Tank destroyers, any thoughts?

[Nemisis]

Personally, I would love to see some tank destroyers added. There is a lot of debat as to wether or not the limited gun traverse would severly hamper their use.

What are your thoughts on this? Personally, I hardly ever traverse my turret more than is nessecary to correct my aim. I "aim" from the drivers seat, and it seems to work fairly well for me.

Also, tank destroyers such as the hetzer, jagdpazer, and jagdpanther all had thick, well sloped armor. This would increase survivability, and (IMO) offset the reduced traverse.

[BigKev03]

Depends on which ones we would get.  The german and soviet TD's would be limited by traverse but the low profile would make it the vehicle of choice for spawn campers in my opinion.  The American TD's would be used more as a hybrid tank in the MA.  Only thing is the American TD's would be vulnerable to air attack due to the lack of top armor.  But I think their inclusion would do nothing but help the game just likenew aircraft do.  The Hellcat, Jadgpanther, Hetzer, and the SU-85 would be good in th game.  I would use them in the defense more than anything.

BigKev

[321BAR]

you all know what i'm going to say here right? any guesses?

[Nemisis]

The jagdpanther in particular would be of great use here, seeing as many place a high priority on survivability here. And the low sillouete would be great for parking on a hill with some trees on it. You will most likely be mistaken for a clump of bushes. That is unless they paint it the same mustard yellow as the panzer and tiger. Then it will be a cannon magnet, and unlikely to survive long once spotted.

[321BAR]

The jagdpanther in particular would be of great use here, seeing as many place a high priority on survivability here. And the low sillouete would be great for parking on a hill with some trees on it. You will most likely be mistaken for a clump of bushes. That is unless they paint it the same mustard yellow as the panzer and tiger. Then it will be a cannon magnet, and unlikely to survive long once spotted.

jagdpanthers have slanted armor nemesis. compare that to the TigerI with almost the same amount of armor and you will have a more survivable unit. the Jagdpanther also uses the later model 88mm Pak43/3 (43/4 L/71) of the TigerII (King Tiger or Konigstiger) compared to the tigerI's earlier KwK 36 L/56 cannon. it also is faster by 4.6 mph and weighs about 11 tons less. This would need maybe a 45-50 perk cost compared to the tiger's 30 unless you add in the fact that it doesn't have a turret then maybe 30-45 perks. The Germans only manufactured 415 of the Jagdpanther 1944-1945. But before we even think of adding ANY armored unit (SP guns such as the Stug and Jagdpanther) we NEED brake turning and zero turn. All tiger models (TigerI TigerII), the Panther, and later war SPs such as the Jagdpanther and Hetzers all utilized zero turn ability and ALL tracked vehicles in WWII used brake turning.

[Nemisis]

Thats what I was thinking. Tiger II perked at 50-60 base cost, Jagdpanther perked at 40-50. The lack of ammo will also force it to RTB or be re supped often.

[321BAR]

but we NEED brake turning and zero turn before we ever attempt to get SPs or Konigstigers

[Nemisis]

We don't NEED break turning, although it would be a BIG help. You can get around it, but it gets tiresome after doing it many times of backing up 5 ft and pulling forward.

[WWhiskey]

I don't know if it is a tank destroyer but I have been wanting the m-18 for quite some time!

[321BAR]

I don't know if it is a tank destroyer but I have been wanting the m-18 for quite some time!

M-18 Hellcat is a TD all the way through. actually the first tank destroyer built on its own chassis instead of incorporating a tank chassis for the design such as the M-10 Wolverine. Nemesis, without break turning you will have a bulk the size of my stomach trying to wedge in between two close together obstacles to get a good advantage point on the enemy. With brake turning these things will be easily slipping in and out of tight spaces they couldnt easily get into before. Zero turn would even add more advantages to maneuvers. maybe you dont want to risk moving you tiger out of cover while turning to put the front towards the stronger enemy tank? zero turn fixes this problem...some of these GV hills are too small to be able to maneuver behind without brake or zero turning

[Nemisis]

Yes, and as it said, it would be a great help. But there ARE ways to getting around the problems. A carefull hand at the controll can get a tiger into a niche that doesn't looke big enough to hold a jeep. Doesn't mean it will get out again, but it can get in there. And to the hill problem: Just kind of parallel park your way into possition.

[Charge]

"but we NEED brake turning and zero turn before we ever attempt to get SPs or Konigstigers"

I cannot see a problem in making them both. The brake turn would simply be established by using e.g. rudder control to control the brake while the stick control controls just the clutch as it seems to do now.

In turretless tank the gun left/right control would first turn the gun a few degrees (as was the case in real turretless guns) and after that it would turn the whole tank by running tracks in different directions. If the engine is not running only the fine adjustment works and if the tank is tracked the turn rate is 1/3 of normal rate.

-C+

 

[321BAR]

In turretless tank the gun left/right control would first turn the gun a few degrees (as was the case in real turretless guns) and after that it would turn the whole tank by running tracks in different directions. If the engine is not running only the fine adjustment works and if the tank is tracked the turn rate is 1/3 of normal rate.

SP guns "aka your turretless tank" did not always have zero turn ability, therefore this idea of the gunsight moving the entire SP might cause problems in your movements. Stugs and such did not have zero turn. If it was a Jagdpanther then yes this could work because it has zero turn. Not many SPs had zero turn ability.

[321BAR]

my bad... i feel like i need to correct my previous statements... The Panther Tank was the only German vehicle to introduce pivot/zero turning with the Ak 7-200 transmission. Otherwise E-brake turning would still need to be added. after the Panther there were no active armored units in WWII with pivot turning until the M26 Pershing but i do not know if that is accurate (i cannot find info on the Pershing's transmission)...    So basically the Panther was the only Pivot turning tank in WWII

I believe that the Jagdpanther and Kingtiger also did but also, i cannot find information

[Charge]

Somehow I thought that it would be a standard feature even in WW2 tanks to be able to run the tracks in opposite directions but apparently it's not. Had not really thought about it before...

The brake/clutch system has been in WW2Online for ages and it works really well and AFAIK none of the tanks modelled there have pivot turn -at least none modelled.

-C+