Jump to content


British Cruiser's (early)


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

RV_Flowers #1 Posted 28 December 2011 - 07:31 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 32877 battles
  • 121
  • [GBH] GBH
  • Member since:
    01-09-2011
British Cruiser Tanks of the early years.

Mk I and II:
These were design to uses the same hull design, suspension, automotive components and armament. The Mk II was an attempt to improve on the Mk I design.
Cruiser Mk I (A9)
Cruiser Mk II (A10)

Mk III and IV
The Mk III was design to make uses of the Christie suspension system, it was in-service at the same time as the Mk I. The Mk IV was again an attempt to improve the deign.
Cruiser Mk III (A13 Mk I)
Cruiser Mk IV (A13 Mk II)

Mk V Covenanter
This was an attempt to design a new tank to fight the German Panza III and IV, but it had to uses a lot of the same components as a tank that was already being made. The Mk III/IV components were chosen. But the design was a failure.
Cruiser Mk V (A13 MkIII) Covenanter

Now do we need to have all of these tanks in the tree?
I think either the Mk I or the Mk II should be in the tree the other as a Premium.
The Mk III and Mk IV can be the same tank as the biggest change was in turret armour.
The Mk V could be in the tree but as a tie 3 tank.

Catarraz #2 Posted 28 December 2011 - 09:03 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13332 battles
  • 928
  • Member since:
    05-05-2011
You know, Cruiser Mk I also seems kinda fitting for tier I...

Tuccy #3 Posted 28 December 2011 - 10:33 PM

    Czech Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 14463 battles
  • 6,482
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    10-24-2010
UMM, disagree, 2pdr would be just too much of a killer there. Also I believe these should be calssified rather as Medium tanks, not Lights, and would make pretty logical succession (esp. if Vickers Medium was really chosen as Tier I ;))

panzerbetyar_h #4 Posted 29 December 2011 - 12:59 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 22807 battles
  • 280
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011
How can you compare a Cruiser MkI with a Loltraktor, Ms-1 or a T1 UMM? Cruiser MKI is ideal for Tier2 and the MKIV is for Tier3.

Catarraz #5 Posted 29 December 2011 - 01:09 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 13332 battles
  • 928
  • Member since:
    05-05-2011
ok, my mistake there then...
but, you gotta admit; with 14mm armour...

Battledragon #6 Posted 29 December 2011 - 10:21 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 12362 battles
  • 650
  • Member since:
    05-04-2010
A9 is like a smaller T-28 (the Russian one I mean)

panzerbetyar_h #7 Posted 29 December 2011 - 01:28 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 22807 battles
  • 280
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011
Yes it has very weak armor so as Panzer III Ausf.A or T-26, but they're still superior than Tier1 tanks.

Listy #8 Posted 29 December 2011 - 01:36 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 12118 battles
  • 5,727
  • Member since:
    04-19-2011

View PostUMM, on 29 December 2011 - 01:09 AM, said:

ok, my mistake there then...
but, you gotta admit; with 14mm armour...

British tank doctrine of the early years was very simple.
Cruiser tanks: Light armour, fast speed.
Infantry tanks: Heavy armour slow speed.

So Expect the early mediums to be very vulnerable, but fast with a good gun.
While the I tanks will take forever to get anywhere but will be hard to kill.

Tuccy #9 Posted 29 December 2011 - 08:57 PM

    Czech Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 14463 battles
  • 6,482
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    10-24-2010
14mm is consistent with early PzKpfw III, most of early PzKpfw IV hull and turret, or (in Russian tree) BT series.

My proposal would be A-9 for Tier 2 Medium and on Tier III split between A-10 and A-13, bvoth with either 2pdr or 3" howitzer.

mr3awsome #10 Posted 30 December 2011 - 10:09 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

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

View PostTuccy, on 29 December 2011 - 08:57 PM, said:

14mm is consistent with early PzKpfw III, most of early PzKpfw IV hull and turret, or (in Russian tree) BT series.

My proposal would be A-9 for Tier 2 Medium and on Tier III split between A-10 and A-13, bvoth with either 2pdr or 3" howitzer.
also T-46

kwk75l48 #11 Posted 30 December 2011 - 10:42 AM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 19329 battles
  • 2,363
  • [TDC] TDC
  • Member since:
    11-28-2010
If i recall correctly the 3 inch how had smoke only for most of the war at least  the part when they were used.
the covenanter would be great at tier 3 nice balance with pz3A and they look soo good the main probs on the covenanter was its cooling system which didnt work and its transmission which sorta worked. The 2 pdr will be a great gun at low tiers.

Tuccy #12 Posted 31 December 2011 - 07:22 AM

    Czech Community Manager

  • WG Staff
  • 14463 battles
  • 6,482
  • [WG] WG
  • Member since:
    10-24-2010

View Postkwk75l48, on 30 December 2011 - 10:42 AM, said:

If i recall correctly the 3 inch how had smoke only for most of the war at least  the part when they were used.
the covenanter would be great at tier 3 nice balance with pz3A and they look soo good the main probs on the covenanter was its cooling system which didnt work and its transmission which sorta worked. The 2 pdr will be a great gun at low tiers.
The 3in had HE from the beginning, though smoke was the theoretical main ammunition.

Gigaton #13 Posted 31 December 2011 - 07:48 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 4675 battles
  • 860
  • Member since:
    11-11-2010
I don't really see any problem with the pre-alpha tree allocation, with Mk I/II and Mk III/IV being tier 2-3 in seperate branches and Covenater getting the tier 4 scout spot. I don't mind the pre-Crusader cruisers being lights either, as some early cruiser and "medium" tanks are lights in the game already (tier 3 PzIII, Pz38, and even BTs were technically cruisers).

Tigger3 #14 Posted 08 February 2012 - 03:57 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13572 battles
  • 1,779
  • Member since:
    02-01-2012
The A9 and A10 Cruisers had 3.7" howitzers firing smoke and HE, the 3" howitzer came in with the Matilda II.

LGrum #15 Posted 11 February 2012 - 01:08 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 456
  • Member since:
    08-10-2010

View PostListy, on 29 December 2011 - 01:36 PM, said:

British tank doctrine of the early years was very simple.
Cruiser tanks: Light armour, fast speed.
Infantry tanks: Heavy armour slow speed.

So Expect the early mediums to be very vulnerable, but fast with a good gun.
While the I tanks will take forever to get anywhere but will be hard to kill.

I'd tweak your description of the doctrine a bit

Cruiser tanks - high speed (and therefore) lighter armour
Infantry tanks - slow speed (and therefore) more armour.

though in truth the speed/armour is also a best engineering solution to a particular requirement.

Tigger3 #16 Posted 09 August 2012 - 03:21 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 13572 battles
  • 1,779
  • Member since:
    02-01-2012
Little vid of some A13 Mk II cruisers, surprising how nippy they really were and how the suspension works better at speed.

http://www.britishpa...ory/query/tanks

mr3awsome #17 Posted 09 August 2012 - 08:49 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 17455 battles
  • 3,086
  • Member since:
    03-15-2011
That was TANK PORN AWESOME!!!!!

LGrum #18 Posted 09 August 2012 - 06:38 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 456
  • Member since:
    08-10-2010

View Postmr3awsome, on 09 August 2012 - 08:49 AM, said:

That was TANK PORN AWESOME!!!!!

A search on the site should through up some Cromwell and Comet action.

Tigger3 #19 Posted 09 August 2012 - 07:39 PM

    Lieutenant

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

View PostLGrum, on 09 August 2012 - 06:38 PM, said:

A search on the site should through up some Cromwell and Comet action.

Plenty of interesting film clips on Pathe news, a good one of a flying Cromwell on there.




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users