3 new GVs

[Someguy63]

+1 For more tanks.

[Coalcat1]

Add the huge low V HE gun for the Hetzer too! 

  Err Stug

[SmokinLoon]

Good assessment of the IS-2.  I'm glad someone else sees it for what it is.  btw... me thinks it would not be any more efficient at killing towns than the other three HE big boys (King Tiger, Tiger, and T34/85).  They all three do 234 lbs of damage to OBJ with HE shells.  Actually, the IS-2 would be LESS efficient at destroying towns thanks to the horrendous reload. 

Also, on the flip side of things I look at what could be/should be added to HTC base on two criteria: First, how does it fit in the AH realm? Second, just what bearing or impact did it have in WWII. 

We all can find the gaps in the line up, but which of those missing would actually fair well or find a place in AH?  The KV-1 was a Soviet mainstay but in AH it would get walked on thanks to a weak main gun and its slow speed. The Cromwell is fast, has average armor, but has a weak gun (same as on the US M4/75mm), and it doesn't have the Calliope available. The Churchill would be armored well enough, and there are a host of main gun options, but it is slower than a 7 year itch (same category as KV-1). 

With the Su-100 HTC would be adding something different and not currently in AH (Soviet TD). New gun, new sights, new platform.
With the Panzer III we'd be adding in a "lessor" medium tank that represents EW and is still very much in the fight in LW.  Don't discount the 50mm KWK 39 L/60. Lighter medium tank, new gun.
StuG III = Panzer III chassis and same guns as on the Panzer IV F1, F2, and H. It would be much like the Hetzer, but more "German". 

[Coalcat1]

Good assessment of the IS-2.  I'm glad someone else sees it for what it is.  btw... me thinks it would not be any more efficient at killing towns than the other three HE big boys (King Tiger, Tiger, and T34/85).  They all three do 234 lbs of damage to OBJ with HE shells.  Actually, the IS-2 would be LESS efficient at destroying towns thanks to the horrendous reload. 

Also, on the flip side of things I look at what could be/should be added to HTC base on two criteria: First, how does it fit in the AH realm? Second, just what bearing or impact did it have in WWII. 

We all can find the gaps in the line up, but which of those missing would actually fair well or find a place in AH?  The KV-1 was a Soviet mainstay but in AH it would get walked on thanks to a weak main gun and its slow speed. The Cromwell is fast, has average armor, but has a weak gun (same as on the US M4/75mm), and it doesn't have the Calliope available. The Churchill would be armored well enough, and there are a host of main gun options, but it is slower than a 7 year itch (same category as KV-1). 

With the Su-100 HTC would be adding something different and not currently in AH (Soviet TD). New gun, new sights, new platform.
With the Panzer III we'd be adding in a "lessor" medium tank that represents EW and is still very much in the fight in LW.  Don't discount the 50mm KWK 39 L/60. Lighter medium tank, new gun.
StuG III = Panzer III chassis and same guns as on the Panzer IV F1, F2, and H. It would be much like the Hetzer, but more "German". 

Yes but we don't have a soviet heavy tank ether, I agree with the addition of the SU and a few Brit tanks as well.

[Tank-Ace]

Yes but we don't have a soviet heavy tank ether, I agree with the addition of the SU and a few Brit tanks as well.

We don't need a soviet heavy just because it's a heavy. The reality is that nothing anyone ever used in WWII will ever challenge the Tiger II, will only be a bit better than the Tiger I, and never have any significant use in special events. And because in the MA, you don't need something to challenge the Tigers, since you can just get a tiger for yourself, it's merit is based on its contribution to the war, and it's historical significance. In both cases, the KV and IS tanks are both rather wanting.



We need 1) the Valentine and 2) the Panzer III next.

[save]

Jagdtiger could probably kill a tiger2 at longer range than the KT2 could fight back at, due to its monster 128mm cannon.


As a Tank I agree with you, KT2 was the best.

We don't need a soviet heavy just because it's a heavy. The reality is that nothing anyone ever used in WWII will ever challenge the Tiger II, will only be a bit better than the Tiger I, and never have any significant use in special events. And because in the MA, you don't need something to challenge the Tigers, since you can just get a tiger for yourself, it's merit is based on its contribution to the war, and it's historical significance. In both cases, the KV and IS tanks are both rather wanting.



We need 1) the Valentine and 2) the Panzer III next.

[Coalcat1]

We don't need a soviet heavy just because it's a heavy. The reality is that nothing anyone ever used in WWII will ever challenge the Tiger II, will only be a bit better than the Tiger I, and never have any significant use in special events. And because in the MA, you don't need something to challenge the Tigers, since you can just get a tiger for yourself, it's merit is based on its contribution to the war, and it's historical significance. In both cases, the KV and IS tanks are both rather wanting.



We need 1) the Valentine and 2) the Panzer III next.

I would absolutely use these tanks, both IS tanks, fairly frequently after figuring out the in-game ballistics and other properties of the gun. I could see a following for this tank, not as big as for German tanks, but a following none the less.

[Tank-Ace]

I would absolutely use these tanks, both IS tanks, fairly frequently after figuring out the in-game ballistics and other properties of the gun. I could see a following for this tank, not as big as for German tanks, but a following none the less.

I see what's going on. You just want the IS's for yourself, regardless of their overall utility for the game.

To be clear, I'm no saying no to them. I am, however, saying not yet rather insistently.

[Coalcat1]

I see what's going on. You just want the IS's for yourself, regardless of their overall utility for the game.

To be clear, I'm no saying no to them. I am, however, saying not yet rather insistently.

No, I could see people using and them serving a purpose in the MA, a great spawn camping GV 

   PS: I was using myself as an example.

[Tank-Ace]

No, I could see people using and them serving a purpose in the MA, a great spawn camping GV  

   PS: I was using myself as an example.

It would actually be a rather average to poor spawn camping vehicle. 1 miss and he has 20 seconds to move. And your ballistics would be none too good with. Also, we should be attempting to eliminate spawn camping, not furthering it.

And of course people would use it; people use the M8 as well, but that doesn't mean HTC couldn't have used their time. The same will happen with the IS-2; it would be time that could better used modeling something else, and will only be used by the few diehard fans.

See how rare the Tiger I is? That's the IS 2 after the "new"  wears off.

[Rich46yo]

I think the SU-100 would be a serious threat to the Tiger-ll. Obviously not an equal but a serious threat non the less. A Soviet main gin study I found on the web, "tho the Tiger ll had a more effective 88 then did the Tiger l correct?

[Tank-Ace]

I would take Soviet data with a grain of salt about the size of an orange if it doesn't match western data for any western guns they show. If thats the 88mm L/71 they're testing (and it appears so, given the muzzle velocity is listed as 1000m/s), and only found it to penetrate 168mm of armor on the level, then the data is utter garbage.

Any differences in testing method can be ignored, due to the fact that the 88mm L/71's main round was the PzGr 39/43 APCBC-HE round. The significance of this is that when the Germans themselves tested it, they required the shell to penetrate intact enough for the HE filler to detonate BEHIND the armor, while the Soviets typically tested for 75% of the shell's mass (including fragments) to penetrate the armor.

So the Germans are testing to a higher standard, and found their gun to be more capable than the soviets allegedly did, despite their more lenient definition of a "penetration".



Were I to make a guess, I would say the reason for the discrepancies have to do with both the fact that they would be sent to the gulag if they pissed the wrong person off, and that the Soviets weren't known for their precision and accuracy in anything they did, up to and including weapons engineering.

[Rich46yo]

Well they must have done something right since they won. But I honestly dont know which 88 they tested.

I think we can all agree the gun and sighting system on the Tiger ll was the best in the war. "It" had other issues but its gun and sights were superb.

[Tank-Ace]

Let me rephrase; either they are using the 88mm L/71, and are grossly incorrect with regard to the penetration, or they tested the KwK 36 for both APCBC-HE, and the incredibly rare and almost never issued APCR round, and somehow came up with both the wrong muzzle velocity and penetration for the APCR round (and the incorrect penetration for the APCBC-HE).

In either case, its a pretty good argument to disregard soviet data.

[Wildcatdad]

I'm still waiting to find out what the Brit's have other than the firefly.