We need a tank-destroyer! M-10?

[SmokinLoon]

Just under 10,000 Stugs were built. Just under 50,000 Shermans were built, 30,000 T-34's were built during WW2, over 80,000 over all. You have to remember that of all major countries that fought in WW2 that Germany had the fewest tanks and TD's built . So quantity really isn't a factor concerning the Stug since it's production run was far less than any allied main battle tank. The point I was trying to make was that the M-18 was not the best TD in WW2 nor should it be added before many other TD's. The only reason the Stug would be a logical addition is that it can span all 3 arenas rather then just the LW. Soviet tactics were rather crude in the way they managed and trained their armor crews but the British had no idea how to use armor either. They were mauled at Normandy and their knowledge of armor fighting was inadequate against the Germans.

I understand your position with regards to adding the StuG being as prominate as it was.  However, it fills no gap in the AH2 line up, imo.  None.  It would be less effective than the Pzr IV.  Far less menouverable with our current tracked vehicle steering ability which means a very limited gun view/traverse, and the same exact gun.  Adding the StuG (undeer current tracked vehicle coding) would be about as fruitful as taking the P40B or the rumored Buffalo in the LW arena and expecting to keep up. 

At this time, I dont think we need another tank.  If HTC adds one, I hope it is a Sherman M4A1/75mm or M4A3/76mm.  But I think the gap that needs to be filled is the TD gap, imo.  We dont have a high speed/med-high firepower/low armor vehicle and the M18 would provide for just that.  Or, the M10 would be an easy add on becuase iirc, the chassis is the same as an M4 which we already have and all that would need to be modelled would be the new turret, new gun, and new ammo.  The hull is the same as our M4 Sherman Firefly (correct me if I am wrong).       

 

out.

[E25280]

However, it fills no gap in the AH2 line up, imo.  None. 

We have ZERO turretless GVs with tank-caliber weaponry.  That seems a very large gap to me, considering how much they were used.

At this time, I dont think we need another tank.  If HTC adds one, I hope it is a Sherman M4A1/75mm or M4A3/76mm.  But I think the gap that needs to be filled is the TD gap, imo.  We dont have a high speed/med-high firepower/low armor vehicle and the M18 would provide for just that.  Or, the M10 would be an easy add on becuase iirc, the chassis is the same as an M4 which we already have and all that would need to be modelled would be the new turret, new gun, and new ammo.  The hull is the same as our M4 Sherman Firefly (correct me if I am wrong). 

I can understand the desire for the M18, but it baffles me why people would want the M10 over so many other vehicles.  It's armor, speed, and firepower are nearly exactly that of a 76mm armed Sherman.  There is your vehicle that truly fills no gaps in the AH line up.

Oh, I forgot, it would be designated a TD instead of a tank.  Well, if it waddles, swims, and quacks . . .

The "classic" TD is a turretless tank like the already mentioned Stg's, Jadgpanzers, Hetzer (my personal favorite), and Russian SUs and JSUs.  US TDs are TDs by classification, but differ very little from true tanks in form.  This IMO makes the Stg's et. al. much more desireable.

[BigPlay]

We have ZERO turretless GVs with tank-caliber weaponry.  That seems a very large gap to me, considering how much they were used.
I can understand the desire for the M18, but it baffles me why people would want the M10 over so many other vehicles.  It's armor, speed, and firepower are nearly exactly that of a 76mm armed Sherman.  There is your vehicle that truly fills no gaps in the AH line up.

Oh, I forgot, it would be designated a TD instead of a tank.  Well, if it waddles, swims, and quacks . . .

The "classic" TD is a turretless tank like the already mentioned Stg's, Jadgpanzers, Hetzer (my personal favorite), and Russian SUs and JSUs.  US TDs are TDs by classification, but differ very little from true tanks in form.  This IMO makes the Stg's et. al. much more desireable.

 I couldn't have said it better. You are probally the most knowlegable tank guy that I have run across in the forums. 

[BigPlay]

I understand your position with regards to adding the StuG being as prominate as it was.  However, it fills no gap in the AH2 line up, imo.  None.  It would be less effective than the Pzr IV.  Far less menouverable with our current tracked vehicle steering ability which means a very limited gun view/traverse, and the same exact gun.  Adding the StuG (undeer current tracked vehicle coding) would be about as fruitful as taking the P40B or the rumored Buffalo in the LW arena and expecting to keep up. 

At this time, I dont think we need another tank.  If HTC adds one, I hope it is a Sherman M4A1/75mm or M4A3/76mm.  But I think the gap that needs to be filled is the TD gap, imo.  We dont have a high speed/med-high firepower/low armor vehicle and the M18 would provide for just that.  Or, the M10 would be an easy add on becuase iirc, the chassis is the same as an M4 which we already have and all that would need to be modelled would be the new turret, new gun, and new ammo.  The hull is the same as our M4 Sherman Firefly (correct me if I am wrong).       

 

out.

No the M-10 has a different chassis, also the M-10 's turret was hand cranked not electric so I would imagine it would be a very slow traverse . The turretless TD's would add a whole new dimension to gv fighting. Remember that there is I believe 15deg of traverse to the right and left on most of them so shooting from a distance and adjusting to the left or right 15deg covers a lot of ground. I know when I go to LW tank town a lot of guys like to hide and wait for tanks to pass in front of them which would suit the TD's well so I think they could be used effectually, heck they were used that way in real life so why not here. The Stug in fact would be a different and possible better choice then the panzer. Same gun but thicker frontal armor, lower profile and would be harder to see and hit. Once again the only reason I say Stug is because it would be able to be used in all arenas. I would much rather see the jadgpanzer or the Su85 or Su100, even the Hetzer before any but again they would be limited to LW only which isn't fair to the folks that only play the earlier arenas.