American Light tank....

[Butcher]

BT-5's 45mm would be even less effective than the US 37mm. The M3 37mm was possibly the most effective gun in its caliber range.

Had to use the tables for the BT-7, BT-5 unfortunately isn't giving me accurate tables -

37 mm Gun M3 has penetration of 35mm at 500 yards
BT-7 has 51mm pentration at 500 yards and 36 at 1000 yards, mostly used APHE rounds which had 50mm penetration at 1,000 yards and 80mm at 500 yards.

However, due to lack of quality, the Table actually is 31mm at 500 yards penetration (from 1941-1942) however this wouldn't be factored in Aces High.

BT-7 would actually on par with a Stuart, just little better gun in the long run.

[bangsbox]

BT-5's 45mm would be even less effective than the US 37mm. The M3 37mm was possibly the most effective gun in its caliber range.

Wasn't the German 37mm antitank gun better...also it was even useful in late war with ability to launch a large shaped charge bomb

[Butcher]

Wasn't the German 37mm antitank gun better...also it was even useful in late war with ability to launch a large shaped charge bomb

German 37mm pentrated 31mm at 500 yards, 22mm at 1,000 yards, really none of the 37mm's were special - or hit stronger then the others.

It wasn't until 50mm and Long Barrels that penetration tables start going nuts, if you look at the 75mm of the Panther vs M4 there's a huge difference.

[SmokinLoon]

BT-5's 45mm would be even less effective than the US 37mm. The M3 37mm was possibly the most effective gun in its caliber range.

Essentially the BT-5 would be a slower M8 in AH.  It offers nothing.

I could possibly see the Puma version with the 50mm.  It would not be much more than the M8 in terms of armor, but it would certainly be a threat thanks to the gun.  Not as fast as the M8 or M18, but not as easy to pick off with aircraft fire either.  Hmm...

[Karnak]

I'd like something with the 57mm 6pdr added....

[SmokinLoon]

I'd like something with the 57mm 6pdr added....

The Cromwell Mk I comes to mind real quick, but it is a medium tank (one of the best of the war, too).  What HTC could do is add in the Cromwell chassis and then allow for both cannons.  The Mk I had the British 6 pdr (57mm), it would be a fast firing with average at best (in LW) AP ability, and below average HE ability.  However, moving around at 35mph it could not be taken lightly.  It would have similar armor to the M4 and Panzer IV.

The second option would be the Cromwell Mk IV, it was armed with the same 75mm cannon the US M4A3 75mm used.  The main gun would be exactly like what in currently in AH on the M4/75mm, but on a chassis that moves at 35mph and does not have the Calliope option.   

I'm not aware of any British scout cars like the Staghound or Daimler carrying the 6 Pdr.  I still think the SdKfz 234/2 "Puma" would be the best bet if HTC were looking to add in another scout car. It would be not as fast as the M8 or M18, its gun would be far better then the M8 but not as good as the M18, and it would have better armor than both and would not be as easy to disable from the air.
 

[Butcher]

Essentially the BT-5 would be a slower M8 in AH.  It offers nothing.

I could possibly see the Puma version with the 50mm.  It would not be much more than the M8 in terms of armor, but it would certainly be a threat thanks to the gun.  Not as fast as the M8 or M18, but not as easy to pick off with aircraft fire either.  Hmm...

The Puma i've requested numerous times, a former squadmate of the 367th Dynamite gang "tull" would go ape crazy over it. Basically I look at it as a scout car able to "pose a threat" to late war tanks. Actually its armor is pretty thin other then machine gun fire, 20mm is enough to penetrate a puma.
Its armor was no better, but in terms of speed it did well over 50mph with a 50mm L/60 gun, although this sounds wonderful it carried very few rounds in general. It was a Recon Scout vehicle, nothing more, it was not ment to take on tanks, only if it had too it was able to defend itself and run away.

not as fast? It drove 53mph top speed - all vehicles in aces high are given by "Road speed" not cross country, the Puma certainly be a much lower eny vehicle (higher then Panzer 4 and lower then M8) but perks wise, I would guess 22? It has massive speed, and a decent gun with no armor, but nothing near and M-18, it couldn't tank any tank on head on - but it could easily flank and fire a kill shot regardless - where an M-18 has a chance to kill some tanks head on especially a Panther's front lower hull.

[Tank-Ace]

I think a Valentine would be our best option for a british tank, as far as bang for our buck goes. We get one for EW with the 2lber, one for MW with the 6lber, and if we want to make a seperate model firing APDS, we can use it for LW as well.

That and it gives us the base for the Archer 17lber SPG.

[Karnak]

I think a Valentine would be our best option for a british tank, as far as bang for our buck goes. We get one for EW with the 2lber, one for MW with the 6lber, and if we want to make a seperate model firing APDS, we can use it for LW as well.

That and it gives us the base for the Archer 17lber SPG.

Don't even need a second version.  Just disable the APDS ammo in the MWA.

[Butcher]

That and it gives us the base for the Archer 17lber SPG.

I've always wanted the Archer along with a german Jagdpanzer - two support guns, both have to turn to shoot - would certainly be a nice balance for tankers.

[Tank-Ace]

Don't even need a second version.  Just disable the APDS ammo in the MWA.

Even better.

I've always wanted the Archer along with a german Jagdpanzer - two support guns, both have to turn to shoot - would certainly be a nice balance for tankers.

Same here. And also the Jagdpanther and Su-100. I imagine the need to turn to shoot would go a considerable way towards reducing the unbalancing effects of their guns.

But still want the Nashorn as the next TD.

[TDeacon]

The Cromwell Mk I comes to mind real quick, but it is a medium tank (one of the best of the war, too).  What HTC could do is add in the Cromwell chassis and then allow for both cannons.  The Mk I had the British 6 pdr (57mm), it would be a fast firing with average at best (in LW) AP ability, <snip>

Look up the performance of the 6pdr with APDS.  It could and did kill Tigers at over 1000 yards (for example at Hill 112 in Normandy). 

MH

[bangsbox]

Didn't the guardian duck and jadgpather have a small traverse? Like 6-10 degrees

[Butcher]

Didn't the guardian duck and jadgpather have a small traverse? Like 6-10 degrees

most tank destroyers yes, you need to really move the entire tank really to change more then 15 degrees.

[Tank-Ace]

Didn't the guardian duck and jadgpather have a small traverse? Like 6-10 degrees

Gudarian's Duck.

Its a reference to Heinz Guderian, who was involved with the Jagdpanzer IV. Nothing to do with guardian.