The M26 Pershing

[Karnak]

It wouldn't be very effective spite.  HTC has 100% control over what they add.

Players, on the other hand, I will vigorously argue with when they constantly request "World of Tanks" fantasy things because they would be powerful regardless of what their actual historical role was.  The M-26 was such a minor player in WWII that in my opinion it would be absurd to add it just to give the Americans a Tiger II equivalent for some fantasy reason.  The MA is a free for all where you can use any nation's equipment.  You want a really powerful tank, grab a Tiger II.

[SmokinLoon]

Players, on the other hand, I will vigorously argue with when they constantly request "World of Tanks" fantasy things because they would be powerful regardless of what their actual historical role was.  The M-26 was such a minor player in WWII that in my opinion it would be absurd to add it just to give the Americans a Tiger II equivalent for some fantasy reason.  The MA is a free for all where you can use any nation's equipment.  You want a really powerful tank, grab a Tiger II.

If people compare what the M26 could actually do, meaning armor figures and gun performance, it really didn't offer much more than the Panther, if any.  It did have a better HE shell than the Panther but that is about it. In terms of comparing it to the big boys it was on the end of the bench.  It certainly wouldn't be the wonder tank many think it would be.

[HawkerMKII]

Only a couple of Super Pershing tanks saw action during the war.  Don't hold your breath seeing it added to the game.

ack-ack

Same could be said about the 163 and it's here.......only 8 kills during the war

[danny76]

Same could be said about the 163 and it's here.......only 8 kills during the war

And the Wirbel

[Coalcat1]

Agreed hawker, if we get AC that had almost no effect on the war, I want my uber US GV. 

[alpini13]

NO. hardly used at all in the war. many other tanks needed

[matt]

The M26 Pershing, although only seeing action a few times in WWII, was indisputably the best US tank of WWII. The first production model, the T26E3 was first produced in January 1944. This model mounted the M3 90mm gun, which was very similar to the German KwK 36 88mm gun, as used on the Tiger I. The M3 90mm could fire AP, HE, and HVAP rounds, the latter of which was a threat to the T2. The other version to see combat in WWII was the T261-1 superperishing which mounted T15E1 90mm gun, an improvement on the M3, having a longer barrel and a larger powder charge, being separate from the projectile. This gun could pen. a panther's frontal armor from 2600yds out. I believe that the addition of these tanks would increase the use of US tanks due to us only having the " Tommy Cooker" for our US tanks. I would be fine seeing the T26E3 perked the same as the tiger I, and the T26E1-1 being perked around the same as the Jagdpanther. It would also be nice if HTC would model the extra armor to the T26E1-1 usually had welded on 
(Image removed from quote.)
Damaged T26 after an 88 round hit its turret.
(Image removed from quote.)
T26E1-1 before having extra armor welded on.

+1

[Butcher]

The Me-163 makes sense of why it was added, each map has a Headquarters for each country and a "Komet" base to help defend it, otherwise without the Me-163 HQ would be down for every country routinely. What is the M-26 going to add to elevate every map? an extra GV that saw almost no action in the war?
There has to be a balance of realism and play ability, the Me-163 brings a strong defense to every map for its HQ, the M-26 would simply be another GV in a long list of GV's to be added.

Sure the Me-163 has 8 kills? 8 minutes of fuel and dozens of dead pilots - it served in the war in squadron strength and flew in combat obviously. However in Aces, it brings a different playstyle when going near HQ.

M-26 would add nothing to play ability.

[Tank-Ace]

Agreed hawker, if we get AC that had almost no effect on the war, I want my uber US GV. 

But the Pershing we're most likely to get (which isn't very likely any time in the near future) ISN'T uber. Its marginally better than the Panther in terms of penetration at range and armor, but less maneuverable with poorer ballistics.


The super pershing, as you said, had a mere two sent to Europe, and was an experimental vehicle. The Me-163 was at least used operationally.

[danny76]

The Me-163 makes sense of why it was added, each map has a Headquarters for each country and a "Komet" base to help defend it, otherwise without the Me-163 HQ would be down for every country routinely. What is the M-26 going to add to elevate every map? an extra GV that saw almost no action in the war?
There has to be a balance of realism and play ability, the Me-163 brings a strong defense to every map for its HQ, the M-26 would simply be another GV in a long list of GV's to be added.

Sure the Me-163 has 8 kills? 8 minutes of fuel and dozens of dead pilots - it served in the war in squadron strength and flew in combat obviously. However in Aces, it brings a different playstyle when going near HQ.

M-26 would add nothing to play ability.

Excellent point

[Ack-Ack]

Same could be said about the 163 and it's here.......only 8 kills during the war

No, the same can't be said of the Me 163.  The Me 163 was produced enough to see it in squadron strength with JG 400, while only 2 Super Pershings (one of those was a regular Pershing modified on the field to Super Pershing standards) saw duty in the ETO.  Apples and oranges.

ack-ack

[Hetzer7]

Personally love the idea of the Pershing being included, but I can see the arguments against it. 2-part ammo (iirc) would make it a slow loader. Side note: M24 deserves a serious look IMO

<S> Coalcat1

- Hetzer

[Blinder]

Lot of "ifs" "could" and "should" but the real thing is we aren't goin to know, or be told anything till "they" decide "they" are ready to do what "they" want.....which is most likely far and away from what we ask for, for the most part.

I would love to see the pershing in game and I love you guys who know what this "list" holds where is this magic list that ya'll talk about. Karnak that's directed at you HTC might put it in just to spite you.....odds are low but heck not like we really know whats up anyhow.

The real question is: Are "they" working on any armour additions at all or are we all just wizzing in the wind here? Because it looks to me like the improved B-26 and the Tu-2 are the bones "they" threw at us so we'd all pipe down while "they" took the rest of the year to work on the new terrain.  I highly doubt we'll be seeing any new aircraft or tanks for a long time.

Kind of reminds me of Warbirds back in 2001-2004. I asked them repeatedly to speed up the T-34/76 or slow down their grossly over modeled Panther. Then I asked for a T-34/85 so we'd at least have another tank to actually challenge the grossly over modeled Panther so every night in the flying arenas and Armored Assault would stop being a Pantherfest. In 10 years no one over there could find the time to model a turret for a T-34/85 and add the dang thing to the game because last I heard, they still don't have one.

My point is: We can wish and condemn and vent all we want too. The truth is it is now a "come as you are war" and we'll probably see new equipment at about the same pace that HTC's competitor is introducing them too.

[Coalcat1]

Personally love the idea of the Pershing being included, but I can see the arguments against it. 2-part ammo (iirc) would make it a slow loader. Side note: M24 deserves a serious look IMO

<S> Coalcat1

- Hetzer

I stated that it should be modeled with the Jagdtiger and M26, because it would balance out the damage the guns can do.
        Hetzer

[save]

the Jagdtiger was a monster with 3.5km kill everything capability and 250mm armour, its very unlikely to see it action in AH, since you pretty much need to bomb it to kill it, used correctly (3k out or more from enemy tanks).

Its not comparable with any other tank/tank destroyer in ww2.