Some Tanks For AH

[fdiron]

The armor on the Panther is not as thick as that of the Tiger.  It was possible for the 75mm sherman to penetrate the Panther's armor from the side or rear at close and medium range.

[Pongo]

I detailed the effective armour of the Panther above. The Tiger has 100mm at 81 degrees. (90/81) * 100mm - 111mm. Vs nearly 200 for the Panther
But still a good amount to withstand the typical guns of its apponents.
The Panther did have weaker protection on the sides compared to the tiger.

[Kieren]

I once read the penetration ranges of the various countries' tanks against one another. That sounds confusing, but it boils down to this; if you wanted to kill a Panther, you had to be much closer than you would to kill anything else. 200yds is an awful darn close effective range to have to take one out, wouldn't you say?

Maybe the point is moot- I mean, kills occur at unrealistic ranges now. But the historical and anecdotal data would elevate the Panther to near legendary status, and it is a damn good thing the Germans didn't have more of them.

I don't drive tanks much- I don't enjoy them. Go ahead, model it. But when it happens, there is going to be two things that happen:[list=1]

• There is going to be a terrific outcry from the people that do, and;
• There will only be one tank used in the MA.[/list=a]
  
  Anytime a vehicle or aircraft is introduced into any sim it must be considered what its impact will be. If the introduction enhances the overall play by introducing a new challenge or opens the door for various new facets of gameplay, chances are it was a good addition. If on the other hand the introduction virtually eliminates any competition from any similar aircraft or vehicle, for the purposes of gameplay it is a bad move. If that is what you would have, HTC might as well model 262's and P-80's (both in production in WW2) and model nothing else in the air- believe me, if they did, you would be silly to try to fly anything else. (And I don't need someone on the LW side switching the focus here to "yeah, but the 262 saw combat and the P-80 didn't". I teach history, I know.  )
  
  The fact is, if you don't want to consider gameplay and approach this on a purely factual basis, fine. But now you are going to have to limit production of oil and rubber for the Germans, and allow unlimited production for the Allies. You are going to have to limit the available number of fighters the Axis had. You are going to have to simulate the comparatively green pilots the Allies faced by war's end. You will need to simulate the complexity and fragility of the advanced but untested equipment the Germans were forced to use. You will need to place them in the middle of Europe with armies on three sides rushing in. You have to give the Allies air superiority on most of the map. You will have the Axis defenders facing odds of more than 10:1. Won't all that be fun if we forget this is a game, and that some concessions have to be made to make it fun to play?
  
  

[Rendar]

The Panther's 75mm gun is not the same as the 75mm gun on the IV H.  The Panther's gun is a high-velocity 75mm which is more lethal than the 88mm.

------------------
Rendar

[Pongo]

A WW2 simulation where all the tanks are Panther Gs is not a WW2 simulation.
A WW2 simulation where the Panther is somewhere equivilient to a T34-85 or a M4A3E8 is not a WW2 simulation.
But a WW2 Simulation without the Panther is HTCs perk scheme seems perfect for this. Limit the numbers of Panthers  and Pershings hardly a WW2 simulation either.
without adding tons of strat reasons why they are rare.
As with the Spit XIV debate, The worst thing I think could be done is put something in that looks like a Panther but doenst dominate as it did.

Rivers with only 30 ton class bridges would limit the panther quite a bit too.....

[pzvg]

Ok so the gun IRL was better, as in the other thread, it don't apply here.
Panther the only tank in the MA if put in?
go take a look at the relative sizes of both tanks, the panther would be at a greater disadvantage in AH for the simple reason it would be easier to see from the air.
Sloping armor giving it a much more effective thickness than a Tiger, True (IRL)
here it doesn't seem to matter, plus it's only sloped on the front and the turret, not that much protection.
If you really want to see something that would dominate ground action in AH (as opposed to real life) try STU-42H
very hard to see, very big gun
In a game where I have crippled a MKIV by shooting it in the butt with the Ma deuce on the M3, it's pretty much apples to oranges to go by real data, while it may be factored in by HTC, something is not going into it right, we have stuff happen to ground units here that not only did not happen in real life, it couldn't.
So let's not be perking any tank in this flight sim, or for that matter any plane
I have thought about it, and if the so-called "uber rides" were allowed in,and everyone flew only them, (which I personally doubt) Then 99% of the few kills I get would probably be these so-called "uber rides"
Somehow that idea doesn't bother me all that much, since I know that there ain't money or life riding on it, or do you all got something going on that we should know about?  

------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"

[Pongo]

Well I hope the extrordinary difference between a Sherman 75 and a Panther 75 is modeled in AH. I hope the massive increase in protection you get when you slope your glacis plane to 35 % is facored into the game...
I suspect they will
If they are then the Panther will be uber.

[Jigster]

I'd really like to push for some type of range finder in the tanks too. Then the dang AP shells wouldn't make craters and we wouldn't have 75mm tracer rounds  

Ridding the tanks of the tell-tale tracer round would be a big step to improving their function in the game.

As long as the terrain is not completely flat there can be some very interesting tank battles...the small depressions at the base of the "big hill" by 27 come to mind. And the planes can't see the fighting because of the hills.

I wouldn't mind smoke trailing from the barrel after firing a round though  

- Jig
-------
Ever notice that the Germans hardly ever had original designs for their tanks? The Pz38 was Czech, the Tiger implemented the size of the Kv's, the Panter came from the T-34, and the Strumtiger came from the Churchill AVRE...adaptation is the winner of wars.

[Kieren]

You can't have it both ways, Pzvg. One poster wants Panthers to be Panthers, not a Panzer IV in a Panther shell. You seem to be saying that HTC will have some kind of Panther lookalike that really won't behave as a real one would... see what I mean?

If HTC did make a Panther, and they made it at all to measure up to its RL reputation, you bet that's all anyone would drive. That may bother you, it may not. It would bother me, because I do like to see the broad spectrum of aircraft and vehicles, and I like to see them used. Right now I think that 99% of the aircraft and vehicles in AH do serve a purpose- no small feat when you consider how many planes are included in the MA free-for-all. Yes, IMHO there are vehicles/planes that should be perked.

I came here from DoA- it's a little WWI sim from iEN. It has somewhat of a narrow focus of planes, but the fights are pretty fun. The trouble was that there was one plane that, for the longest time, was superior in every attribute to all others. Of course there were those that argued this was accurate, others against, but no matter. What did matter was that you flew into every furball knowing that 9 out of 10 airplanes were going to be Sopwith Camels. You don't really understand what an uber plane can do until you've seen something like this (I'm sure there are many ex-DoA pilots that can confirm exactly what I am saying here). DoA never could quite get over the hump for many reasons, but chief among them is the reputation it gained for being a one-plane sim. There were those of us that accepted the challenge of taking inferior aircraft against the hordes (ah! Taking the beloved DVa against 4 Camels and winning is sweet!) but usually people caved and flew what they needed to fly to be competitive.

WB's has had the same trouble occasionally, though not to the same extent. To some degree it is unavoidable. But when you look at this particular vehicle you have to ask yourself, what rough equivalent do you have for the other side?

[Tac]

Yes, bring on the Sherman and other tanks.

But for gods sake get RID of the external view!

The only advantage I see in driving a Sherman in AH is that it would be able to clear hills and run around while a panzer would muck and crawl at 5 mph. But the external view is simply screwing up the tanking experience. Just now I was in a PERFECT position to surprise, ambush and massacre 4 red panzers that were on the other side of a hill (a plane had given me their location and heading, which I confirmed with external view). If there was no external view, I wouldve still had the info from my flying buddy, wouldve gone around the hill (I was near the turn and the red panzers were halfway climbing hill on the other side). Alas, the geeks on the red panzers saw me with the external view and rushed me. Extremely frustrating to see my efforts messed up by such omniscient external view.

I say, take off the external view or give external view that would not display anything BUT terrain (aka, wont show tanks or airplanes). Whichever is easier to implement.

Matilda, Sherman (rocket, flamethrower, artillery versions would be nice as well), T-34, some early German Panzers would be great too.

Edited: Spelling...good grief  


[This message has been edited by Tac (edited 07-30-2000).]

[pzvg]

Kieren my point being that the mark IV in AH does not behave like the real thing, no not a panzer mk IV in a panther shell, more like an AH MK IV in a panther shell, come on folks stop trying to introduce real world data into the discussion, most of us are smart enough to know the panther was a superior tank, the point is, would that translate into a game where an unstabilized panzerkampfwagen IV ausf H can fire on the move and score a frontal armor kill at 2300 meters? If you think that is reality, send me some of what you're using  

------------------
pzvg- "5 years and I still can't shoot"

[Pongo]

 

Originally posted by pzvg:
Kieren my point being that the mark IV in AH does not behave like the real thing, no not a panzer mk IV in a panther shell, more like an AH MK IV in a panther shell, come on folks stop trying to introduce real world data into the discussion, most of us are smart enough to know the panther was a superior tank, the point is, would that translate into a game where an unstabilized panzerkampfwagen IV ausf H can fire on the move and score a frontal armor kill at 2300 meters? If you think that is reality, send me some of what you're using  

Are you saying that that shot in a Panzer IV is imposible? I guerrenty you its not. Yes it is extremely unlikly but not impossible.
Most of the reason the Panzer can hit at long ranges on the move is that in the absense of all the little natural fluctuations that make that shot extremely unlikly in RL here it just remains unlilky.
Sory to keep bringing up the painful facts but how is that situation made any better by inundating the theater with Panthers? You want those kills to happen at 5.5k?
The armour game is in its infancy. Some more diversity in AFVs will focus the interest of the players on the problems that still exist and that will focus HTC on it. Why wreck the whole process by focusing everyone on the Panthers increadably supperiority vs any likly adverserary?
Yes like its historical counter part most of them would be killed from the air anyway. But why not try to use the Panther as an incentive to play tanks more not less? If perk vehicles could only be earned from vehicle earned points then the guys that really love the weaker tanks would be deadly in the Panther if they earned it.
But it seems extremely unlikly that you would be able to play your namesake in the MA on a daily basis. Which I suspect is your real agenda.

[Kieren]

One of my points in this discussion is there has to be a good blend of playability anchored in historical fact. One cannot discount all data any more than one can discount game playability.

Pure data = fun? Nope.
Pure gameplay = fun? Nope again.

Essential data + essential gameplay concessions = fun? Yes!

Now, what is essential on both counts is subject to vigorous debate.  

[Rendar]

Maybe if we had a limiter, this could work.  For the MA, for each side, there would be a limit of 6 Panthers or 20% of the ground vehicles. which ever is more.  So instead of having 50 Panthers, there would be 10 Panthers.

------------------
Rendar

[SpyHawk]

My $0.02 (USD):

just give us a faster tank! I don't care who's or what, just something faster than that 25mph slug we have now. It takes an hour to get from one base to another in most cases. It's the only reason I don't tank more often.