New Vehicle

[Sakai]

Originally posted by Tilt
Seems to me we have a std tank and a heavier tank..............

In the context of AH adding later Shermans and T34's would simply add a higher plain of fire power and armour.

The GV interface with buildings, structures and the like is not so refined as to make this a rewarding venture..........

I would suggest that any GV's should look to expansion in range of type rather than increase in calibre and armour.

To this end I would offer the Studebaker truck and trailer........

It would have several load out combinations

Yes, and along that line a light tank--and again I would state a preference for the Stuart--as a proxy for all early war armor (and IJA-Italian armor).  The Pzkfw II would be another excellent choice.

Sakai

[brady]

The M4A3 with the 76mm gun is a prety good match over all for the Panzer IVH they are prety even at least inso much as their abaility to kill one another is concerned. Also both would have as  hard a time killing a Tiger.

Tilt  "Except of course these things would be in artillery/katyusha range range from the spawn point..............."

 So you spawn fire and die, spawn,and take a death in doing so. Or you have ammo brought up and sit and fire till it is all gone. Mean while somone like me who loves to kill GV's with planes orbits the spawn point and just racks up the kills aganst soft skind targets who may not actualy be hitting anything and have no apricable means of defending themselfs.
  I do think it is a cool idea but it realy goes back to the point of what are we willing to give up to get it, GV's come prety slowly to AH to ask for a system that is as vulnerable as this is and would have a neglable effect and little posable reward for the player, who is going to sacrifice rank to do it 9 times outa 10 is maybe not a good place to point or hope HTC goes in terms of creating a new GV.

[Tilt]

Originally posted by brady
not a good place to point or hope HTC goes in terms of creating a new GV.

Well this is all opinion of course........my view is that we have "tanks"...we dont need new ones unless they bring some thing new.............. the  ones we have are quite sufficient we have a full range from light armoured vehicle to heavy tank.

Within the bounds allowed by AH they are fairly well modelled and good fun............ unlike AC the terrain does not allow subtle differences to be fully played out......

Spawn camping  kills any thing............... heavy long range field artillery should require team work (osty or M16 guard) it is also very effective..............   and yes folk do go to a gun battery/ ships gun and fire some stuff off then rtb.

From the list above the howitser option seemed different.........the rest just seems to me to be much the same with a different name once it actually gets into the scenario or the ma.

The ability  for two players to spawn such a thing and put up a 5"  AA barrage over any field seems pretty devasting........enough to consider such a thing to be perked............. I would not rule it out as an in effective weapon.

[Arlo]

Tiltster .... being a member of the "Aces High Scenario Corps", you surprise me. You'd think having scenarios where the Russians or Americans .... or, heck ... the Japanese ... are all toolin' around in Panzers would be a bit of a let-down. I know most of the scenario-minded players I know (self included) feel that way.

Of course, you may feel that tank battles have no place in scenarios anyway ... there weren't any, really, in the war, you know.

I'm looking forward to the Battle of the Bulge panzer vs panzer snapshot someday.

Originally posted by Tilt
Well this is all opinion of course........my view is that we have "tanks"...we dont need new ones unless they bring some thing new..............

[MOIL]

I'll agree, I never said I wanted another "tank" added to the game, just a Whirblewind.  It's not a TANK, it's an anti-aircraft weapon. IMO we have enough tanks in the game {although there was some mention of a Sherman} that would be nice too, only because it would be the only Allied tank in the game.
Thanks again for all the great ideas fellas

                            MOIL

[brady]

Well Tilt I see your point, field guns and Ships dont effect rank howeaver, not that everyone plays for rank of course.

  How about this as a counter, A Hummel instead of a truck and a towed weapon, just use the Panzer chasie we have now and throw a 150mm gun on it and a new superstructure and their ya go artillery and a more surivable platform that you could actually stand a chance of landing, some even had AA MG's. New weapon type for GV's artillery and uses up a minimal amount of production time.
    Or do a sherman, and a Priest, although 105 mm doesent sound as juicy as 150mm:)

       I would kinda like to see a Sherman for the reasions arlo mentions howeaver.

[Tilt]

Originally posted by Arlo


Of course, you may feel that tank battles have no place in scenarios anyway ... there weren't any, really, in the war, you know.

A wish list could be as long as  a piece of string...........

I think the Niemen scenario has more tank battles than any previous AH scenario ......... Frame 2 just had several full scale multi tank on tank, and gv on gv battles........ the terrain was set just for this and it happens.

I would have prefered it even more if I could have modelled the shear weight of Red army artillery and Katyusha out of range of Whermacht armour.

The compromise as brady says is some form of 4" howitzer on a tank bed......... maybe with a single mg on the top..(several WWII GV's like this).... problem with  this is  load out becomes a single variant.

Where as a truck can be asked to tow any thing and the options of 5" or katyusha can be formidable........ it could also tow 37mm anti tank/ anti air and 75mm anti tank.................  it could also carry "camoflage netting" as part of its loadout .

Some may notice that a truck is already rendered in the AH object list with external art work........ i doubt its FM would be so different from an M3 (speed lessened by the load of the trailer) or its damage model so different from an M3 although probably weaker still.

Upon deployment we already have the 37and 75mm ap and he, and the 5" battery gun is modelled with he and AA. We already have troops and field supplies....... all we do not have is a generic piece of trailer art and the katyusha stuff. (so may be katyusha would have to wait)

As for camoflage? well we already have ground to ground lack of enemy icons......... so we add ground to air and switch off the rendering once stuff is deployed

(30 secs of high vulnerability) ........viola camoflage. You only spot it by the muzzle fashes.  (It takes another 30 secs to take it down.)

[Arlo]

And yet ... still ... the Sherman and the T-34 come off to me as a more immediate necessity and improvement to AH where scenarios are concerned. Maybe it's just me. No ... wait ... it isn't.

Honestly ... I like your suggestions as well ... I just see them as the cart and some decent allied tanks as the horse. You may see it the other way around (which, of course, you have every right to). I just hope the rest of the AH Scenario Corps doesn't.

Salute!

[Sakai]

Originally posted by Arlo
And yet ... still ... the Sherman and the T-34 come off to me as a more immediate necessity and improvement to AH where scenarios are concerned. Maybe it's just me. No ... wait ... it isn't. ;)Salute!

Agreed, but given the diverse set of vehicles now, I think I'd still rather see either the He-111 or Ki-84 or I-16 or Il-4 before I saw three new GVs.  You know?  I mean, TOD is where it is going to be "at" and the new modeling should go into AC before we worry about Vehicles.

That said, yes, the Sherman and T-34 would really go a long way towards making the scenarios better.  

Sakai

[brady]

Back A while ago, the First Scenaro I played in Was "Africa" It had huge Tank battles every frame, in fact the war was one or lost based on them, was prety fun. I must say I have enjoyed your creation Tilt, plane choices aside it has been fun.

 Back to our regulary schedualed programing:):

      Well like I sad above I am not to shure how popular  totaly soft skined anything,guns, trucks,rocket launchers would be. At least with the Nashorn, or Priest, you would have simi survivable platform that you clould land.

[hazed-]

Ive said it before and ill say it again.

The germans throughout the entire western war (apart from very early on) pretty much fielded the best tanks of the war and I think AH should endevour to portray this aspect.

The sherman M3 and m4 would be the best tank to add for some simple reasons.

1) it would be good to see for ourselves the difference in combat ability the average alllied tank driver faced rather than getting a unrealistic late development model
2) If we add tanks even more capable in AP power than the PanzerIV the Tiger would become pretty much useless as 'the' choice of ride.Facing hundreds of 105mm shermans or wolverines or other heavy tanks the tigers advanced protection would be unappreciated.
3) As the damage model stands, ie panzers can quite easily kill tigers already! the sherman will probably be modeled with the capability to take out a tiger anyhow!

but seriously i think the Germans should always be able to field a tank of superior power and defensive armour because 9 times out of 10 thats exactly what happened in WW2. They fielded small numbers of incredibly good tanks that fought weak but numerous allied tanks. On average it took 10 shermans to kill a single tiger and this should damn well be reflected in any game that seeks to simulate the war.
If we start to add the top allied tanks before we add the common types we will get a totally wrong veiw of the battles we read about.The panzerIV will become unused, the tiger not worth the extra expense and then it will become an all allied land war.
What we need is a representation of the tank the germans were MOST LIKELY to face and that is without doubt the sherman.
Once we have that then by all means add the later better but more rare examples and of course perk them accordingly.
Id like to see the ground war become shermans vs panzerIV's with the odd rare and dangerous tiger thrown in in very small numbers.I dont want to see the panzerIV ignored in favour of a far better gunned allied non-perked ride and see no tigers because no one wants to lose one to a simple shot from a powerfull allied tank.It will be as bad as it is now, ie nothing but panzers and no 'feel' of the axis vs allied part of the ground war.

just my $500 2c isnt enough

[ZePolarBear]

Tilt:


Steal the rocket lauchers off the PT boat for your truck 'o' plenty.  I like the idea, versatile and could last us a long time.


ZPB[/B]