Jump to content


Crusader as a Tier 5 Light Tank?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
31 replies to this topic

Icecreamvan #1 Posted 24 June 2012 - 11:43 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 11446 battles
  • 382
  • Member since:
    10-03-2010
I don't know, I'm just wondering why the Crusader is not considered as a Medium in this game.

Will it have the same MM like any other Tier 5 Light and being used as a scout?

What about the armament? AFAIK, the Crusader had only the 2pdr, 6pdr and a 3in howitzer.

Honza_H34 #2 Posted 24 June 2012 - 12:10 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 18483 battles
  • 649
  • Member since:
    08-21-2011
My guess is it is just so you can use crew from covenanter and crusader is somewhat in between light/medium, but with tier 5 medium matchmaking. making it tier 5 light in the sense of t-50-2 or Chaffee makes no sense.

Edited by Honza_H34, 24 June 2012 - 12:11 PM.


Icecreamvan #3 Posted 24 June 2012 - 12:43 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 11446 battles
  • 382
  • Member since:
    10-03-2010
That's what i thought. The Crusader is too slow compared to the other T5 Lights (48 kph) so you won't be able to use it as a scout.

Gigaton #4 Posted 24 June 2012 - 03:39 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 4675 battles
  • 860
  • Member since:
    11-11-2010
IMO, it should be a medium. M7 Medium is already pretty equivalent vehicle, also tier 5.

fattoler #5 Posted 24 June 2012 - 05:33 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20424 battles
  • 689
  • [ACE-] ACE-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011
I think if the Crusader is classified as a Light it might cause new players to be a bit too reckless with it.

saml6131 #6 Posted 24 June 2012 - 06:07 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8559 battles
  • 3,821
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
Either way, I'll still be driving it on my way through the crusier branch of the tree.

They can't really make it a tier 5 light as the others due to the main thing about the light. Their speed/mobility.

- Low top speed, as a medium, the speed is alright.
- Acceleration is too low. 18hp/ton is good for a medium, but bad for a light.

Plus, the other tier 5 scouts are much better than their tier 5 medium tanks. Aside from the AMX12t who has an autoloader and is also being moved up a tier next patch.

The 6 pounder (57mm) could be similar in stats to the 57mm on the T-34. It also had a 76mm howitzer available. Not good at this tier, but still a weapon.
The armour of the Mk3 Crusader is 51mm at a pretty good slope. Better than the M4 Sherman.

In fact, the majority of the tank is better than the M4 Sherman.

Same hull armour, but angled better. Similar top speed, give or take a couple of km/h. Better acceleration. 6 pounder had more penetration than the 75mm used on the Sherman, but less than the 76mm M1A1.

So the tanks mobility is good for a tier 5 medium, not for a tier 5 light.
However, the gun may not be powerful enough for tier 5, unless WG plan on giving the Crusader its great accuracy on the move.

Quote

The main armament, as in other British tanks of the period, was balanced so the gunner could control its elevation through a padded shaft against his right shoulder rather than using a geared mechanism. This fitted well with the British doctrine of firing accurately on the move. - Fletcher - The universal tank
So if it has great accuracy on the move, decent penetraton on the 6 pounder, fair top speed and acceleration, it could be one of the best tier 5 tanks. Unless WG count it as a tier 5 scout. I hope not.

Edited by saml6131, 25 June 2012 - 04:45 PM.


Tigger3 #7 Posted 24 June 2012 - 09:14 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13572 battles
  • 1,779
  • Member since:
    02-01-2012

View Postsaml6131, on 24 June 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

Either way, I'll still be driving it on my way through the crusier branch of the tree.

They can't really make it a tier 5 light as the others due to the main thing about the light. Their speed/mobility.

- Low top speed, as a medium, the speed is alright.
- Acceleration is too low. 18hp/ton is good for a medium, but bad for a light.

Plus, the other tier 5 scouts are much better than their tier 5 medium tanks. Aside from the AMX12t who has an autoloader and is also being moved up a tier next patch.

The 6 pounder (57mm) could be similar in stats to the 57mm on the T-34. It also had a 76mm howitzer available. Not good at this tier, but still a weapon.
The armour of the Mk3 Crusader is 51mm at a pretty good slope. Better than the M1 Sherman.

In fact, the majority of the tank is better than the M1 Sherman.

Same hull armour, but angled better. Similar top speed, give or take a couple of km/h. Better acceleration. 6 pounder had more penetration than the 75mm used on the Sherman, but less than the 76mm M1A1.

So the tanks mobility is good for a tier 5 medium, not for a tier 5 light.
However, the gun may not be powerful enough for tier 5, unless WG plan on giving the Crusader its great accuracy on the move.


So if it has great accuracy on the move, decent penetraton on the 6 pounder, fair top speed and acceleration, it could be one of the best tier 5 tanks. Unless WG count it as a tier 5 scout. I hope not.

Would love to see it fitted with the Meteor engine that was trialled in the Crusader before it was fitted in the A27(M) Cromwell. That would give it some real speed.

mr3awsome #8 Posted 25 June 2012 - 07:09 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 17455 battles
  • 3,086
  • Member since:
    03-15-2011
that would be epic

SnibediSnabs #9 Posted 25 June 2012 - 04:34 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13938 battles
  • 439
  • Member since:
    08-16-2011
there is no M1 sherman, please fix your little mistake.

saml6131 #10 Posted 25 June 2012 - 04:44 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8559 battles
  • 3,821
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View Posti_was_here_97, on 25 June 2012 - 04:34 PM, said:

there is no M1 sherman, please fix your little mistake.

Oops, You are right. I meant the M4A1 Sherman. My point still remains though. It can be better than the M4A1 Sherman in some aspects and similar to it in others.

Catarraz #11 Posted 25 June 2012 - 05:58 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13332 battles
  • 928
  • Member since:
    05-05-2011

View Postsaml6131, on 24 June 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

In fact, the majority of the tank is better than the M4 Sherman.

If it was like this, the british would not have dropped the Crusader by 1942 in favor of the Sherman which could carry better armament for having  a wider turret ring.

I think making the crusader a light is like making the PzIII a light; a mistake which was later fixed... In fact these two tanks are quite similar to eachother..

Edited by UMM, 25 June 2012 - 06:00 PM.


SnibediSnabs #12 Posted 25 June 2012 - 06:16 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13938 battles
  • 439
  • Member since:
    08-16-2011

View Postsaml6131, on 25 June 2012 - 04:44 PM, said:

Oops, You are right. I meant the M4A1 Sherman. My point still remains though. It can be better than the M4A1 Sherman in some aspects and similar to it in others.
Agreed.

mr3awsome #13 Posted 25 June 2012 - 07:23 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 17455 battles
  • 3,086
  • Member since:
    03-15-2011

View PostUMM, on 25 June 2012 - 05:58 PM, said:

If it was like this, the british would not have dropped the Crusader by 1942 in favor of the Sherman which could carry better armament for having  a wider turret ring.

I think making the crusader a light is like making the PzIII a light; a mistake which was later fixed... In fact these two tanks are quite similar to eachother..
that is why they were both the most numerous tank of their respective forces until PzIV F2s and M4A1s appeared

Icecreamvan #14 Posted 25 June 2012 - 09:30 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 11446 battles
  • 382
  • Member since:
    10-03-2010
Unfortunately, the Crusader was inferior to the M4A1 because of technical reliability and severe weakspots. Many party of the Crusader's armor were only paperthin and the driver's hatch was a large target.

Posted Image

Guess the hatch will be as vulnerable as KV-5's R2D2.

saml6131 #15 Posted 27 June 2012 - 08:19 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8559 battles
  • 3,821
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
Posted Image


Well, that's what the front looks like from ingame screenshots. Drivers hatch is quite a bad weakspot but it blends in well with the rest of the tank. Still though, as its a medium I won't be expecting to bounce any shots aside from the weakest tiers that you'll fight against, so in this case it'll be tier 3, which will struggle to penetrate the front.

Honza_H34 #16 Posted 27 June 2012 - 12:25 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 18483 battles
  • 649
  • Member since:
    08-21-2011
With the armor Crusader has, i doubt anyone will bother finding weakspots. It is like knowing where A-20 has ammorack. Sure, you can aim for a while, hit it and blow it to bits...or you can just point gun in general direction and do the same thing

Edited by Honza_H34, 27 June 2012 - 12:27 PM.


Skaipe #17 Posted 01 July 2012 - 03:17 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 20358 battles
  • 9
  • [KRA] KRA
  • Member since:
    09-30-2011
Well crusader can be a tier 5 light tank because the tier 7 in the france tech tree is even light

mr3awsome #18 Posted 01 July 2012 - 03:56 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 17455 battles
  • 3,086
  • Member since:
    03-15-2011
hopefully it will be classed as a med

raziekaine #19 Posted 01 July 2012 - 09:52 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 554
  • Member since:
    07-14-2010

View PostHonza_H34, on 27 June 2012 - 12:25 PM, said:

With the armor Crusader has, i doubt anyone will bother finding weakspots. It is like knowing where A-20 has ammorack. Sure, you can aim for a while, hit it and blow it to bits...or you can just point gun in general direction and do the same thing


I'm not really understanding the problem with the crusader as a tier 5 light tank? compared to mediums at the same tier it is almost as good and in some cases better then it contemporaries with considerable angle to emphasise it as well.

According to wiki MK.I 40mm  MK.II 49mm  MK.III 51mm

by comparison to other tier V's

M4 Sherman 51mm
M7  38mm
M24 Chaffee  38mm
AMX 12t 50mm
T-34 45mm
T-50-2  37mm
Pz III/IV 60mm
VK 3001(p)  75mm
VK 2801 60m
If i am missing something here please feel free to point me in the right direction but it seems like a fair fit too me.

Also if anyone knows the maths are they able to work out what the effective armour is with the slope of the armour?

Sotahullu #20 Posted 01 July 2012 - 10:04 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 15540 battles
  • 684
  • Member since:
    10-15-2010

View Postraziekaine, on 01 July 2012 - 09:52 PM, said:

Also if anyone knows the maths are they able to work out what the effective armour is with the slope of the armour?

Well,  that is about 70-89 (hard to see the angle really). And I don't think that angle is not going to be very effective, many players will simply hit the "box" and lower plate.

So, don't stop! Drive like maniac! :Smile-playing:




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users