« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)  (Read 1223 times)

Offline bozon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6037
Re: Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #15 on: April 16, 2007, 05:20:29 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Wobblin-Goblin
The Panther was arguably a better tank than the Tiger I, and certainly better than the PzIV.

... because there's no place in this game for anything but the best.

Modeling more GV is a waste of time. They all get bombed the same :)
Logged
Mosquito VI - twice the spitfire, four times the ENY.

Click!>> "So, you want to fly the wooden wonder" - <<click!
the almost incomplete and not entirely inaccurate guide to the AH Mosquito.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGOWswdzGQs

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #16 on: April 16, 2007, 05:30:26 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Wmaker
I would like too see good, honest airplanes.
Yes!  No more of those evil, lying, cheating, philandering airplanes!  We have too many of those already!  :mad:
Logged
Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."

Offline Willfly

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 115
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #17 on: April 16, 2007, 06:19:48 PM »
I have never seen AH take away anything in all the 5 years I've been on it and I am sure they never will.

The Panther is a nice idea that has Quite obviously been suggested before.

About the M24 Chaffee light tank, It is NOT armed with some feeble 37mm but with a M6 75mm (In fact, it's the same gun that was put on experimental models of the B-25 for anti-ship use) It was supposed to replace the M5 Stuart (The M5 Stuart is not to be confused with the earlier M3 Stuart which was officially considered obsolete in July 1943) The M24 was designed after the ordinance committee wanted a replacement for the M5 Stuart. The M24 was standardized in 1944 and saw action in Italy and the Rhine River crossings

And I must say, we are actually fine with what we have in response to Hornet's message.

P.S.: There are several models of the Panther...choose one!

M24 Picture
« Last Edit: April 16, 2007, 06:37:36 PM by Willfly »
Logged

Offline Fencer51

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4680
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #18 on: April 16, 2007, 06:45:54 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Wmaker
I would like too see good, honest airplanes.


Careful, that would rule out the Buffalo. :aok

The Stuart (M3) would be an excellent tank if we had the MkII and MkIII Panzers along with the short 75 MkIV.

Then we would need an early version of the Sherman and voila desert war time.

Excellent footage of the M24 in "Bridge at Remagen" and "Battle of the Bulge".

Cheers
« Last Edit: April 16, 2007, 06:48:22 PM by Fencer51 »
Logged
Fencer
The names of the irrelevant have been changed to protect their irrelevance.
The names of the innocent and the guilty have not been changed.
As for the innocent, everyone needs to know they are innocent –
As for the guilty… they can suck it.

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20387
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #19 on: April 17, 2007, 01:00:43 PM »
What the heck, how bout a nice early war  PzKpfw III Ausf.G. or J with the short barrel 50 just for fun and because they look good.

Everyone always wants the latest and greatest so they can't be beat.  How bout something that you might have to work at a bit?

Throw that one in with the early T34 and the early Sherman with the short barrel 75 and then see how folks do.  And with the Sherman and Mk III as well as the Mk IV you've got North Africa and Tunisia battles.  And with the T34 you've got Barbarossa, Stalingrad etc.

Skinners could have a ball with all those Mk III paint schemes.
Logged
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline Furball

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15781
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #20 on: April 17, 2007, 01:28:41 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Guppy35
Skinners could have a ball with all those Meteor Mk III paint schemes.


I agree :t
Logged
I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.
-Cicero

-- The Blue Knights --

Offline Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #21 on: April 18, 2007, 02:39:37 AM »
"Everyone always wants the latest and greatest so they can't be beat. How bout something that you might have to work at a bit?"

C'mon, isn't that a bit too much asked... :D

No really, it would actually make sense but I'm beginning to think that the tank warfare suffers of somewhat inaccurate modelling. I mean that if you shoot a tank into a well known weak spot it is not modelled so nothing happens, or tanks may even explode when hit in tracks or track wheels etc. That means that with a bit worse guns you only option is to get really close or behind to penetrate and hitting a certain spot from greater distance has no effect.

-C+
Logged
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."

Offline bozon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6037
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #22 on: April 18, 2007, 04:41:11 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Charge
No really, it would actually make sense but I'm beginning to think that the tank warfare suffers of somewhat inaccurate modelling. I mean that if you shoot a tank into a well known weak spot it is not modelled so nothing happens, or tanks may even explode when hit in tracks or track wheels etc. That means that with a bit worse guns you only option is to get really close or behind to penetrate and hitting a certain spot from greater distance has no effect.
 

"Aces High"
This game was designed for airwar with quite impressive aerodynamics modeling. GV were a side show that grew too big for its original box. The GV modeling is very simplistic compared with the planes and at least till now it seems - by intention.

What ever HTC decides to do in the future, I hope the ground aspect will not be developed at the expense of the air simulation. Even though it may attract a much wider player base, there are enough vehicle games out there, but very VERY few good (combat) flight simulators.
Logged
Mosquito VI - twice the spitfire, four times the ENY.

Click!>> "So, you want to fly the wooden wonder" - <<click!
the almost incomplete and not entirely inaccurate guide to the AH Mosquito.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGOWswdzGQs

Offline Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #23 on: April 18, 2007, 06:48:57 AM »
"What ever HTC decides to do in the future, I hope the ground aspect will not be developed at the expense of the air simulation. Even though it may attract a much wider player base, there are enough vehicle games out there, but very VERY few good (combat) flight simulators."

I concur, but since the ground war is getting more intention all the time there might be some pressure to develop it (one way or the other).

But yes, it is an excellent flight simulator and that should be its main focus.

-C+
Logged
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #24 on: April 18, 2007, 01:17:51 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Charge

No really, it would actually make sense but I'm beginning to think that the tank warfare suffers of somewhat inaccurate modelling. I mean that if you shoot a tank into a well known weak spot it is not modelled so nothing happens, or tanks may even explode when hit in tracks or track wheels etc. That means that with a bit worse guns you only option is to get really close or behind to penetrate and hitting a certain spot from greater distance has no effect.
I disagree -- especially after the new patch.  They updated the damage modeling on all the tanks.  Even before that, you could track a tank, or just take out an engine leaving the crew compartment / turret able to continue fighting, or just take out the turret leaving the driver to continue tooling about.  There were weak spots to hit before - a slight misjudgement in aim could be the difference between hitting a bogie wheel and tracking a tank vs. hitting the hull and killing the crew.  So, I don't quite get the criticism here.

I have never played WWIIOL, so I can't compare to it - but compared to BF1942, for example, AH tank warefare is much, much more realistic to put it mildly.  I think this is why GVs have such strong player support (aside from the "purists" who want them removed entirely).  

The monster is loose -- might as well continue to feed it.
Logged
Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."

Offline Wobblin-Goblin

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 34
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #25 on: April 18, 2007, 02:54:29 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by E25280
I have never played WWIIOL, so I can't compare to it - but compared to BF1942, for example, AH tank warefare is much, much more realistic to put it mildly.  I think this is why GVs have such strong player support (aside from the "purists" who want them removed entirely).  

The monster is loose -- might as well continue to feed it.


Agreed. I like playing both the air and ground combat. Both are very entertaining and the loss of one or the other would be to the detriment of AH.
Logged

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #26 on: April 18, 2007, 03:06:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Keiler
They got rid of the 109-G10 config :p

Regards,

Matt


Just as an aside:

No, they didn't. They never had a G-10. They had the numbers for a K-4, and they modeled a K-4 (note, same K-4 as is in Warbirds!). Only, in the early AH days they wanted to be able to include another version in (the "G10" was the only 109 in the game). So they took it, left the performance exactly as it was (superior to any G-10 model ever was) and simply added a 20mm nose gun and underwing weapons add-ons, to simulate a G-10.

In the 109 update, they simply removed those options, and relabeled it what it was the entire time, since day 1, "109K-4". Also, since we have the 109G-14, more accurately modeled (not like a G-10 that flew like a K-4), it has the exact same weapons options as the old G-10. So there was no need for a faked/kluged "g10" that we used to have.

Basically they made the K-4 more accurate and shifted the extra gun options to the new ride - the G14.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2007, 03:08:37 PM by Krusty »
Logged

Offline Keiler

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 314
Replace the PzIV with the Panther (PzVI)
« Reply #27 on: April 20, 2007, 09:39:36 AM »
@ Krusty,

ok that clears it up. Heard/read some rumours about that but never any conclusions.

:aok

Matt
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
« previous next »