Tank destroyers, any thoughts?

[SmokinLoon]

Since when has the M10 been a stand off vehicle? it was just a M7 3inch gun. Tank destroyers were meant for speed. the M10 did have more speed than the M4s that the chassis was meant for but not as good as the M18 speed and maneuverability wise. The M18 would just be a slower and much more powerful M8.
Other than my M18 i'd take a
StugIV or III
Jagdpanther
Hetzer
and by the way, Stugs were not tank destroyers. they were SP guns. Jagdpanthers and Hetzers, although also SPs were meant to kill GVs.

The M10 did not, unless it absolutely had to, barge into a situation and duke it out with the enemy.  It did its best to stand off and engage enemy armor.  Also, I'm under the impression that the M10 is no faster than the M4 series of tanks (25-28mph max).  The speed nod goes to the M18.

[WWhiskey]

The M18 would just be a slower and much more powerful M8.

Slower? the m-18 runs about 60 mph, its only weakness is its open top!
 it will probably out accelerate the m-8 as well

[Nemisis]

321BAR, of course no one will up one... Unless his side has complete or near complete air superiority. Also, some have 5000+ GV perks just waiting to be burnt. Plus factor in the 50+ kills you will likely make (with resup), and you will likely only loose 75-60 perks.

[321BAR]

The M10 did not, unless it absolutely had to, barge into a situation and duke it out with the enemy.  It did its best to stand off and engage enemy armor.  Also, I'm under the impression that the M10 is no faster than the M4 series of tanks (25-28mph max).  The speed nod goes to the M18.

the M10 was faster IIRC. but i never said they barged into combat. A tank destroyer used its speed to displace fast and set up another position fast also.
M-18 runs at 60mph on ROAD. offroad this speed would be limited to 45-50 maybe. It would easily out accelerate the M8, but still, slower (an M8 runs at what top speed?)... and much more powerful than the M8.

Nemesis... so basically you just said that no one will up one if air space is even remotely contested. correct. people love burning points sometimes. correct. but imagine if you had air superiority and 5 people had 200 perks each (which many do). The defenders would have no unit to stop the enemy onslaught of GVs AND aircraft. At least now the Defenders still have a chance when a base is capped by A/C this would stop immediately once we had Konigstigers and Elephants. And you rarely get 50 kills on a good day now because no GV battle lasts that long anymore. You would lose near the 100 base cost no matter what.

[WWhiskey]

the M10 was faster IIRC. but i never said they barged into combat. A tank destroyer used its speed to displace fast and set up another position fast also.
M-18 runs at 60mph on ROAD. offroad this speed would be limited to 45-50 maybe.

there is no difference "in game" for speed on road verses off road.
 m- 8 has Power/weight    14.1 hp/ton      Hercules JXD 6-cyl gasoline 110 hp
  m-18 has Power/weight    18.9 hp/ton     Continental R-975-C4, 9-cylinder, radial  engine 340 hp
so the m-8 will not outrun the m-18 in any condition!   it might be more stable since it is a rubber tired gv but it is not faster in any way!

[save]

Well I guess they have to change speed for terrain.

I've travelled @ 70km/h plus in terrain in a tank many times, you dont spot much moving @ that speed, also you get banged up quite considerably

One time I tried to open the commanders hatch as  the tank found a big hole to plummet down into, result : crushed and broken finger on me , blue eye on the gunner , only the loader and driver managed to cushion the impact.

[Nemisis]

321BAR, good defense relys on absorbing the enemy's attacks in multiple supporting possitions. If I were to be put in command of 6 tanks (Panzer IV's even, which aren't much when put against a koinstiger, or an elephant), I would be able to make a formidable defensive line.

Personally, I believe in using blitzkrieg tactics for defense, and Kursk style tactics for defense. Sure the knits can take any one possition, but how many untill they get tired of loosing perks by the hundreds each spawn?


As I said: to make it work, we would need something free (or at least cheap) thats armed with the KwK43. I proposed the Nashorn because its weak armor makes if very vulnerable. Il-2's will be able to kill them from the FRONT. Any vehicle mounted cannon firing AP will tear right through the armor.

You have Jagdpanthers, Koinstigers, Nashorns, and other Elephants to deal with the attackers from the front (elephant will likely be added last, IMO). Also, (in an ideal situation), you have jagdpanzer L70's, Panthers, Fireflys, T-34/85's, and Tiger I's that will be able to penertate the side armor at a good range. It would be vulnerable to the Panzer's and M4A3(76)'s gun from the side at med range as well.

[321BAR]

there is no difference "in game" for speed on road verses off road.
 m- 8 has Power/weight    14.1 hp/ton      Hercules JXD 6-cyl gasoline 110 hp
  m-18 has Power/weight    18.9 hp/ton     Continental R-975-C4, 9-cylinder, radial  engine 340 hp
so the m-8 will not outrun the m-18 in any condition!   it might be more stable since it is a rubber tired gv but it is not faster in any way!

you just made me happier to wish for my M-18

321BAR, good defense relys on absorbing the enemy's attacks in multiple supporting possitions. If I were to be put in command of 6 tanks (Panzer IV's even, which aren't much when put against a koinstiger, or an elephant), I would be able to make a formidable defensive line.

Personally, I believe in using blitzkrieg tactics for defense, and Kursk style tactics for defense. Sure the knits can take any one possition, but how many untill they get tired of loosing perks by the hundreds each spawn?


As I said: to make it work, we would need something free (or at least cheap) thats armed with the KwK43. I proposed the Nashorn because its weak armor makes if very vulnerable. Il-2's will be able to kill them from the FRONT. Any vehicle mounted cannon firing AP will tear right through the armor.

You have Jagdpanthers, Koinstigers, Nashorns, and other Elephants to deal with the attackers from the front (elephant will likely be added last, IMO). Also, (in an ideal situation), you have jagdpanzer L70's, Panthers, Fireflys, T-34/85's, and Tiger I's that will be able to penertate the side armor at a good range. It would be vulnerable to the Panzer's and M4A3(76)'s gun from the side at med range as well.

part 1: yeah until that big fat blob of a tank rolls over your pnzrIVs or even tigers like flies. yes absorb the enemy attacks but if the enemy CANNOT be absorbed you lose the base no matter what. having that many GVs that would need perking would completely destroy any GV fight for people without perks. yes people have 3000 perks, i used to. but some have 30 or so like i do now, now picture this. 2 guys with 3000 perks up King Tigers while the defenders cant even up a firefly. what would happen? the defenders get smashed and the base is taken in minutes... you cannot add these major GVs without throwing the fairness out of the game, (at least not yet)
part 2: blitzkrieg tactics for defense? blitzkrieg was an offensive tactic to smash the enemy fast. there was no defensive tactics involved for blitzkrieg due to the far strung out supply lines and lack of defensive positions.
part 3: the nashorn's never gonna be unperked, even the firefly has 15 perks...
part 4: since when has an actual GV battle in this game been under ideal circumstances?

[WWhiskey]

you just made me happier to wish for my M-18

glad I could help!!   I like the m-18 as well!!! have been asking for it for a few years!

[Nemisis]

part 1: The elephant is incapable of dealing with multiple opponents with heavy cannons at once. And certainly not 6 panzers at close range. When it turns to deal with one, the other 3 with a shot will put shells into the rear and side, killing the crew and engine.

To the GV fight thing: the firefly and tiger are rare compared to the other GV's. And the firefly has a 15 perk base price. IMO, we'll see maybe 1000 Elephants used in any heavy combat, making any real difference per tour. Koinstigers will be used more, as will the SPG's and tank destroyers. But still, if a 30 base price limits the tigers to their current numbers, what is a 50 base price, a 100 base price, or a 200 base price going to do to the numbers?

part 2: I made a typo, it should say offense, not defense


part 3: Nashorn has 30mm FRONTAL armor. An M8 will tear right through that at 1600yds. The M4A3(75) will be able to kill one at 2000yds with no problems. Even .50's will pose a threat to it: the top isn't armored at all.

part 4: I meant ideal as far as the GV line up goes. We get an M18, and an M36 for the U.S., Churchill for the british, KV-1, KV-85, and the IS-2 for the russians, and the tank destoryers I listed for the Germans.

[321BAR]

part 1: The elephant is incapable of dealing with multiple opponents with heavy cannons at once. And certainly not 6 panzers at close range. When it turns to deal with one, the other 3 with a shot will put shells into the rear and side, killing the crew and engine.

To the GV fight thing: the firefly and tiger are rare compared to the other GV's. And the firefly has a 15 perk base price. IMO, we'll see maybe 1000 Elephants used in any heavy combat, making any real difference per tour. Koinstigers will be used more, as will the SPG's and tank destroyers. But still, if a 30 base price limits the tigers to their current numbers, what is a 50 base price, a 100 base price, or a 200 base price going to do to the numbers?

part 2: I made a typo, it should say offense, not defense


part 3: Nashorn has 30mm FRONTAL armor. An M8 will tear right through that at 1600yds. The M4A3(75) will be able to kill one at 2000yds with no problems. Even .50's will pose a threat to it: the top isn't armored at all.

part 4: I meant ideal as far as the GV line up goes. We get an M18, and an M36 for the U.S., Churchill for the british, KV-1, KV-85, and the IS-2 for the russians, and the tank destoryers I listed for the Germans.

part 2: ok no problemo there then
part 3: the nashorn has a gun thats better than many guns from WWII and can kill some pretty big tanks. That would be the reason for a perk, not the armor. the sherman firefly is perked for the gun also and it has a weaker gun than the nashorn and its armor cant withstand any round but the M4 75mm and the M8 at distance.
part 4: GVing will never be ideal im sorry to say. the KV-1 is extremely weak in late war standards and the Churchill is too slow to keep up with other GVs. Tank Destroyers are the only true thing that can help GVing out tactically right at the moment. These super tanks of WWII probably won't be added any time soon due to their massive chance to unbalance the GV war with the amount of people with banked perkies

[Nemisis]

Yes, thats why we have bombs, and particularly the stuka.

[321BAR]

Yes, thats why we have bombs, and particularly the stuka.

sometimes those bombs arent usable? especially when what you stated previously about air superiority is in effect

[Lusche]

These super tanks of WWII probably won't be added any time soon due to their massive chance to unbalance the GV war with the amount of people with banked perkies

Oh, sure we would see a lot of them at first, but that would quickly wear off along with the novelty factor.
Most players that have huge amounts of banked perkies do have them -surprise! - because they rarely to never use them at all. A player that didn't spend his perks on 262's, Temps or Tigers & Fireflies will most probably do the same with other, future perk planes & vehicles. I doubt they are just waiting for a certain uber item. (Bombers are a different matter though)

[Lusche]

sometimes those bombs arent usable? especially when what you stated previously about air superiority is in effect

Il-2 does not need bombs. You can also give the B-25H a few AP rounds. And if the enemy has air superiority in such a way even Il-2s can't get to the tanks, it really doesn't matter anymore what's rolling in.