Author Topic: Tank news flash (Read 2311 times)

Arlo · « **on:** February 20, 2008, 05:50:27 PM »

There are already two German MBTs, one US/British MBT, one Russian MBT modeled. No more German uber tanks are needed (or Russian ones ... or even US ones - Brit - maybe) .... even from just a plain `ol MA mentality. From a scenario or AVA standpoint, however, the Japanese and Italians don't seem to even have an armored car .... much less a tank.

Thank you. Carry on.

HTC ... thanks for the Shermie, baybee! (Firefly? That's ok.)

Rino · « **Reply #1 on:** February 20, 2008, 05:57:00 PM »

Hangar getting too empty again arlo? We don't even have scenario
opponents for those death traps ytou just asked for.

Puck · « **Reply #2 on:** February 20, 2008, 05:58:01 PM »

WOOO!!!! YES!

Something on wheels I might be able to kill!

Meatwad · « **Reply #3 on:** February 20, 2008, 05:59:51 PM »

Crusader III
Matilda II

They would make a nice british tank to be added

BaDkaRmA158Th · « **Reply #4 on:** February 20, 2008, 06:12:41 PM »

wait..

Americans have the lvt's the m8 m3 m16.
Germans have the ostie panzer tiger.
British have the m4

....poor japanese.

(ehy, they had realy bad tanks)

Arlo · « **Reply #5 on:** February 20, 2008, 06:22:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rino
Hangar getting too empty again arlo? We don't even have scenario
opponents for those death traps ytou just asked for.

Cause there were no Italian tanks in Africa and no Japanese tanks on the islands of the Pacific?

I'm sayin' the umpteenth thread asking for uberstampfwagon mk XVXII.378 or even the T-999 Russian hovertank makes less sense.

Less.

I'm perfectly happy with the Shermie (Firefly) addition. Lots of scenario fodder there. But you know there's room for Africa, man ... even then.

Doncha?

Treize69 · « **Reply #6 on:** February 20, 2008, 06:36:49 PM »

Why would you want a Japanese tank for anything other than curiosity sake? They hardly used them outside of mainland Asia, and when they did even our pathertic little M3 Stuarts could mop the floor with them. .30-cal machine gun fire could punch through the armor of all but the biggest, and even the best ones didn't see action with anything bigger than a 37mm gun, not to mention they weren't much faster than walking speed.

Theres a reason most of them had the turrets removed to use as pillbox guns by 1944.

This (the Type 97) was about as good as they got, and its about the size of a modern pickup truck.

Most of them were smaller, like this Ha-Go, which was about the size of a VW bug (except taller).

Almost all only had a two man crew and were armed with a small cannon and a machine gun. You might as well just take an M8, pretend its a Japanese tank and be glad that its about five times as fast.

Treize69 · « **Reply #7 on:** February 20, 2008, 06:41:42 PM »

Or theres always the Ke-Re.

Although I have a feeling that most would end nearly every sortie like this.

Arlo · « **Reply #8 on:** February 20, 2008, 07:47:54 PM »

Not getting the entire point. No need for more uber german or russian tanks, either. Not in the MA ... not in the AVA. IF anything made sense for adding tanks to Aces High .... the only ones I can see would be ones that fill scenario gaps. Are we terribly lacking? Not really.

Treize69 · « **Reply #9 on:** February 20, 2008, 08:10:44 PM »

Problem is that most of the tanks we'd want (to be competitive at least) are worth adding because they're late war or later in the line to where they'd be effective. Most of the early war ones were similar enough in size, weight and armament that one is as good as another. The only real differences (range, ground pressure, reliability, etc.) aren't really something that can be recreated in AH.

Thats not to say they shouldn't be worked in somehow- the Grant, the Lee, the Italian and Japanese tanks... all would be nice for a scenario, but otherwise would only be used by afficianadoes and those who like to use the "different" rides.

I still prefer my original solution to the prob though- its Aces High, why does it need AFVs in the first place? If I wanted tanks, I'd play Panzer Commander or Steel Beasts. Or WWIIOL.

macleod01 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 20, 2008, 08:38:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Treize69
...M3 Stuarts could mop the floor with them. .30-cal machine gun fire could punch through the armor of all but the biggest...

Oh finally, add it! I can take it out in my spit 1!!!!

Gabriel · « **Reply #11 on:** February 20, 2008, 10:46:58 PM »

Generally,

Italian and Jap tanks were ****.

Thanks.

Arlo · « **Reply #12 on:** February 20, 2008, 10:56:48 PM »

Thanks for pointing that out. None of us were aware. This seems like Sherman threads of old part 2.

Gabriel · « **Reply #13 on:** February 20, 2008, 11:13:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Arlo
Thanks for pointing that out. None of us were aware. This seems like Sherman threads of old part 2.

I didn't read those threads- but whoever thought there weren't variants of the M4 that were capable, watched too much history ch.

The only Italian armour worth mentioning is the Semoventes and the P 40 , the latter of which is the only "tank", and is handily outclassed by what is in game currently (unlike say WWIIOL, where it would have a place in the early tiers).

Arlo · « **Reply #14 on:** February 20, 2008, 11:27:31 PM »

There was a time when the pilot's pistol was wooden and we all had to say "bang bang."

It's not always about who's daddy's tank is tougher. Sometimes fun is seeing how under the dog can be and still come out on top somehow. Sometimes it's rolling a jeep down a hill sideways when you're drunk. Sometimes it's losing a battle online the same way it was lost in history. Sometimes it's winning it instead.

Eh ... I'm philosophical like that.

HT and I seem to share some similarities in vision. Some.

Now if only I can win over some SCW converts!