it would be absolute hell to get uptiered against BT-5 tanks and such when playing an interwar tank but I guess it can be balanced somehow… though it would make for a fun BR where all the tanks are truly dogshit and have like 37mm guns with 5mm of pen
War Thunder is garbage... a horrible game. WOT isnt any better.... make informative videos... I have repaired and restored quite a few armored vehicles. Want advice ? Ask someone that has actually been in... and repaired these classics.... To this I refer to one WW1 tank (Renault) Later on... Sherman... Universal Carrier ... Centurion... More Half tracks and jeeps ...M37... M151.. etc etc than I can name. You give alot of book information... ANYONE can get that. Real world data... you know spit.
Ford 3 ton tank. The survivors are armed with MGs but a few sources I saw said they could mount a 37mm gun. It'd be a decent low BR SPG.
I have seen an image of the Ford 3-ton tank with a 37mm gun
Running without threads would be a great improvement in WT it would make the BT-5 series tanks and a few light tanks more invulnerable of being tracked.
It would be an interesting feature, having worse cross country capability vs faster on road speed and as you say no longer worrying about being detracked.
@@Toreno17 Yes, but sadly, this and the gun barrel collision will never make it into the game. A fancy new high-tier premium will always solve better than some true game-changing feature that affects multiple vehicles if not all of them.
What do you think about the Gun Barrel collision idea?
I think gun barrel collision could be interesting, but I think some people would struggle with it in game, especially in tight urban or forested areas, so I doubt we will ever see it implemented.
@@Toreno17 Adopt, Survive, Overcome.
It would be a realistic feature bit it won't be an annoying thing as you can use your brain to take the guess my gun barrel will be problematic or not.
And btw in my experience people tend to avoid clipping their gunbarrels anyway.
It would also be funny in some situations and let weak players leave
Normal people adopt and overcome.
Remember when shooting a track bogie tracked the vehicle?
Mildly disappointed that my favorite Christie design, the M1932, wasn't mentioned, but the balance on a vehicle allegedly capable of 60mph on tracks and a whopping *120mph* on wheels would be, uh, difficult.
The M1 Combat car would be a jack of all trades m2a2, because it has almost everything the m2a2 has, with it just not having armor.
8:27 - that's a cool tank and all, but what kind of car was that?
I would like to add 2 things:
The 1st one would be that Christies Marine Corps tank would be modified each year from 1921-1924, with the 1922 design being the one shown in the video. The 1923 design could go at 18knots and was still an open topped vehicle, with it having the option for either a M1897 75mm Howitzer or a 37mm cannon, as well as an additional set of tires. However the 1924 design or the Marine Corps GC-2, weighed in at 6.8 tons, it had a maximum armor thickness of 6.35 mm's, it could swap between tracks and it tires. With the top speed with it's tracks being 24.14 kph, meanwhile on wheels it could go 56.33kph. It however could only do a middling 14 knots when in the water. It now had a closed top design, and still had the 75mm howitzer from previous designs.
The next thing would be the T3E2 design. As it is a completely different looking vehicle to that of the T3 Medium. With it being 12 tons and armed with 5 7.62mm Machine Guns, with a variant replacing the main gun for a 6th one. As well as it having a 37mm cannon. It had a maximum armor thickness of 12.7mm and could go 65kph on tracks, and 111kph on wheels as it was powered by a 435 hp engine. It looks a lot like the T-34 just worse.
I just felt those two vehicles were worth mentioning.
Interwar is better than modern tanks in terms of visual beauty
WOOOO nice, new interwar toreno vid!
Thanks, hope you enjoyed it!
Honestly, I think M1922 and up-engined M1921 could potentially be viable at 1.0 BR, given that (lack of) mechanical reliability isn't accounted for. (Otherwise Panthers, Tigers, and T-34-76s would be breaking down a lot.)
The jeeps if they did it be cool to see dismounted crew firing it. If they did that one step closer to APCs dismounted infantry squad that could set up and ambush
I hope Gaijin adds in the jeep with a number of armaments. We’ve already seen some vehicles like the LAV-AD that can change their preferred armament before a battle. Maybe gaijin could give the jeep the ability to use rockets, .50s, and maybe even a recoilless rifle. There’s quite a few options, it would just be kinda neat I guess…
It's great but still overall sad commentary that one of the best series on Interwar Tanks period is actually about War Thunder
There's more about the T-90M operational manual that the CIA had to go to the WT forums to learn how to drive theirs than there is about interwar tanks.
I have seen photos of both US and UK trucks, from WWI to the interwar period (and French and German vehicles also) armed with 75-77mm guns as AA trucks. These would be pretty sweet to add IMO. Google Antiaircraft Truck Mount Model 1917 for 75mm Field Gun Model 1916
I don't play War Thunder, but your vids are well-presented and very well-researched, full of historical info. Did you consider prototypes like the Skeleton Tank or the 1918 Studebaker tank? Both were equipped with armed turrets, at least at some point during their testing (though maybe fake guns representing real armament).
the christie tanks look like sprocket designs, oh god
Hell just put a .50 on a Jeep for a third variant. Oooh, the US Milk Trucks with .50's! YES!!
M2 medium would be a beast at 0.3- all the way up to 2.7 or 10.0 against thin skinned vehicles in a fail platoon.
wow this was a excellent show loved it
The current M3A3 Stuart is completely wrong in WOT. Wrong tank trees, armor, and engine combination.
M3A3 had armor similar to upgraded M5 but retained the single radial air-cooled engine, not the twin Cadillac engines of the M5.
M3A3 was sold as Lend-Lease to China but never issued to US troops in the field; it was used as training vehicles in the states.
2 of those training vehicles are parked next to an M60 Patton on static display.
Amazing size difference.
The Stuarts are complete; I crawled up cooling duct and inspected engines, and they are complete. Turret basket and seats are still in tact.
WoT pretty much gave up accuracy for "BaLaNcE" a long time ago. I remember how they kept changing the Tiger 2's lower front plate or how they gave the Leopard 1 a fictional HE round.
@DarkButz Yah, I agree about them balancing the tanks. But they could at least get the tank history specs correct. There are 2 M3A3 on static display in the town I was born in, and that model was never used by US troops in battle, training only; lend lease for the Chinese. A diesel version went to the Soviets.
The displays have similar armor to the M5 but retain the gasoline radial engine.
Those 2 tanks would be great candidates to get running again and have a museum with "Tank Days" to drive them around. I crawled up the cooling duct and took pics of the engine and a pic through a hole to see the turret basket and drivers seat; they are both complete. US army still owns them.
I wonder if WOT would be interested in sponsoring those tanks?
Would have to build a museum for them, but the park they sit in has plenty of space for a test track, museum, and host tank days.
Stuarts are much cheaper to operate and store than other tanks.
The M60 Patton next to them still runs but is huge.
@@jhoncho4x4 Unfortunately, I don't think the devs really care at this point. They're too busy making another napkin drawing, horribly OP Tier X clan wars reward tank, discussing another celebrity crewmember contract and designing more terrible tank skins that make them look like mobile garbage dumps.
@DarkButz Yep, it seems like they are just looking for ways to sell you something now. I was surprised they didn't jump on a "Turtle Tank" skin when they started being added for drones over in the current conflict.
They have done some good work for the restoration field; the FV4005 is kinda neat. I don't care much for playing it in the game, though; reloading too slow and boring.
Dude i want all this so much.
Nah.
Gaijin Couldn't charge $60 for the premiums.
Pretty good otherwise!
Holy hell, I literally just returned home and was looking for something, happy to see a new vid and fresh vid, loving this series!
Glad to hear you're enjoying it!
Kee0 cooking man, love this❤
Am I crazy, or is this captain jack from SE?
Or the disston tractor tank
What about the Ford 3 ton tank
Wasn't the T18 also tested in the interwar period?
Are you referring to the T-18 HMC? It started development just before America's entry into World War 2, so I will probably cover it when looking at the World War 2 tanks.
What about the Marmon-Herrington CTLS? Are they not from interwar period?
They are and could be used in War Thunder, I didn't cover them as they and a few other tanks all had broadly the same armament, armour and crew numbers, only being different in top speed by a few mph, though I might come back and look at them again in the future, or include them in the World War II episode.
Makes sense, thanks for the research you did
BR 0.5
Ok do do you want to add a BR below 1.0 or what? These things have to be better than a BT-5 which is at 1.0
I would either start Battle Ratings from 0.0 or bump all exisiting tier 1 tanks up 1.0 or so in order to fit World War 1 and interwar tanks.
I would also like to see the BR spread from reduced 1.0 to 0.7.
@@Toreno17 it would be absolute hell to get uptiered against BT-5 tanks and such when playing an interwar tank but I guess it can be balanced somehow… though it would make for a fun BR where all the tanks are truly dogshit and have like 37mm guns with 5mm of pen
War Thunder is garbage... a horrible game. WOT isnt any better.... make informative videos... I have repaired and restored quite a few armored vehicles.
Want advice ? Ask someone that has actually been in... and repaired these classics.... To this I refer to one WW1 tank (Renault) Later on... Sherman... Universal Carrier ... Centurion... More Half tracks and jeeps ...M37... M151.. etc etc than I can name. You give alot of book information... ANYONE can get that. Real world data... you know spit.
If you want advice the comma is right next to the period, you could use that.
Enjoy your shit fit.