A player was asking about the differences between the two models of Sherman tank we have modeled in Battleground Europe. In describing those differences, I thought it might shed some more light on the level of detail we use in our weapons modeling for ALL the weapons and vehicles of the game, just in case this aspect of what the game does do so well is part of what you like so much about it, or might like so much about it now that you know about it! B]

The M4a2 Sherman and the M4a3(76) Sherman share similar hulls, the later M4a2(76) has a slightly thinner front glacis plate but it is effectively the same thickness as the M4a2 due to an increased "layback" angle of 9 degrees further back from the vertical.

The front lower hull (or nosepiece) varies a little due to a different casting technique and improvements in that method of construction. In reality it is not a constant thickness on either tank, the later M4a2(76) may have a tiny advantage in this area, but it's really hard to quantify due to the complexity of that casting.

In all other respects the hulls are the same.

The M4a2 has signifigantly better front turret protection due to the presence of a 51mm thick armoured rotor shield cover over and in addition to a regular gun mantlet that is 89mm thick. The M4a3(76) only has the 89mm gun mantlet and no rotor shield. Turret thicknesses are the same in other areas on both tanks.

Ammunition stored in the upper side sponsons of the M4a2 is moved to under the floor in the M4a3(76) ... thus a side or flank shot on the earlier M4a2 is an easier kill than it is on the later M4a3(76) model.

The M4a2 carries the 75mm M3 gun firing a lower velocity (2030 ft./sec) 75mm APHE anti-tank round than the later M4a3(76) which carries the M1a2 derivitive of the M7 gun (76.3mm) which fires a higher velocity (2600 ft./sec) 76.2mm solid shot AP round, obviously a much better armour penetrator than the 75mm round of the M4a2 Shermans M3 75mm gun, although it lacks the post penetration benefits of APHE exploding inside the target after penetration. The APHE 75mm round of the M4a2 just doesn't penetate as well in the first place, but performs better afterwards if it does manage to penetrate.

The 76.2mm M1a2 M7 derivitave gun performs very well out to about 800m, where it rivals the German 75mm guns. At 100 meters it is close to (but still behind) the Tigers 88mm gun, but degrades quickly after that. After 800 meters it is falling behind the German 75mm PaK.40 and StuK.40 guns. The 3inch M7 on the M10 MGC (using M62 APHE ammunition) doesn't rival the German 75mm guns anywhere until around 2000 yards, where they become roughly equal.

Under 1200 meters the M1a2-M7 derivitive gun on the M4a2(76) is superior to the M-10 MGC because it is using M79 solid shot AP versus the M62 APHE round used in the 3inch-M7 gun on the M10. The 3inch-M7 gun on the M10 MGC (firing a 76.2mm M62 APHE shell) will beat the M4a2(76) at all ranges beyond 1200 meters. At around 1200 meters (the crossover point between M79 and M62 ammo and interestingly about the average long range engagement in game) M79 and M62 ammo have about the same penetration performance, making the M4a2(76) and M10 MGC roughly equal in terms of sheer penetrating power alone at 1200 meters.

The M10 will have the post penetration advantage due to APHE shrapnel effects; but a much, much slower turret traverse so thus at closer ranges far less ability to cope with a changing target situation. In as much it is a better long range device and gets the better long range ammo (at the cost of short range power) ...whereas the M4a2(76) with its fast turret traverse is hugely more capable of dealing with a changing target situation at close quarters, and gets the improved short range penetration to more quickly deal with perhaps a heavily armored threat up close.

Just for referance's sake ... the German Pak.40L43 and StuK.40L48 (PzKw.IVg and StuG.IIIg) 75mm guns perform as well at 1500 meters as the two M7 3inch (76.2mm) derivitives on the M4a2-76 and M10 MGC do at around 1200 meters. The 75mm M3 gun on the M4a2 Sherman is nowhere near that effective,  being a low velocity gun and more in line with the smaller British QF.6pdr guns (which are actually 57mm caliber) that are blessed with a good round mass (6 pounds) and a high muzzle velocity.

All the guns and vehicles and weapons in Battleground Europe share the same amount of attention to this kind of detail variation. I hope this has helped you understand a little better; that no matter what tank, plane, or infantry weapon you use, knowing about these kinds of weapon variations are what the great players base their skill and experience on, and what helps seperate their success from those less successful who may think that all the weapons are equal or should be. Historically they were not and we do use historical data like this to make these weapons in game.

If you were to talk about aircraft for example, speeds, climb rates and all the aspects of their performance as well as their guns, make them all differently unique ... and give them all different strengths and weaknesses in combat with each other, just like the tanks and just like even the different infantry weapons too.