The successful use of the heavily armored M4A3E2 "Sherman Jumbo" created a desirability to make equivalent versions of future tank designs. This was first going to be applied to the M26 and the new up-armored variant was designated T26E5. In February 1945, it was recommended to convert ten T26E3s into T26E5s.
The T26E5 was initially meant to have eight inches of frontal protection, on both the upper/lower glacis and the turret face. However, on March 29 it was recommended to make further increases to the frontal armor. The front glacis plate had its thickness reduced to six inches and the lower glacis was reduced to four inches. The turret had a thickness of 7.5 inches at the front, 3.5 at the side, and 5 at the rear for balance purposes. However, the new gun shield casting had an actual thickness of 11(!) inches at 0 degrees. With these changes, the vehicle weight bloated to 102,300 pounds.
Tests at Aberdeen indicated the T26E5 performed more favorably than the M26 Pershing. However, with the end of the war, no further vehicles were produced and the 27 that had been built were reused for test purposes.
The new T26E5 is considerably different than its—arguably overpowered—version at Tier VIII. Now I believe the tank is more balanced with an authentic configuration. What we see here are a few net-positive changes to the vehicle's armor in exchange for a massive nerf to the vehicle's mobility and firepower. The first hull/turret option actually sees a considerable improvement to the tank's armor, but these stock modules have considerably worse maneuverability and gun handling. By "upgrading" the modules (decreasing the hull armor and increasing the turret armor, to be the same as the Tier VIII version), the weight decreases and the quality of life greatly improves.
However, this tank should be expected to play more like a British Churchill tank. It has great armor, but very poor gun choices. I would even give it worse DPM than a Churchill VII, let alone a comparable M26 Pershing, T25, or T23. Of the "Pershing" family at Tier VII, this tank has the worst mobility and gun characteristics (reload, aim time, etc.), but the best armor: a polar opposite of the T23.
In the end, with alternate hulls at play, you have two options: a conventional heavy tank with great armor, poor mobility, and a respectable gun (elited); or an absurdly armored heavy tank, with some of the worst mobility at its tier and a lackluster gun (stock).
Stock, all this thing really has going for it now is its armor. Frontally, it's practically impenetrable from everything but higher tiers. But it's easy to flank, vulnerable at the sides, and it can't really protect itself due to its lackluster mobility and firepower. But the top gun would require the more armored turret, which would in turn require the less armored hull to mount.
As for player compensation goes, there's plenty of ways to do it. The most painless would be to keep a "T26E5 Patriot" as an exclusive version of the T26E5. Whether or not that tank gets balanced for Tier VII (with some gold compensation) or stays at Tier VIII, I don't personally care. But regular T26E5 owners should just get a full gold refund for the tank, plus the new T26E5 automatically researched. Whether or not the tank is also purchased would be up to Wargaming.
The T26E5 was initially meant to have eight inches of frontal protection, on both the upper/lower glacis and the turret face. However, on March 29 it was recommended to make further increases to the frontal armor. The front glacis plate had its thickness reduced to six inches and the lower glacis was reduced to four inches. The turret had a thickness of 7.5 inches at the front, 3.5 at the side, and 5 at the rear for balance purposes. However, the new gun shield casting had an actual thickness of 11(!) inches at 0 degrees. With these changes, the vehicle weight bloated to 102,300 pounds.
The new T26E5 is considerably different than its—arguably overpowered—version at Tier VIII. Now I believe the tank is more balanced with an authentic configuration. What we see here are a few net-positive changes to the vehicle's armor in exchange for a massive nerf to the vehicle's mobility and firepower. The first hull/turret option actually sees a considerable improvement to the tank's armor, but these stock modules have considerably worse maneuverability and gun handling. By "upgrading" the modules (decreasing the hull armor and increasing the turret armor, to be the same as the Tier VIII version), the weight decreases and the quality of life greatly improves.
However, this tank should be expected to play more like a British Churchill tank. It has great armor, but very poor gun choices. I would even give it worse DPM than a Churchill VII, let alone a comparable M26 Pershing, T25, or T23. Of the "Pershing" family at Tier VII, this tank has the worst mobility and gun characteristics (reload, aim time, etc.), but the best armor: a polar opposite of the T23.
In the end, with alternate hulls at play, you have two options: a conventional heavy tank with great armor, poor mobility, and a respectable gun (elited); or an absurdly armored heavy tank, with some of the worst mobility at its tier and a lackluster gun (stock).
Stock, all this thing really has going for it now is its armor. Frontally, it's practically impenetrable from everything but higher tiers. But it's easy to flank, vulnerable at the sides, and it can't really protect itself due to its lackluster mobility and firepower. But the top gun would require the more armored turret, which would in turn require the less armored hull to mount.
 |
| A late T26E5 pilot with the gun shield cover removed. |
As for player compensation goes, there's plenty of ways to do it. The most painless would be to keep a "T26E5 Patriot" as an exclusive version of the T26E5. Whether or not that tank gets balanced for Tier VII (with some gold compensation) or stays at Tier VIII, I don't personally care. But regular T26E5 owners should just get a full gold refund for the tank, plus the new T26E5 automatically researched. Whether or not the tank is also purchased would be up to Wargaming.
Guns: 90 mm Gun T7; 90 mm Gun M3
Engines: Ford GAF (500 hp); Ford GAN (525 hp)
Turrets (Turret Armor (mm)): T26E5 Early (203/127/127);
*measuring the turret front, not the thicker gun shield.
*measuring the turret front, not the thicker gun shield.
Suspensions/Alternate Hulls, Total Weight (metric tons): T26E5 Early (50.64); T26E5 (46.4)
Hull Armor (mm): 203/76/51 (T26E5 Early); 152/76/51 (T26E5)
Top Speed: 32 km/h
Crew: 5 (Driver; Gunner; Loader; Commander; Radio)
See Also:
T14, M26 Pershing, T23, T25, T32
Sources:
Hunnicutt, R. P. Pershing, 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment