Author Topic: GV gaps  (Read 540 times)

Offline Chris79

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1068
GV gaps
« on: May 07, 2014, 10:44:46 AM »
Instead of hijacking a previous thread pertaining to the Pershing, I am writing this thread to address vehicles IMHO that ought to be added prior to the Pershing.
United Kingdom
Cromwell
Centurion
Comet

United States
Stuart
M3-Lee/Grant

Germany
Panzer mk 2 and Panzer mk 3

Soviet Union
KV-1
IS-2
SU-76
SU-100
BM-31(Katyusha multiple rocket launcher) I would love to unleash Stalin's Organ into a town.



Chuikov

Offline Someguy63

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2031
Re: GV gaps
« Reply #1 on: May 07, 2014, 11:17:01 AM »
This is a lot.

Try picking one from each, HTC is loaded with work, let's not try and add much more a load on them.
Anarchy
#Taterz
-=Army of Muppets=-
"Imagination rules the world"

Offline R 105

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 978
Re: GV gaps
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2014, 12:00:15 PM »
 Stug-III, The most produced armor vehicle of WWII for Germany.

Offline Chris79

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1068
Re: GV gaps
« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2014, 12:20:03 PM »
Britain lacks any domestically produced tanks, and the Soviet Union which produced more AFV's then any other country in WW2 is only represented by 2 tanks. To stay on topic I am not advocating for any more GVs until the aircraft gaps are filled. The GVs previously listed pertains to GV's I would rather see before the Pershing


Chuikov

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6166
Re: GV gaps
« Reply #4 on: May 07, 2014, 12:51:15 PM »
As I always do, I think of how X would fit in the AH realm (MA and SEA) and not what I or another player "wishes" for.  True, this is a "wish" forum but sometimes people try peein' in to a soup can on a windy day, too. 

Filling the gaps has always been something I've vouched for.  I've was vocal on the He111, Ki-43 Oscar, and a level Soviet bomber.  Same goes for the M18 (it provided a fast platform, powerful gun, but weak armor. Something AH did not have at the time). 

In terms of plane set, the biggest gaps now are now the Wellington, Beaufighter, Pe-2, Ki-100, and another German bomber.  They all were important participants in WWII and they all would see use in the MA.

IN terms of GV's, the more notable vehicles that are missing in AH that would be useable in the MA are, in my opinion: StuG III/IV, Panzer III (parent chassis of StuG III), Su-100, and perhaps the Cromwell.  Once HTC adds multiple Panzer III variants THEN they can add in the EW/MW British tanks with the 2 Pdr and 6 Pdr main guns.  The Crusader and Valentine were huge players for the British, but stacked up against the current crop of tanks in AH they wouldn't be much of a contender.  Unless, that is, if HTC allowed for the use of the HV AP ammo the British used in the 6 Pdr, then they could compete with the M4's and Panzer IV's.
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline Chris79

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1068
Re: GV gaps
« Reply #5 on: May 07, 2014, 12:56:57 PM »
I am in full agreement. The only GV I would strongly like now would be the BM-31. I'm not sure how practical it would be, but it was of the most iconic weapons platforms in the Eastern Front


Chuikov

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: GV gaps
« Reply #6 on: May 07, 2014, 12:58:13 PM »
I think we need the Crusader tank, Grant and KV-1 tank - for German Counterpart the Panzer III.

KV-1 fills a Russian gap for tanks that can be upgraded later (KV-85, and KV-2) etc, there isn't much design changes to it.

The Cromwell, being a 1944 tank would not far to well against any of the German tanks, I would honestly rather see the Valentine tank with the Panzer III added. This also adding the Grant/Lee would pretty much cover most of 1941+ for the allies.
Only other tank I can see is the Churchill, however with its horribly weak Armament and top speed of 15mph, it might not be worth even bothering no matter how much importance it is.
The Comet would be my choice for a late war British tank, unfortunately British doctrine means it has frankly nothing to combat german tanks up till 1944, I'd rather see a list of Russian tanks added instead.

As for the US, Stuart tank? Nah I'd rather see a list of M4's added that could be practical. M4A3 models with bigger guns and more armor, even a 105mm version.

There is a ton of Russian tanks that could be added, Not only a few varients of the T-34 as well (1942, 1943 models) that could be gap fillers. KV-85's as well as the long line of assault guns and tank destroyers.

Not dissing Britain or anything, but the lack of actual combat tanks makes me shy away from them being near the top of the list, with the Firefly there really isn't a better tank available for the time period anyway.
JG 52

Offline Coalcat1

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 913
Re: GV gaps
« Reply #7 on: May 07, 2014, 01:47:10 PM »
Instead of hijacking a previous thread pertaining to the Pershing, I am writing this thread to address vehicles IMHO that ought to be added prior to the Pershing.
United Kingdom
Cromwell
Centurion
Comet

United States
Stuart
M3-Lee/Grant

Germany
Panzer mk 2 and Panzer mk 3

Soviet Union
KV-1
IS-2
SU-76
SU-100
BM-31(Katyusha multiple rocket launcher) I would love to unleash Stalin's Organ into a town.


Thanks for no stealing my thread.  :D

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: GV gaps
« Reply #8 on: May 07, 2014, 06:03:44 PM »
The AH tank game is growing in popularity. Hitech is steady but, never neglectful as some want to paint him to salve their personal demons. He is one man programing all of this. And the title over the front door is not "Hitech Creations War of Tanks".

Have any of you considered what may be going on in Ft Worth? Even with only hints by Hitech, the next full update is an opportunity to showcase Aces High as a playground of unified war technology integration. Remove all the fluff and eyecandy from our competitors, and our simulator still leaves them trying to go the IL2 route having carnal relations with an xBox controler. With how many players restricted to an arena?

How many of you know there is a TBM in 2014 art work waiting to be released? How many think this next game update isn't looking at making the ground game less gamey to attract more paying customers? So what then is sitting in the can ready for the ground game in the next update? 

Hitech recently bought a second airplane. Do you think he is going to let the ground game languish? I HATE commander mode but, I still land 5 kills in an IL2 while enjoying some hypocritical sniping in a jagdpanzer at the new TT. You guys are going to get something, give Hitech the time to release a new product.
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: GV gaps
« Reply #9 on: May 07, 2014, 06:08:39 PM »
Do you think he is going to let the ground game languish? I HATE commander mode but, I still land 5 kills in an IL2 while enjoying some hypocritical sniping in a jagdpanzer at the new TT. You guys are going to get something, give Hitech the time to release a new product.

I don't think anyone mentioned HTC is neglecting the ground game, I think all the vehicles being added were a great addition - considering for years it was only the Panzer IV and Tiger.
JG 52

Offline BuckShot

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1721
Re: GV gaps
« Reply #10 on: May 08, 2014, 01:56:52 PM »
There are indeed gv gaps, but I'd like to see all of the old planes redone before any tanks are added.

Ki-61, A-20, 110, etc.
Game handle: HellBuck