Tank destroyer

[E25280]

how about a Nashorn
(Image removed from quote.)
it has to be perked its got an 88

I wouldn't think a Nashorn would be perked, because the armor was thin.

Elefant, on the other hand . . .

[StugIII]

elefant would be a hell of a target to take out, it had a big gun, good armor protection and it had mobility. Nashorn has the gun but not rlly the protection either way thye would be nice additions

[FrodeMk3]

elefant would be a hell of a target to take out, it had a big gun, good armor protection and it had mobility. Nashorn has the gun but not rlly the protection either way thye would be nice additions

Mobility...No. Road speed was 20-30 Kph, Cross-country was 8-10 Kph. http://www.achtungpanzer.com/pz6.htm

[BigPlay]

elefant would be a hell of a target to take out, it had a big gun, good armor protection and it had mobility. Nashorn has the gun but not rlly the protection either way thye would be nice additions

The elephant was a disaster at Kursk and was abandoned rather quickly. The jadgpanzer would be a nice adition for a tank destroyer

[BigPlay]

Frontal upper hull armor was 150 mm, frontal lower hull armor was 100 mm, only the superstructure front had 250 mm armor. The lower hull hit may have been a penetrating one but it's not really clearly visible.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Jagdtiger_3.jpg for another view

From everything I have read about the jadgtiger is that is was impervious to any tank round from the front. I don't believe any of them were knocked out from tank on tank action. Most broke down or were abandoned for one reason or another. The picture is from the Aberdeen tank proving grounds and that scar in the front  was done when it was being tested for penetration at various angles and distances not on the battlefield. It did not penetrate according to what I have read. The glacial plate where the hole is is considered the lower hull and has 240 mm thick armor. The 128 mm gun wasa a naval gun and could turn a Sherman into vapor over 4500 yards.

[snowey]

The elephant was a disaster at Kursk and was abandoned rather quickly. The jadgpanzer would be a nice adition for a tank destroyer

that was becasuse it didnt have a printil or bow gun but in aces high it wouldnt be a problem because we dont have swarms of rusian tank killer squads runing around

[Denniss]

The Ferdinand - there was no Elefant there - was somewhat successful at Kursk, killing lots of enemy vehicles. But it had severe reliability problems and prone to breakdowns especially from within the entire engine/drivetrain components. It was also very unmanouverable and the terrain was not really suitable for a tank that heavy and slow. Almost all Ferdinands lost at Kursk had to be blown up by their own crews to prevent capture.

[StugIII]

people have to remember that, it was untested and this was it baptism of fire, just like the tiger, that had many problem, the Ferdinad, looks to be more of a defensive unit, it would be good for V base defense or Airfield town defense. I rate the Ferdinad a 7 for the things that could have happened to it, the jadgpanther would be a great addition to the game.

[BaldEagl]

M18 would be way more fun then the M10.

It was way faster.

But the M-10 was produced in far geater numbers and would find a home in all three arenas.

[BigPlay]

people have to remember that, it was untested and this was it baptism of fire, just like the tiger, that had many problem, the Ferdinad, looks to be more of a defensive unit, it would be good for V base defense or Airfield town defense. I rate the Ferdinad a 7 for the things that could have happened to it, the jadgpanther would be a great addition to the game.

The Ferdinand had the same gun as the Tiger with the Porsche chassis that was originally suppose to be the Tigers chassis. It was rather big with a high profile. German doctrine was to have a tank destroyer with the same gun package
as the main battle tank in that class. ie


Tiger-Ferdinand
Panzer-Stug

However this changed a bit when tank destroyers started to be equipped with larger guns,

Jadg Panther had the new high velocity 88 that the King Tiger had
Jadg Panzer had the L/70 75mm that the Panther had
Jadg Tiger had a 128mm naval gun

The Ferdinand played such a small part in German tank warfare that others would be a more obvious choice. These tanks im my opinion wouldn't be good for base defense from the stand point that you had to face what you were firing at. More than 1 target would pose a problem from first locating the target than traversing the tank and then jumping into the gunner position to adjust the gun site on the target and if the target is moving fast it may be out of the gun barrel traverse
before you were able to fire starting this process all over again. The only way I see the turretless tank destroyer playing a part would be in the ambush role that would require very little movement.

[FrodeMk3]

The Ferdinand had the same gun as the Tiger with the Porsche chassis that was originally suppose to be the Tigers chassis. It was rather big with a high profile. German doctrine was to have a tank destroyer with the same gun package
as the main battle tank in that class. ie


Tiger-Ferdinand
Panzer-Stug

However this changed a bit when tank destroyers started to be equipped with larger guns,

Jadg Panther had the new high velocity 88 that the King Tiger had
Jadg Panzer had the L/70 75mm that the Panther had
Jadg Tiger had a 128mm naval gun

The Ferdinand played such a small part in German tank warfare that others would be a more obvious choice. These tanks im my opinion wouldn't be good for base defense from the stand point that you had to face what you were firing at. More than 1 target would pose a problem from first locating the target than traversing the tank and then jumping into the gunner position to adjust the gun site on the target and if the target is moving fast it may be out of the gun barrel traverse
before you were able to fire starting this process all over again. The only way I see the turretless tank destroyer playing a part would be in the ambush role that would require very little movement.

The only thing I would correct is that the Ferdinand DID NOT have the same gun as the Tiger. The Tiger had an L/56 88mm derived from the Flak 18/36. The 88mm. in the Ferdinand (and the Nashorn, as well) was also an 88mm, but it was the L/71 Pak 43, which had a higher muzzle velocity and even more penetration and range than the Tiger E's L/56 weapon.

The Tiger II (King Tiger, Royal Tiger) had the Pak 43.

In AH terms, I don't know how the Long 88mm Pak 43 would work in terms of gameplay. It would outrange any other GV gun in the game, able to make one-shot kills' out to at least 3k, even on heavily armored or hard-to-kill target's such as the Tiger or T-34. I don't think in that situation, the trouble's of jumping back and forth between gun and driver would be much of a problem. It would most likely draw out fighter-bombers' to take them out, because contending GV's would not be able to get close enough to effectively engage the Tank Destroyer's. They could really enhance gameplay.

[moot]

Or it could make a nice target for deployable artillery...

[DPQ5]

just saying, ADD M18!!!

[moot]

...or for an allied tank destroyer.

[BigPlay]

The only thing I would correct is that the Ferdinand DID NOT have the same gun as the Tiger. The Tiger had an L/56 88mm derived from the Flak 18/36. The 88mm. in the Ferdinand (and the Nashorn, as well) was also an 88mm, but it was the L/71 Pak 43, which had a higher muzzle velocity and even more penetration and range than the Tiger E's L/56 weapon.

The Tiger II (King Tiger, Royal Tiger) had the Pak 43.

In AH terms, I don't know how the Long 88mm Pak 43 would work in terms of gameplay. It would outrange any other GV gun in the game, able to make one-shot kills' out to at least 3k, even on heavily armored or hard-to-kill target's such as the Tiger or T-34. I don't think in that situation, the trouble's of jumping back and forth between gun and driver would be much of a problem. It would most likely draw out fighter-bombers' to take them out, because contending GV's would not be able to get close enough to effectively engage the Tank Destroyer's. They could really enhance gameplay.

I stand corrected in regards to the Tiger having the same gun, it did not.