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

Author Topic: M-10 Tank Destroyer  (Read 1545 times)

Offline Redlegs

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1151
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #15 on: December 09, 2007, 07:28:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Widewing
Why do we need a hanger queen? We have enough defenseless, under-used aircraft now. The Ju 88 is faster, with a better bomb load. Yet, they are seldom seen except for torpedo attacks on CVs. The reason for that is they are nearly defenseless against heavily armed fighters.

My regards,

Widewing


Well, the He-111 would be a good EW bomber. And, it'd be more AH relevant, it could be used in a lot more scenarios, as opposed to Operation Tidal Wave  for
the Iar. 81.
Logged
Resident Arizona Cardinals/Cincinnati Reds fan

Offline Masherbrum

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 22408
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2007, 07:48:04 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Redlegs
Well, the He-111 would be a good EW bomber. And, it'd be more AH relevant, it could be used in a lot more scenarios, as opposed to Operation Tidal Wave  for
the Iar. 81.
Wrong, but I won't bother tying to convince you otherwise.
Logged
-=Most Wanted=-

FSO Squad 412th FNVG
http://worldfamousfridaynighters.com/
Co-Founder of DFC

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16333
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #17 on: December 09, 2007, 08:21:45 PM »
Masherbrum, I don't know much at all about either the 111 or Iar81.  Could you elaborate a bit?
Logged
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #18 on: December 11, 2007, 04:26:31 PM »
What on earth is a He-111 :D

Anyway, easiest bomber inprevements for AH would probably be different loadouts/added loadouts.

And we do have a 20K bomber BTW :D......hint hint!
Logged
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline BaldEagl

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10791
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #19 on: December 11, 2007, 04:39:28 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Yossarian
personally I find GVs to be usually unexciting when compared to aircraft.  However, it is fun to do things like... going on a rampage with a M-8, and killing tigers.  


Good luck with that.  I was alone in a Tiger defending a V base the other night when the 68th rushed it with M-8's.  I took at least a hundred hits, had 10 kills and sent several running off smoking before someone was smart enough to roll a Sherman in and finish me off.
Logged
I edit a lot of my posts.  Get used to it.

Offline WWhiskey

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3122
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #20 on: December 15, 2007, 10:11:14 AM »
O K lets say you can have what you want, who is going to pay for all these new planes and tanks?the taxpayers the hard working people of this great land? you go explain it to them, why you need another tank,another bomber!


but yes the gv part of this game could use more stuff. alot of players dont fly that much and love to gv (LTARs come to mind). if there were better AA guns on gv,s like the wirbil thang ,i dont remember how to spell it. the tactics of the pilots would have to change. more heavy bombers in the air to bomb gvs makes for more targets in the air for friendly pilots to come shoot down! kind of a win win !:aok
Logged
Flying since tour 71.

Offline Captain Virgil Hilts

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6128
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #21 on: December 15, 2007, 02:00:38 PM »
Why an M-10 when you could have the M-18 instead?
Logged
"I haven't seen Berlin yet, from the ground or the air, and I plan on doing both, BEFORE the war is over."

SaVaGe

Offline bj229r

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6732
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #22 on: December 15, 2007, 02:44:47 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Why an M-10 when you could have the M-18 instead?

I was thinkin same, but noone pointed it out, so I assumed perhaps there WAS an M10:lol ---Saw a restored M18 on Mil channel....neat critter. (50 mph, suspension system that M1A1 uses even now)I didnt remember it having an open compartment, which would suck as a 202 would disable it in 1 pass
Logged
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers

http://www.flamewarriors.net/forum/

Offline BaldEagl

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10791
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #23 on: December 15, 2007, 02:49:44 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Why an M-10 when you could have the M-18 instead?


If I recall the M10 was produced in much higher numbers.
Logged
I edit a lot of my posts.  Get used to it.

Offline bj229r

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6732
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #24 on: December 15, 2007, 07:36:01 PM »
Eh....like there were tons of Nikis and Lgheys produced
Logged
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers

http://www.flamewarriors.net/forum/

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #25 on: December 15, 2007, 08:39:23 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by WWhiskey
but yes the gv part of this game could use more stuff. alot of players dont fly that much and love to gv (LTARs come to mind). if there were better AA guns on gv,s like the wirbil thang ,i dont remember how to spell it. the tactics of the pilots would have to change. more heavy bombers in the air to bomb gvs makes for more targets in the air for friendly pilots to come shoot down! kind of a win win !:aok
Is this the "wirbil thang" you are talking about?  :D

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 WWhiskey

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3122
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #26 on: December 16, 2007, 10:49:27 AM »
yes it is the THANG i was wanting  it is one KOOL looking piece of history is'nt it!
Logged
Flying since tour 71.

Offline angelsandair

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3126
      • RT Website
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #27 on: December 18, 2007, 12:50:22 AM »
ty guys, i just really think that there should be more tanks and have the m-10 about half the price of the tiger, and the churchill tank would be nice in game (dont know much about churchill tank) :D
Logged
Quote
Goto Google and type in "French military victories", then hit "I'm feeling lucky".
Here lie these men on this sun scoured atoll,
The wind for their watcher, the wave for their shroud,
Where palm and pandanus shall whisper forever,
A requiem fitting for heroes

Offline Yarbles

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6200
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #28 on: December 18, 2007, 11:17:19 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by angelsandair
ty guys, i just really think that there should be more tanks and have the m-10 about half the price of the tiger, and the churchill tank would be nice in game (dont know much about churchill tank) :D


Like the Churchill but with its 13mph top speed who has got the patience other than in defence.
Logged
DFC/GFC/OAP



"Don't get into arguments with idiots, they drag you down to their level and then win from experience"
"He who can laugh at himself has mastered himself"

Offline angelsandair

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3126
      • RT Website
M-10 Tank Destroyer
« Reply #29 on: December 18, 2007, 08:05:16 PM »
still, just throwing tanks off the top of my head =), just need more gvs
Logged
Quote
Goto Google and type in "French military victories", then hit "I'm feeling lucky".
Here lie these men on this sun scoured atoll,
The wind for their watcher, the wave for their shroud,
Where palm and pandanus shall whisper forever,
A requiem fitting for heroes
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
« previous next »