Author Topic: Panzers MG34 Anti Aircraft gun.. (Read 923 times)

Pongo · « **on:** September 02, 2000, 04:03:00 PM »

I am not sure how but Pyro seems to have gotten the idea that the MG34 on the anti aircraft mount of a Panzer IV could only shoot over to the front of the turrent.
This is wrong.There is a ring around the cupola that the mount moves on. The gun can be quickly swung to any quadrant. This would be an advantage of the Panzer over the Sherman. While the Sherman would have a .50 cal mg to defend its self, it is static mounted and the comander can only fire it a limited quadrent of the tank(Front - right - rear) I believe.

I will take this oppertunity to hope that the next two tanks introduced in the game will be the
M4a3(75) and the T34(85)
My reasoning once again is this.

Panzer Good anti armour, some anti aircraft, slow, weak armour.

M4 Weaker anti armour, good anti aircraft, fast, well armoured.

T34 Good anti armour, No anti aircraft, very fast, well armoured.

Of the three the best anti tank vehicle should be the Panzer. But it is the slowest and easiest to kill. By far the best tank in the game would be the Sherman, Unless other tanks showed up.
The T34 would be the best mass tank attack tank, but would be very suseptible to aircraft and could out run its anti aircaft vehicles.
What better ballence could be achieved? The M4A3E8(76) would just give the Americans a supperior tank to everyone else which serves no purpose. In this game the 75mm sherman would rock! It was designed to go behind eneymy lines and wreak havoc...
The 76mm T34 would be too weak.
That leaves some great perk tanks. M4A3E8, Panther, Is2m, Persing, Tiger I and II....

cant wait

Fishu · « **Reply #1 on:** September 02, 2000, 04:32:00 PM »

If looking to T-34 M41 (I believe) with 76L41 F-34 cannon, it is more powerful than Sherman M4 - M4A1 75L38 cannon, if there weren't any special ammunition used, and as I recall, M4A1 or M4 didn't use tungsten rounds.
So all in one, pretty much equal guns.
T-34 M40 had lower velocity cannon (L-11), weaker than M4s.
I figure that T-34 M41 would be quite fearsome anti-tank.
M41 came on same year as M40, with more armor also I believe.
To have equal year T-34 as PZ-IVh, it should be T-34 M43, which I believe is fall/winter '42 and with more armour again, but same F-34 cannon.
T-34 with 85mm would be quite a monster, but it wasn't done until something like mid '44.
US M10 Wolverine would be quite intresting, with fairly low armour and open top, but with 76L54 cannon.
For online play in Main Arena, T-34 M43 would be good choice because of its speed, though, totally lacking self defence when having only coaxial and bow machineguns.. (maybe issue them with PPSh 41G so they can try their luck

)

What comes to Pz-IVhs A-A MG34, I'd be happy to see it work like that!
I never wasn't sure of that it would go around like that, so I kept shut.. I hope that its muzzle gets smaller also. (its fairly huge even though it should have flash hider making muzzle effect smaller)

Other that I'd like to see would be anti-tank guns to be pulled with halftracks. (of course this would disable use of troops, because AT-gun crew would be there)

Pongo · « **Reply #2 on:** September 02, 2000, 11:22:00 PM »

The gun on the M4a3(75) would have a poor chance of defeating another sherman or a T34 but a good chance agianst a PZIV. The T34(85) would have a great chance against a panzer IV and a good chance agianst a sherman or T34. The Panzer would would find either of the other tanks a bit harder to kill then it currently finds other panzers but still quite deadly against them.

The panzer should have the same 360 degree AAMG capability as the scarf ring on the M3. They are mounted fundimentaly the same way.

Jigster · « **Reply #3 on:** September 03, 2000, 11:30:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Pongo:
The gun on the M4a3(75) would have a poor chance of defeating another sherman or a T34 but a good chance agianst a PZIV. The T34(85) would have a great chance against a panzer IV and a good chance agianst a sherman or T34. The Panzer would would find either of the other tanks a bit harder to kill then it currently finds other panzers but still quite deadly against them.

The panzer should have the same 360 degree AAMG capability as the scarf ring on the M3. They are mounted fundimentaly the same way.

I've only heard accounts of the pindel mount MG34 AAMG on the Panzer IVH and J past '44 (I'd still rather have the MG42 mount, more rounds with less accuracy, but this was rare, as was AAMG mounts on the IV class )

The Sherman's .50 is a side mount, which has about the same are as we have now on the IV, albeit the commande could get out and swivel the gun around, but with the gun laying speed of the Sherman I sure wouldn't

There were e8 Shermans that were not up-gunned, although there aren't really any advantages of the e8 over a M4a3 in AH.

The 75L40 of the Panzer IV would still be the best gun if the T-34/85 wasn't around, but the AP and HE capability of the larger gun and it's superior speed would seem to make it best for base strikes

Shermans would definately have the edge against aircraft, with the thickest roof, a .50, and all roof armor sloped. Couple that with good speed and a good HE gun.

My one suggestion is a Cormwell series for the British. I mean, how can you say no to a Merlin powered tank?

- Jig

Pongo · « **Reply #4 on:** September 04, 2000, 01:41:00 PM »

If they model the throw of the suspension correctly and the smoothness of the ride than there might be an an advantage to the E8(75) over the straight M4a3. The same applies to the Panther and in the opisite way to the T34. Very rough ride.

Fishu · « **Reply #5 on:** September 04, 2000, 02:42:00 PM »

It is just too bad that I think HTC will see PZ-V too superior to allied tanks and we will not see it (even though it is '42 tank!)

good thing for panther when compared to T-34/85, is that T-34/85 is '44 and Panther is '42

Tac · « **Reply #6 on:** September 04, 2000, 08:20:00 PM »

Bah. Gimme a Panzerschreck & Tommy gun.. ill fend off the whole Air Corps and Panzerarmees.

Pongo · « **Reply #7 on:** September 04, 2000, 11:40:00 PM »

Fishu its nothing to do with dates and you know it. The Panther is just silly good compared to a Sherman or a T34. The wide open spaces of AH would make it more so. I just hope they can restrain them selves from makeing the American tank the best normal one in the game.

Jigster · « **Reply #8 on:** September 04, 2000, 11:57:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fishu:
It is just too bad that I think HTC will see PZ-V too superior to allied tanks and we will not see it (even though it is '42 tank!)

good thing for panther when compared to T-34/85, is that T-34/85 is '44 and Panther is '42

Dude, the Pz V is a mid '43 tank. (okay early '43 if you want to include the D)

Panther G was mid '44, Panzer IV H was mid '43 to mid '44

You figure 5,900 Panthers altogather from Jan '43 to mid '45 , while in 1944 and early '45 there were 29500 T-34/85's made.

By the Normandy Invasions there were several tanks on the par with the Panther, namely the IS-2, and the M4A3E2/76 (least it had a chance, anyway

If you wanna talk uber, how about the Panzer VI Ausf B, mid '43

- Jig

Torque · « **Reply #9 on:** September 05, 2000, 01:12:00 AM »

Fek play Combat Mission and find out how superior the Gerry armour really was. http://www.battlefront.com/cmdemo.html

Pershing(Firefly maybe) tanks can match Tigers from what I've seen.

True pongo but lets not forget that the Allies had massive artillery support and airpower, also it was never usually 1 vs 1 but 20 vs 1.When the Allies ran into a roadblocks they just got on the horn and called in Typhoons or groundfire.

[This message has been edited by Torque (edited 09-05-2000).]

Pongo · « **Reply #10 on:** September 05, 2000, 01:26:00 AM »

True torque. The firefly can mutually kill tigers. And the Pershing is on par with the tiger. But the Panther is supperior to all three. If your game does not show that it is play ballanced...

Hans · « **Reply #11 on:** September 05, 2000, 01:33:00 AM »

I think the M7 Priest is a better choice all around. Artillery is what we need, not a tank. It also has a coupla gun like the M3 halftrack (.50 cal on a 360 degree ring mount).

I would prefer that tank.

Hans.

Fishu · « **Reply #12 on:** September 05, 2000, 07:48:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Jigster:
Dude, the Pz V is a mid '43 tank. (okay early '43 if you want to include the D)

Panther G was mid '44, Panzer IV H was mid '43 to mid '44

You figure 5,900 Panthers altogather from Jan '43 to mid '45 , while in 1944 and early '45 there were 29500 T-34/85's made.

By the Normandy Invasions there were several tanks on the par with the Panther, namely the IS-2, and the M4A3E2/76 (least it had a chance, anyway

If you wanna talk uber, how about the Panzer VI Ausf B, mid '43

- Jig

Ops, found out that I was looking at PZ-IVg next to the PZ-Va stats..
Yes.. even in my source its '43 as I we're looking at correct line.
D is mid, A is early

But I think you made the same error, Tiger I is '42

Tiger I is '42 and Tiger II is mid '44
(Tiger came out before Panther right?)

I wouldn't have anything against Tiger II's 40mm top armour.. (or something close)

[This message has been edited by Fishu (edited 09-05-2000).]

Vosper · « **Reply #13 on:** September 05, 2000, 03:27:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hans:
I think the M7 Priest is a better choice all around. Artillery is what we need, not a tank. It also has a coupla gun like the M3 halftrack (.50 cal on a 360 degree ring mount).

Now this idea would be cool, or even the 75mm howitzer armed M3 halftrack (might be easier to bring into service). Give enough deviation to the HE round so its not like an oversized sniper rifle and enough range to sit behind the friendly tanks, and off I would go to support a base assault

Cheers

Pongo · « **Reply #14 on:** September 05, 2000, 04:12:00 PM »

Not nearly so good as the 105 armed M4A3.