New GV's now, please?

[WMGambit]

sorry can you point me to ANYWHERE in ANY description that says this is ONLY an air combat game?

[Nemisis]

Fugitive, the problem with an area in wich you can't kill someone is that no one will leave it, or that the "campers" will trail the uppers untill the pass out of the no kill zone and then fire on them from behind.


As to the vehicles that can fire accuratly from more than 2mi out, I personally never asked for anything worse than a nashorn or a panther while being serious. Nothing I've asked for in this thread has more than a 76mm cannon, the german tanks I asked for use the same cannon as the panzer or a 50mm, and the US/British tanks weren't known for their superior ability to destroy a tank at 2mi out.

AND when have you seen a GV battle where you get a clean line of fire for 2mi? I think the max I've seen (asside from firing into a valley from a hill side, which exposes your top BTW) is around 2000 yds. Usually, thats the most I have to elevate my gun to start shooting past my target.

[JHerne]

I've been in several excellent GV fights only to have them ruined by bomb****ing Lancasters. Hell, I've even seen other countries complain that GV fights were ruined by their fellow countrymen.

Is there spawn camping? Sure. Even during a spawn camp situation, getting into a firing position while taking fire is still a challenge in itself.

As to additional vehicles that could be added with a minimal amount of work...

Stug IV, Jagdpanzer IV/L48, Jagdpanzer IV/L70, Brumbar - are all 'new' vehicles that use the existing Pz IV chassis.

SturmTiger would use Tiger I chassis

M10, M36 both use the existing Sherman suspension and running gear, sponsons and upper hull would have to be modified, but the moving parts are already there.

SU-85, Su-100, Su-122 - all use the existing T-34 chassis.

There's 10 vehicles that could be added using chassis and running gear that's already in game. That means only minor modifications to vehicle performance data, speed, etc., and more than likely, utilize an existing gun sighting system based on existing vehicles.

OK, so an SU-85 has the same gun as the T-34/85. Since it has a limited traverse, don't perk it. Upgrade it to an Su-100, you still have limited traverse, but you've got a better weapon, so perk it for a couple points. Su-122, you got a portable town killer, but not great against against tanks at longer ranges. Some thing with the Stug and Jagdpanzer IV series. Perk the L70...perk the M36, perk the snot out of the Sturmtiger and Brumbar, using them as hangar and town killers.

[RaptorL]

nice list.

[Nemisis]

Don't forget the Pz III ausf J, as someone said before almost nothing is a hanger queen in the GV world. It would replace the Panzer IV for me, since it would be fun to rack up 17 kills in a Panzer III before finally being taken down  by Jherne's Jagdpanzer IV/L70 from 4000yds out.

[JHerne]

Ok, you got me. Jagdpanzer IV/L70 is a kick-ass design, and I'm partial to it simply because it combines the reliability of the Pz IV chassis with the high velocity 75mm gun. Personally, anything that's low profile has an advantage in my opinion, even with the limited traverse.

J

[321BAR]

I don't see where any GV tactics would change. Different GVs same spawn camp. Good luck with that.

you dont GV much do you?    stick a fast and light big punch vehicle to hit the sides of tanks and tactics change. just like tactics changed for GVs when the T34/76 originally entered years ago and when the firefly (WHY NOT THE M4A3???) entered also... tigers have to watch out for the fireflies at distance now because now you got 3 shermans to every tiger in battle... The T34 adds a faster moving tank which although doesnt have the best gun for a 76mm can still somewhat flank armor and attack bases. and the 85 is a better version of the 76.

[waystin2]

M-18.  Conversation is over gentlemen!

[321BAR]

M-18!!! should i make an anthem to the M-18?

[Nemisis]

Would love to see an M18 in as well. Would provide a nice target for my 50mm.

[321BAR]

By the way nemesis, the KV-1 is actually much more different than the T-34 models, the KV-1 was MUCH larger than T-34s and also MUCH slower on rough terrain. Level terrain it could go 35kph (NOT mph)... along with the fact that the armor thickness was 70mm in every direction except up and down. the 41 models used the crappy F32 and F34 guns and the 1942 versions had the less crappy ZiS-5 and varied between the EXTREMELY bulky KV-1 model which went only 25kph on road with only a 600hp engine and the faster lighter KV-1S that could go 45kph on road but only had a max armor protection of 82mm compared to its other 42 model with 130mm. The reason i want the KV-1 is because of Soviet tank commander Zinoviy Kolobanov who engaged an entire German column of 43 German tanks of which 22 tanks and 2 artillery pieces his tank destroyed alone and his 4 other KV-1s in his command finished the column off only deploying one KV-1 at a time to engage the enemy... Of the KV-1s that engaged the column 2 still remained in reserve. 43 tanks destroyed by THREE KV-1s. Of course though this was in 41 when the Germans didnt have any effective AT weapons. Kolobanov's crew of KV-1 number 864 counted a total of 135 hits on their tank after the battle. The KV-1 was the Tiger of the early war...

[Ultimate]

In the end HTC should add new GV's 

[gyrene81]

In the end HTC should add new GV's 

Sure, after more aircraft are added.

[321BAR]

In the end HTC should add new GV's 

Mini Bump

Sure, after more aircraft are added.

gyrene you and i both know that we need more GVs. there's many gaps in the GV fights and GVing is a massive role in capturing many bases on most of our maps. Ground assaults with air support can be virtually unstoppable if done correctly and the leaders dont have their heads up their butts. in fact i think air ground combinations have a higher percentage of takes than air only or ground only on some maps.

[jay]

true true true gv and air base takes are way harder to make possible (ie getting people to work together) but are VERY succesful