Top Heavy in Tanks

[Wmaker]

We have two other arenas and the last time I checked historical events are not stuck to late war events either.

Well, as Lusche has said, the early war arenas are a mess where people use squaddies or second accounts to generate perks etc. Not saying that there isn't any combat happening there but the numbers are so low that hopes for healthy ground war are nonexistant.

As far as events go, evens that use GVs are few and far between. Bigger scenarios using GVs have been based on latish war eastern front events.

Considering the size of the ground war on the eastern front and the nature of AH ground combat, it's Soviet heavy armour what's missing.

Examples:

SU-76 (nothing heavy but was basically anywhere where Soviet army went, produced in huge numbers)
SU-85
SU-100
ISU-122/152
IS-2

[Chalenge]

Well, as Lusche has said, the early war arenas are a mess where people use squaddies or second accounts to generate perks etc. Not saying that there isn't any combat happening there but the numbers are so low that hopes for healthy ground war are nonexistant.

Just another example of selective reception. NEWS FLASH!!! Early war tanks are also about historic events.

[Debrody]

Not hardly, kid. Meet me online sometime and find out how I do with tanks. Oh, wait. . . you don't subscribe.

Sit on the concrete in a tiger2 while asking for more EW tanks?
Dood, youre funny 

[Wmaker]

Just another example of selective reception. NEWS FLASH!!! Early war tanks are also about historic events.

Adding planes historic events in mind is far more fruitful than adding tanks. As said, very very few events use GVs at all. People who participate speacial events want to fly.

Early tanks would be far bigger "hangar queens" than early planes.

[gyrene81]

Do a search for M36 and you will see gyrene's previous hit job on it. My favorite is the Pershing, but I would settle for Cromwell and Challenger.

you might want to get your eyeballs checked and work on that reading issue you have. it was the m-26 pershing that i poo poo'd. at the time it was justified, now, not so much.

i'm not saying the m-36 wouldn't be useful, but since you're talking "top heavy in tanks" as well as tank destroyers, i'm saying the russian su-85/100 should be added before the m-36. as for "special events", the last scenario that involved tanks turned into a whinefest of a joke. haven't seen any snapshots or sec's with tanks in the past year or more. so, what special events are you talking about, the sdl, koth or the ah racing league?

[Butcher]

you might want to get your eyeballs checked and work on that reading issue you have. it was the m-26 pershing that i poo poo'd. at the time it was justified, now, not so much.

i'm not saying the m-36 wouldn't be useful, but since you're talking "top heavy in tanks" as well as tank destroyers, i'm saying the russian su-85/100 should be added before the m-36. as for "special events", the last scenario that involved tanks turned into a whinefest of a joke. haven't seen any snapshots or sec's with tanks in the past year or more. so, what special events are you talking about, the sdl, koth or the ah racing league?

I really tried to argue against the M-26, frankly I am just going to ignore it from now on - frankly in my best opinion it was just to late in the war to see action, we have dozens of russian/brit/japanese tanks to add first.

M-36, Su-85/Su-100, Comet and we have a rebalance of the ground war.

[Tank-Ace]

I really tried to argue against the M-26, frankly I am just going to ignore it from now on - frankly in my best opinion it was just to late in the war to see action, we have dozens of russian/brit/japanese tanks to add first.

M-36, Su-85/Su-100, Comet and we have a rebalance of the ground war.

Would probably need a separate vehicle for the Su-100, since IIRC it had slighlty thicker armor, and was based on the T-34/85 hull. And even if I'm mistaken, and there were no differences, we would still need to keep the 100mm out of the MW arena  .

Also don't forget to add the Archer, and Valentine tanks, that way you get acceptable EW/MW coverage for the British.

And I'm just going to throw this out there; Panzer III. Its probably in the top 5 most historically significant vehicles we still need to add. It literally led the Blitzkrieg until about 1943.

Not hardly, kid. Meet me online sometime and find out how I do with tanks. Oh, wait. . . you don't subscribe.

Oh I do subscribe. And I've seen you fight in tanks before; unless you grew some small measure of intrepidity, you're not in a position to bluster. If memory serves, your GV'ing boil down to concrete sitting, bringing up the rear in a Tiger when the ordnance goes down, shelling undefended bases, and heavy use of perk tanks to offset tactical inferiority.

[gyrene81]

I really tried to argue against the M-26, frankly I am just going to ignore it from now on - frankly in my best opinion it was just to late in the war to see action, we have dozens of russian/brit/japanese tanks to add first.

the m-26 did see action. i believe something like 20-24 of them in different incidents. a couple were lost in battle.

Also don't forget to add the Archer, and Valentine tanks, that way you get acceptable EW/MW coverage for the British.

those things would be a ball against panzer 2s.

And I'm just going to throw this out there; Panzer III. Its probably in the top 5 most historically significant vehicles we still need to add. It literally led the Blitzkrieg until about 1943.

panzer 2 was the most numerous from 39 to 42 and was supplemented by panzer 3s and 4s from 1940 onward. by 43 it had been removed from front line duty and was replaced by the panzer 3 and 4.

[Tank-Ace]

the m-26 did see action. i believe something like 20-24 of them in different incidents. a couple were lost in battle.

those things would be a ball against panzer 2s.

panzer 2 was the most numerous from 39 to 42 and was supplemented by panzer 3s and 4s from 1940 onward. by 43 it had been removed from front line duty and was replaced by the panzer 3 and 4.

You miss what I'm saying. While it wasn't the most numerous tank, it was much more.... symbolic, shall we say. Untill 1943, when large numbers of Panzer IV F2's started rolling off the lines, that tank was what projected the image of German power, and literally helped project that power out onto the world.

The actual blitzkrieg was much less armor-centric than people imagine, but its still Panzers rolling across the low countries and Russia to most people. Not having the Panzer III  is really like not having the Valentine, or the Cromwell.

[gyrene81]

You miss what I'm saying. While it wasn't the most numerous tank, it was much more.... symbolic, shall we say. Untill 1943, when large numbers of Panzer IV F2's started rolling off the lines, that tank was what projected the image of German power, and literally helped project that power out onto the world.

The actual blitzkrieg was much less armor-centric than people imagine, but its still Panzers rolling across the low countries and Russia to most people. Not having the Panzer III  is really like not having the Valentine, or the Cromwell.

and i'm saying you're mistaken.    it was the panzer 2 with the high r.o.f. 20mm main gun that had the role as the point of the spear when germany invaded poland and france in the beginng of the blitzkreig. the panzer 3s role starting with the ausf. a thru the ausf f. were intended to take on enemy armor with their 37mm main guns. it wasn't until the panzer 3 got the 50mm that it took on the role that the panzer 2 had.

[Butcher]

the m-26 did see action. i believe something like 20-24 of them in different incidents. a couple were lost in battle.

Long as it is the EARLY M-26 and not the super pershing I am ok with it, problem is I have a nasty feeling the super pershing would get added.

Kind of like saying "Oh well, the P-80 was technically in Europe, lets add it too!"

[gyrene81]

oh hell yeah Butcher...the super pershing would be a big donut NO!

[Chalenge]

Adding planes historic events in mind is far more fruitful than adding tanks. As said, very very few events use GVs at all. People who participate speacial events want to fly.

Early tanks would be far bigger "hangar queens" than early planes.

This statement disqualifies you from any further contribution in tank threads for all time.

[Wmaker]

This statement disqualifies you from any further contribution in tank threads for all time.

Well that may apply in your own mind but as you aren't a moderator on this board you can't do much if I share my views, whether it's about tanks or planes. Why not provide a counter argument if you consider my points way off base?

[SmokinLoon]

Do a search for M36 and you will see gyrene's previous hit job on it. My favorite is the Pershing, but I would settle for Cromwell and Challenger.

Ok, you had me on your side with "Cromwell", but now I'm standing back and letting you get fish slapped because you said "Challenger".

I will admit that I am surprised that HTC chose the three AFV's that they did for their first fray in to turretless territory.  I actually has my money on the StG III or the Su-100.  I understand the Jagdpanzer IV thanks to the chassis and gun already being in the game, and the Jagdpanther too since that chassis and gun are both in game.  It makes sense.  I am most surprised at the Hetzer because that is a 1 trick pony.  There are no viable offshoots for that chassis while the StG III can go multiple ways INCLUDING about two or three variants of the Panzer III (think early and mid war).

For a British tank, in addition to the Cromwell I think it makes sense to add the Crusader since it had variants with both the 2 Pdr and 6 Pdr guns, and iirc it also spawned AA and infantry cannon (25 Pdr) variants. 

Oh, and fwiw the Pershing is #47 on the list of gv's and aircraft to be added in to AH.