Author Topic: Greyhound (Read 1005 times)

brady · « **Reply #15 on:** August 21, 2001, 07:48:00 PM »

Realy the only draw back to the Puma(234/2) is the lack of an AA MG, othr wise it is a way better AC, better gun ,better armor better spead, better off road, better stearing,(2 drivers seat's) one in front and one in back( that way you dont half to turn it around, just jump in rear driver set and shift....) better weigt dispershion 8 wheals...Better looking...and best of all it aint US

But seriously I very much look forward to using it, and the TU 2, and the huricane with the 40mm at guns

[ 08-21-2001: Message edited by: brady ]

CJ · « **Reply #16 on:** August 31, 2001, 10:27:00 PM »

According to what I've read, the M8 has a top speed of around 86 km/h, and somewhat less range than the Puma. Also, the turret has partial stabilization for turreted weapons. Did any german tanks/gv's have stabilized turreted weapons? I agree that the Puma with a 75 or 88 would be fearsome, and Im sure the 50 would pack a lot more punch than the 37 on the M8, but I'm sure the 37 would be plenty against a Puma especially since you could use it more accurately at higher speeds over rougher terrain. It would be an interesting matchup.

funkedup · « **Reply #17 on:** September 02, 2001, 02:27:00 AM »

Gimme an M18

LtHans · « **Reply #18 on:** September 02, 2001, 02:55:00 AM »

I want more ground vehicle options, as well as treelines for cover.

We have the classes of battle tank, troop transport and AA vehicles already. What we need now are scout cars and self propelled artillery.

With the M8 Greyhound we add the scout car.

But what I want to see are the artillery guns. Guns that use the navy sighting coordinate system so you can adjust fire over the horizon with the aid of a spotter.

I would also like to see the aim point for ship turrets moved to the top of the superstructure.

stomper3 · « **Reply #19 on:** September 02, 2001, 06:17:00 PM »

I`d REALLY like the 234 with an auto 20mm

imagine that against A/C...

/stomp out/

AG Sach · « **Reply #20 on:** September 03, 2001, 02:09:00 AM »

234 series or a SDKfz 251 series would be nice. believe it was the /10 or /19 not sure have to get books out that had 3 MG 151/15's on it oh now that would be nice.

hazed- · « **Reply #21 on:** September 03, 2001, 09:43:00 AM »

NOW im sure you all know im into German stuff/planes etc BUT i think priority at the moment is a balanced set of vehicles.

my fair choice of introductions :(in order)

Sherman M4
T-34 (for the ruskis)
the german troop carrier armoured car thingy

so we have axis troop vehicle
British Matilda (desert)
tiger I (perked)

my choice if not fair

:

Panther(perk?)
Tiger (perk)
German troop thing (lol cant remember name)
sherman M4
sherman firefly (perk?)
T-34
puma or similar

we gotta be fair, US need a tank and so do the russians and british.
I liked the idea of the landing craft tank (lVt?) but it seems to be a wasted effort really as its not being utilised.surely a sherman would have been better.I absolutely loved the sherman when i was a kid.

Karnak · « **Reply #22 on:** September 03, 2001, 02:08:00 PM »

hazed-,

Nice list, couple of comments though.

The Matilda or Matilda II would be useless unless some German stuff that it could kill was added. Without that the Firefly is a much better, and easier, tank to add for the Brits. No, the Firefly isn't a perk, unless the Panzer IV H is a perk. They are pretty equivilent tanks.

The Panther V G is definately a perk. It is, all around, the best tank of WWII. Its armor is actually functionally thicker than the Tiger I's armor because of their respective slopes. The V G is also much faster, presents a low profile and has a gun that can kill all common Allied tanks at range.

I think the upper range of non-perk tanks would be the T-34/76 or T-34/85. The T-34/85 could also be the bottom rung of perk tanks.

[ 09-03-2001: Message edited by: Karnak ]