Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: MOSQ on October 12, 2004, 04:57:26 PM
-
Pyro,
Can we get one of these? Just a slight modification to the one we have now.....
(http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/portland/971/images/decals/acad_ju-87g-1-decals.jpg)
It was then decided to withdraw the remaining intact aircraft and relocate them to the Eastern Front. In the Eastern Front it was successful in combating the increasing numbers of Russian tanks. The new Ju 87G “flying tank destroyer” was fitted with two massive37-mm cannons. One pilot Hans-Urlech Rudel’s personnel score was an amazing 519 Russian vehicles destroyed. However, for this score there was also a price to pay, as he was shot down 30 times. On each occasion he was shot down by ground fire and not through air combat. He also who flew 2,530 combat missions and continued to lead Stuka formations in daylight after other Strukagruppen units had switched to the Fw–190’s. For the rest of the war the Stuka’s reputation steadily declined as an aircraft to be feared. Eventually it was reduced to the role of skulking on dark nights just above ground.
-
Need perks for it. Otherwise, if the 37mm tungsten-cored AP shot does what it should do, nobody will ever ride the Hurri2D or Il-2 again.
The Hurri2D and the IL-2 is an excellent tank buster, but the Hurri2D needs a good concentrated aim to the tank roof to explode(not disable) a Panzer. Same with IL-2 - need to find right angles to disable or kill Panzers.
In the case of the Tiger, it is almost impossible to even damage it with the Hurri2D, and the IL-2 needs a very good aim, concentrated hits, and luck too. The Tiger even withstands the mighty RS-182 tankbuster rocket.
However, although it is a bit hard to aim, the 37mms on the Stuka will slice Panzers like knife through a butter and wreck havoc on the Tiger.
It takes some skills to kill a Panzer or hurt a Tiger with a Hurri2D and an IL-2 - just plain sucidal strafes doesn't cut it. But if everybody can have Ju87G for free, and just go crashing into the tank with guns blazing, since a few hits will punch through the armour.. why'd anyone bother to even use a tank?
I suggest 10~15 perks. Yeah, it's a slow lumbering plane, easy kill for a fighter.
But its ability to do what it is intended to do, is more than enough to unbalance the arena in terms of GV battles.
-
Kweassa,
It only carries 6 rounds per gun, so I don't think it would need to be perked.
On the other hand, might be a reason to burn up some "bomber" perkies. Too bad kills in Bomber mode don't count in the scoring.
I like this:
"On February 10th of 1943, Hans Rudel flew his 1000th mission and became a national hero to the German public.Rudel was then posted to the new special "Panzerjagdkommando Weiss" unit formed at Briansk to test newly developed tank-busting version of Ju-87 D-3.Modified Stuka armed with two Rheinmetall-Borsig 37mm (BK) Flak 18 guns (each mounted in special canopy under each wing with 6 rounds of ammunition) was developed at the Luftwaffe's experimental station at Rechlin (near Neustrelitz, Germany). Prototypes were used at first against Soviet landing crafts in the Black Sea and in the space of three weeks, Rudel destroyed 70 such boats.In March of 1943, during a tank battle around Belgorod, Rudel knocked out his first tank with his new tank-busting Stuka - "... my rear gunner who said that the tank exploded like a bomb and he had seen bits of it crashing down behind us." (Hans-Ulrich Rudel)."
On April 14th of 1943, Hans Rudel was awarded Oakleaves to his Knights Cross.Captain Hans Rudel's squadron of nine tank-busting Ju-87 G-1 was assigned to support of the 3rd SS Panzer Division "Totenkopf". On the first day of the Operation Citadel, during his first mission,Rudel knocked out four Soviet tanks and by the evening, his score grew to twelve. "We are all seized with a kind of passion for the chase from the glorious feeling of having saved much German bloodshed with every tank destroyed." - Hans Rudel.At the same time, because of Rudel's squadron'ssuccess, Panzerstaffels (Tank Destroyer Squadrons) were formed.Based on his experiences, Rudel developed new tactics for Panzerstaffels. He found that the best way to knock out tanks was to hit them in the back (T-34's rear mounted engine and its cooling system did not permit the installation of heavier armor plating) or the side. Interesting fact is that attacking the back of the tank meant that the plane had to come from the rear flying towards friendly territory - great advantage if the plane got damaged during the attack.
-
I believe that later operational versions had 12 or 18 rounds. Not sure though.
But yes. It should be in the game.
-
It only carries 6 rounds per gun, so I don't think it would need to be perked.
On the other hand, might be a reason to burn up some "bomber" perkies. Too bad kills in Bomber mode don't count in the scoring.
It's more than about the ammunition Mosq.
An unskilled pilot in a Hurri2D can use all of his total 30 rounds of 40mms, or hundreds of 23mms in an IL-2, and not be able to kill a Panzer. With a Ju87G, he can just go guns blazing kamikaze and kill a Tiger.
Now, with the typical vehicle spawn 3~5 miles away from the airfield, he can up again and again and again and again and kill every tank he sees even if he dies each time.
Ofcourse, some might say that this is the same with IL-2 or Hurri2Ds. But like mentioned, these planes have the guns to kill a tank but its not an easy job. I can kill about 1 tank, and damage 2~3 more with an IL-2 each sortie.
I like tank busting, and while I'm not as much as an expert as some people are, I consider myself to have quite a bit of more experience than the average guy in an IL-2 and usually achieve much better results then they do.... but even I can't do the job myself if there are 5~6 tanks marching to the field.
If I was in a Ju87G, I'd be able to kill six tanks in one sortie, go rearm and kill six more respawning.
Bring in a free Ju87G and the neophyte of all neophytes can go kill a couple of tanks. With only 2~3 defenders at a field upping in Ju87Gs and not even 15 tanks would be able to march to the field. It means the extinction of IL-2s and Hurri2Ds in the arena, and an end to the need to 'practice tank busting'.
-
Alll these comments are about IL2 23mm cannon which is all I use to kill tanks.
An IL-2 easily disables a Panzer IV provided the battle takes place at seal level where the IL2 climbs well enought to get a bit off the gound quyickly. A turret kill or an engineb kill are both good, they will stop the panzer from doing its mission.
An IL-2 is practically useless against a Tiger. Yes i have killed one or two with an Il's cannon but it isnt worth the time. This is good for the tiger since its cost so much.
A 37mm armed stuka would be a bad choice to hunt Panzers becausec the IL2 is so good at it and has so much 23mm cannon ammo and it can uise those guns for self defense.
However a 37mm stuka would be murder for Tigers and really every possible heavy perk tank in AH. I read that this 37mm gun firing its special ammo can penetrate some 143mm armor at close range, maybe that high but the figure is certainly over 100mm.
This means any perk tank can be killed with one shot to the side, a tiger 1 can be killed frontally.
So I dont think we will see this 37mm Stuka wth its killer guns any time soon.
In the meantime I would really like that we get a Stuka with 20mm cannon and a choice of special AP ammo, same for the 190F8.
Panzerblitz rockets for the F8 and D9 would be great too, but they might have the same poroblem as the 37mm stuka!
-
A few comments.
1) It isn't really easy because they'd be updating the Ju87D to AH2 standards at the same time.
2) How common was the special ammo for the 37mm cannons? From the way you're talking it was common as dirt and HTC would have no choce but to model that ammunition.
3) Any sort of fighter cover for the GVs would be absolute murder to the Ju87Gs.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
I believe that later operational versions had 12 or 18 rounds. Not sure though.
But yes. It should be in the game.
That might explain why FA3's Ju87G have 12 rpg.
Either that or their loadout is wrong.
-
Nah, the Ju-87G had special clips that were 2 standard 6-shot clips stuck together somehow.. so it had a total of 12 rounds in each guns.
I REALLY want to have one of these in the game... all the Ju-87G was was a JU-87D with a pair of big cannons slung under the wings.
As far as "it would murder all GVs and mean the end of the ground game" .. no it wouldn't.
I enjoy killing tanks. I used the Hurri-2D pretty exclusively for a tour a couple months back. You want to know something?
That plane "murders all GVs and means the end of the ground game".
One shot to the Tigers turret from a Hurri-2D and it has no more turret. A couple shots to the roof and you can usually kill one, that seems to depend on luck though. But you can definately disable the turret and engine and leave it sitting for dead. You won't get the kill on it, simply because someone else will do more "damage" to it than you did by completely disabling it.. but it'll be dead nonetheless.
You want to know why the IL-2 still gets WAAY more use than the Hurri-2D? Hell... why the Hurri-2C and Spitfire still see more use as "tankbusters"?
The Hurri-2D is completely and utterly helpless when it comes to A2A combat... and there aren't to many instances where you'll be able to kill tanks without having at least one enemy plane come down to try to kill you. The IL-2 is a fantastic plane.. it can knock out Panzers with ease and Tigers with somewhat more difficulty (the Hurri-2D is better for knocking out Tigers, the IL-2 for panzers)... but the IL-2 is also fantasticly lethal vs stupid enemies, and it is much tougher than the Hurri-2D is.
So basically a JU-87G would be a less manueverable Hurri-2D with more potent guns. The guns would still be all but useless against airplanes, so it would still not see as much use as the IL-2 or the Spitfire/Hurri-2C.
As far as "suiciding" goes... have you played around in tanks? Generally, there is plenty of cover to hide around. Typically, the 1337 gamer d00ds use Lancasters or B17s to carpet bomb tanks when they haven't got the skill to use an IL-2 or Hurricane.. I don't see many people using the JU-87G as a suicide attacker. It is much less effective than simply taking a formation of heavy buffs and carpetbombing from 500 feet.
-
Kweassa,
1) If you want to kill a Tiger now the most effective attack plane is the JU87 with it's bunker buster bomb. So I don't think the gun pods would be any big difference, especially with only six shots per gun. 99% of us will use all 12 rounds in one or two passes.
2) The JU87 is unarmored, or at least no where near as armored as an IL2. To get close enough to hit with your 12 rounds, most pilots will close to D400-200. At that range the pintle guns on the Panzer/Tiger will be very effective too.
I don't think it needs to be perked. If you perk it, you should perk it's 1800 KG bomb too. I don't see anybody complaining about Tiger deaths to JU-87 bombs now. (However my Tiger was killed last night by a Lancaster flying over at 600 FT and unloading on me. Lancasters were well known in WWII as low level tactical anti-tank bombers. NAUGHT!!)
Karnak, Do you think to add the gun pods they would have to re-do the entire plane to AHII standards?
-
One more argument for it:
If we are getting the T-34, the JU-87G would be the perfect air adversary for it. It would add a lot to the Special Events to have these vs T-34s, and not IL-2's taking their place to attack the T-34s.
May the Battle of Kursk begin!
Armour and troop concentrations were also built up by both sides with the Russians amassing 1,300,000 men, 3,600 tanks, 20,000 artillery pieces and 2,400 aircraft. The Germans also assembled a formidable fighting force which was slightly smaller with 900,000 men 2,700 tanks 2,000 aircraft. As well as the three premier Waffen SS divisions taking part.
The German attack finally began, in the afternoon of July 4, 1943, as planned. The German armor spearheads, led by the most armored and most powerful Tigers and Elefants, advanced forward in the wheat fields toward the Russian lines. Then came wave after wave of anti-tank aircraft attacks by both sides, German Stukas attacked dug in Russian tanks and Russian Sturmoviks attacked the German tanks. The fighters of both sides engages in air combats over the battlefield, and each side's massive heavy artillery also fired.
-
Just some stats to back up what I'm saying..
I'll go by Tour, then the rank of the plane as far as panzer kills go (i.e. most kills is #1, second most is #2)
Current Tour
Il-2 907 kills #1
110G 277 kills #2
P-38L 195 kills #3
Lanc 179 kills #4
Hurri-2C 123 kills #7
Hurri-2D 98 kills #9
Last Tour
Il-2 2236 #1
110G 809 #2
P-38 512 #3
Lanc 425 #4
Hurri-2C 306 #6
Hurri-2D 150 #15
Tour 55
Il-2 1423 #1
P-38 772 #2
110G 642 #3
Hurri-2C 579 #4
Hurri-2D 165 #14
Tour 54
Il-2 1593 #1
P-38 1027 #2
Hurri-2C 798 #3
Tiffy 758 #4
Hurri-2D 268 #13
Tour 53
P-38 947 #1
Il-2 793 #2
Nik2 760 #3
Hurri-2c 735 #4
Hurri-2D 81 #22
It can easily be seen that is spite of the fact that the Panzer IV got "toughened up" Hispanos can still kill tanks (although in HTC's defense.. the Hispano actually could get through the armor on a Panzer IV at close range and relatively steep diving angle). Because of this, the -2C is a more popular choice than the -2D, because the -2C is quite capable of killing a plane with a short burst as well as a tank. It simply takes to much effort to actually hit with what is effectively a single shot anti-tank weapon mounted on a plane.
-
A few comments from RL:
The BK 3,7 came with 6, 8 or 12 round clips. The tungsten-cored ammo seemed to be standard (it was introduced at the same time as the Ju 87G) although other types were used for different targets.
The BK 3,7 with Hartkernmunition could indeed penetrate up to 140mm, but that was in ideal conditions: 100m, and 90 degree striking angle. Penetration fell off sharply as the striking angle worsened and the range increased. That's why Rudel eventually had his guns harmonised at 100m - it was to stand a a chance of penetrating the Russian tanks.
The 40mm Vickers S would penetrate around 50mm (range and angle unspecified). The 23mm VYa only around 25mm (400m range - 30mm at 100m). Having said that, it is very difficult to compare penetration stats because they may have been tested in very different conditions.
The Hurri IID was ineffective against Tigers, although it could cope pretty well with a Pz.IV. I can't see the Il-2 achieving very much against a good tank with the 23mm - the 37mm NS-37 was a different matter, although there weren't many Il-2s with that gun.
This pic below gives you some idea of the relative power of the cartridges. From left to right they are: .50, 20mm Hispano, 23mm VYa, 30mm MK 101/103, NS-37, BK 3,7, 40mm S Gun. It comes from the article on 'Tankbusters' on my website - which is worth a read if you're interested in this subject.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
(http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/FGww2APcarts1e.jpg)
-
Tony, the Hurri-2D may have been ineffective in real life, but it is quite effective in AH.
I think this is because the penetration was there, but in real life you had to worry about dying if you made a mistake pulling out of your 45 degree dive at 300 feet, whereas in AH you just up again if you hit a tree.
Still takes far to much effort for 99.999% of the population though.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
It takes some skills to kill a Panzer or hurt a Tiger with a Hurri2D and an IL-2 - just plain sucidal strafes doesn't cut it. But if everybody can have Ju87G for free, and just go crashing into the tank with guns blazing, since a few hits will punch through the armour.. why'd anyone bother to even use a tank?
Why does anyone bother to use a tank now? Both panzerknackers we have now (Hurri-D, IL-2) can kill a ground vehicle in one pass suicidally. I should know, I do it occasionally when I get wound up enough. And the exsisting AT aircraft are actually, to some extent, able to put up atleast a token defense against fighters.
The Stuka-G cant. Best it can do is turn, and that is assuming that it has the same maneuverability as our current Stuka. Put a perk tag on it, and noone will fly it in the MA, period.
Now, having said that, why is everyone so worried about there being a threat to the perkified Tiggers? Dont we take risks every time we fly out in a perk vehicle? The Me-262, Spit 14, Tempest, Ar-234, all of them have weaknesses that can be exploited if the pilot is not careful, why should the same not be true of a Tigger? It's about time the tread-heads with perks to burn had a good reason to be nervous when the amount of red in the air is greater than the amount of green.
I sure as hell wouldnt drive a Tigger, with Stuka-G's about, if I didnt know that the air support was their to keep me safe.
-
MOSQ,
I would be very surprised if HTC spent effort on making an aircraft that was not up to AH2 specs. It isn't a matter of if the could just add the gun pods, it's a matter of if they'd want to do so without bringing the Stuka up to AH2 specs.
What we need isn't some slow, underpowered Ju87G with a couple of 37mm guns. We need a Mosquito FB.Mk XVIII with a 57mm cannon.
-
The S gun wasnt ineffective in real life. It was ineffective vs tigers.
You should read Tonys book about what was effective vs tanks. There is a number quoted in there that after all BDA is done the western allies probably only killed 100 tanks with fighterbombers in the normandy campaign. How many fighter bombers were killed to accomplish that..2-3000?
S gun round looks like an HE round more then an AP round.
-
The S Gun AP ammo followed an entirely different principle from the Hartkernmunition. It relied on the mass of a heavy steel projectile travelling relatively slowly to bash its way through armour, rather than a narrow tungsten core travelling quickly.
Later in the war the British tried fitting a Littlejohn squeezebore adaptor to the S Gun and tested it on a Hurricane. See: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/sgun.htm
The Hurri IID didn't actually attack in a dive: this is from 'Flying Guns – World War 2: Development of Aircraft Guns, Ammunition and Installations 1933-45':
"The gun was capable of automatic fire, but in fact the first shot from each cannon pushed the nose of the aircraft down and off the target, so in practice only single shots from each barrel were fired, the sights being brought back into line before the second salvo. Pilots learned to pull back slightly on the control column at the moment of firing, in order to minimise this effect. The typical attack profile saw the Hurricane diving from 1,500 m before levelling off just above the ground at 400 km/h. The first shots were fired at about 900 m with two further salvoes being fired before the pilot pulled up to avoid hitting the target."
However, later tests in SE Asia showed that a diving attack would be more effective.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion
forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
-
Originally posted by MOSQ
Pyro,
.....One pilot Hans-Urlech Rudel’s personnel score was an amazing 519 Russian vehicles destroyed......
Did you read his book?
I did.........
If he had at least half of the tanks destroyed he tells he did German would win the war.......
Form what he wrote - I understand one thing....... he was very good pilot but he knows even better then flying ---- to tell lots of b** sh***.
So.... I'd be much more sceptic about these numbers - and lots of other things he told. (BTW I do belive he is very lucky guy)
About the Ju-87G it would be nice to have it - but only as axis anti-viecle plane... IL-2 is much better in this role - because of heavy armor it has.
-
Artik.
If he had destroyed 10 times the tanks he said he did the germans would still have lost the war.
The guy was a rabid nazi. More honest about it then many of his brethern. But as far as I know his claims are valid.
-
Originally posted by Pongo
The guy was a rabid nazi. More honest about it then many of his brethern. But as far as I know his claims are valid.
I'd be very surprised. As a result of careful checking after the battles, the RAF and USAAF fighter-bomber pilots were known to overclaim by 10 times. AFAIK no such checking went into German claims. I wouldn't necessarily expect their overclaiming to be so bad, as they made more use of anti-tank guns which were much more accurate than rockets or bombs, but some of the reasons for Allied overclaiming would still have applied.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion
forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
-
All I want to say:
We shoudn't beleve the things Rudel had written - or was awarded of !!!!!
When you read how 8(!)x37mm (!!!!) canon round had hit his stuka (not couning lower calibers) and he had landed safly....... you understand that something wrong
You know - I don't believe half of things he had written.
When you read his book you "figures out" that Rudel was only pilot that destroyed targets. :eek: :lol
So.....
-
the idea that i got from rudels book was that he felt any tank he shot he "destroyed"
would be nice if they fixed the hurri 2d before they added that stuke.
-
Originally posted by Tony Williams
I'd be very surprised.]
Rudels impact on the battle field was recognized by the German Army. I think we can accept that his unit had an increadable impact on Soviet armour. The weapon he was using was easily capable of killing the vast majority of the tanks he engaged when used the way he used it. Its not like he was lighting up a Tiger with 50cal and claiming it killed.
He certainly would have been subject to all the isses of overclaiming but the most signigant. His weapon could kill the targets he claimed quite easily.
-
I just want them to add the 37mm gun pods as an optional weapons loadout on the JU87-D. Later HTC can redo the plane and call it the JU-87G in AHII modelling.
As far as Rudel, there's no denying his bravery in the face of near certain death. He was the most highly decorated German combatant. They actually had to create a new level of order for the Knight's Cross just for him.
Even minus a leg, he still jumped back into a totally obsolete plane and continued the fight with a prosthetic leg.
It's amazing he survived the war, luck was definitley with him.
I really don't care whether he destoryed 500 or 300 tanks, his accomplishments on the battle field were remarkable.
However he was a rabid Nazi. The only thing keeping him out of Hell is probably that he was assigned to a combat unit and not an SS unit. ( And Yes I'm aware of the SS combat units, but you know what I mean.)
-
Can you imagine how slow and unweildly that Ju-87G would be?
AH2 is all about combined arms. If you have just a tank force assaulting a base, a number of dedicated aircraft can destory it. If you have planes assaulting a base, ground forces against your planes will have no difficulty in getting off shots at you(FLaK and M16).
Have the Ju-87G in AH2. Give it a total of 12 rounds. It would be slightly slowly and less manueverable then the Ju-87D we have now. Give it recoil.
This plane would be easy picken's for FLaK and M16s, so why perk it? If the tanker is skilled, he could always quickly change direction.
The Ju-87G, other than its 3.7cm guns, has no other offensive armament. It's only protection was the gunner, and thats not really all the effective unless someone is manning it with great aim.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
What we need isn't some slow, underpowered Ju87G with a couple of 37mm guns. We need a Mosquito FB.Mk XVIII with a 57mm cannon.
The 37mm are pretty effective against aircrafts but they are really tough to hit with. At least they were in FA were I killed an Avenger that attacked me when I had only 2 37mm ammo left and killed him with a cokpit shot. :rofl Wish I had it on film. :(
I agree about the Mossie with the 57 mm cannon.
With 8 rockets and 25 57 mm rounds it's a bird of prey.
-
would be nice if they fixed the hurri 2d before they added that stuke.
Fix what? The Hurri2D seems fine.
Why does anyone bother to use a tank now? Both panzerknackers we have now (Hurri-D, IL-2) can kill a ground vehicle in one pass suicidally.
They suicide because usually they make a few passes and find out that the tank is unharmed. They get pissed and hold the trigger through a dive a little too long, and that's when they auger.
Personally the only thing I'm afraid of when I'm in a tank, is an IL-2, Hurri2D, and another tank. While it is true, like Urchin said, that continued strafes from guns 20mms and under still damage a tank eventually, the chances of this happening are much lower than it used to be. Not to mention most people have horrific aim with bombs and rockets.
Unless there is someone who's had some experiences with an IL-2 or a Hurri2D included in the defense, 5~6 tanks can march onto a field and start turning it into a parking lot while 3~4 defenders hardly even damage one tank, much less kill(explode) one.
This plane would be easy picken's for FLaK and M16s, so why perk it?
If there's anything that can kill a tank literally in a single pass it's the Ju87G. Takes no special approach, no angles, just pass and shoot and boom! Penetration.
Why is anyone gonna start riding something else than an Osty or a M16 when that happens?
Remember the days of old AH1? Once upon a time, there was a time when "ground assault" meant "osty horde". Nobody used tanks. Any plane could disable it literally in a single pass. .50s and 20mms, even .303 rounds. So nobody used tanks.
It wasn't until the tank armour was fixed a bug, and then subsequentially strengthened a bit to more accurately portray penetration values, that the concept of "ground assault" changed to armoured column of tanks.
As a general rule(according to AH experience), when the effectiveness of aerial strafing passes greatly surpasses the effectiveness of tank armour, the tanks die out from the MA. The Ju87G, when free, is a plane that can cause that result once more. I guarantee you that.
It needs a perk. Since its an attack plane, not a bomber, it should use fighter perks. 10~15 perks. It doesn't matter how easy this plane is to kill with other fighters or AA vehicles.
The only thing in question is the effect this plane can bring considering the GV warfare as it is in the MA. And the answer is, "It's gonna bring the extinction of tank usage, and consequentially, current tank busters, as a whole."
It's like a ecosystem - when one supreme predator appears in too much numbers, the others die out. Everybody uses G Stuka -> Nobody uses Panzers or 50perk Tigers, and Hurri2D/IL2s -> Everybody uses Osties and M162 -> Nobody uses G Stuka.
A free Ju87G is a great, elaborate way to make 4~5 aircraft/vehicles of AH into hangar queens, including the Ju87G itself.
-
IL2 is by far the most useful defensive plane in this game.
I have used one on numerous occasions more or less singlehandedly stop mass GV attacks and vulches on airbases.
Its a wonder weapon with the best all purpose air to air and air to ground guns in AH by far.
The only thing I fear in a Panzer IV is an IL2. I dont fear other Panzer IV tanks because I can kill them on equal terms, I dont fear Tigers because I can kill them and because like hunting them. I fear Il2s because they can destroy or disable my Panzer IV in a split second and there isnt squat I can do about it.
As far as the Ju87G 37mm Stuka goes, if properly modeled and free to use it would make every reasonable perk tank useless because it would do the same thing them, or even worse, as the IL2 does to the current PanzerIV.
-
Kweassa,
I'm still of the opinion that the Stuka-G would not be as devastating as you think. Namely for the reason that even a Spitfire Mark ONE can make it's life miserable. A tank force with no air cover or AAA? Yeah, that would be a turkey shoot, but that's already true with the Hurri-D and IL-2 (and the Lanc dweebs. Cant forget about them).
The Stuka-G would give you crunchies more of a reason to call us pile-it's in to make sure the red to green ratio in the sky is in your favor :D
-
if HTC release '87G, might as well modify the tigger tank perk to just 5:rolleyes:
-
Kweassa.. have you ever used the Hurri-2D?
The 40mm has the penetration to blow through the Panzer IV from any direction but the front. I've already showed how much use that gets.
You know why it doesn't get any use? Because it is hard to use. It is absolutely the case that one hit equals one disabled panzer (you will get either the engine or the turret). It is not the case that one hit equals one kill. Typically, if I'm in the hurricane, I disable all the tanks on the field, and then collect all the assists as other people finish them off.
I'd consider myself to be very good in the Hurri-2D. I usually need about 2 shots to disable a panzer. That is 4 rounds total (2 rounds per shot).
Even if the Ju-87G is introduced as a free plane, nobody is going to use it except people who like the precision of using a large one shot weapon to disable tanks with. And even your "worst case scenario" doesn't apply in my opinion, since as soon as any "ground attack" faces any kind of air resistance, over half of the tanks respawn as flakpansies anyway.
-
Add the Ju87G and the Whirbelwind at the same time.;)
-
Nobody seems to mention the fact (though ya got close a few times) YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO HIT SOMETHIN TO KILL IT!
With 12 rpg that's 12 chances. If you have the skills to hit once in 12 recoiled/slow firing shots, you have the skill to kill a tank in a hurri/IL2.
-
Originally posted by OOZ662
Nobody seems to mention the fact (though ya got close a few times) YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO HIT SOMETHIN TO KILL IT!
With 12 rpg that's 12 chances. If you have the skills to hit once in 12 recoiled/slow firing shots, you have the skill to kill a tank in a hurri/IL2.
That's another good point. Not everyone has the skill or mindset to make use of our current panzerknackers. Thats why we got the low-level lanc dweebs using the old shotgun tactic to get the job done.
Will the high velocity 37mm be more effective than the 40mm vickers, or the 23mm cannons on the IL-2? Maybe. Will the vast majority of pilots in this game have the skill to use them, when attached to a Stuka? Not likely.
It took me a month to get to the point to where I can disable a tank with one-shot one-pass in a Hurri-D, and I was -trying- to learn that bird. One more month later, I'm still trying to learn how to shoot planes with the thing.
The Stuka is not going to be the death of the ground war if it's unperked. It'll just be another option for those of us wanting our WWII A-10's.
-
Originally posted by Tails
The Stuka is not going to be the death of the ground war if it's unperked. It'll just be another option for those of us wanting our WWII A-10's.
No it wont be tyhe death of the grund war. We allready have 2 cannon planes that can disable PzIV in a split second, a 37mm stuka would just be the third.
However neither of our existing cannon tank killers them are that succesful vs a Tiger I. A properly modeled 37mm Stuka would have that split second kill capability vs a Tiger I and any other reasonable perk tank. That would severly discourge the use of expensive perk tanks.
And thats the problem.
I dont think perking a stuka makes anyt sense but I dont think it should be free either. So I'm not sure we will have one as long as it so eaily able to kill/disable every perk tank..
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
I dont think perking a stuka makes anyt sense but I dont think it should be free either. So I'm not sure we will have one as long as it so eaily able to kill/disable every perk tank..
Easy way to defend a Tigger against that problem...dont use the bloody thing without air support!
Seriously, anything that flies and has a gun, or even osties and M16's, would be a threat to the slow maneuvering, slow flying, quite large Stuka air frame. And anyone who has flown the exsisting Stuka knows that it has the same neon SHOOT ME sign that the 262 comes standard with.
Would you take a 262 into a furball at med/low altitude if you knew or were not certain of the presence of higher fighters (especially the dives-like-a-piano P-47)? No.
Would you take an Arado in to bomb something in the same situation, or without some backup to keep your tail-feathers clean? No.
So why should you go plunk the perks on a Tigger, when you dont have the air support to keep the tank-busters off you?
-
simple solution...... just decrease the tiger perk to 5........
-
GRUNHERZ makes a good point about very likely not seeing the Ju87G due to it's effect on perk tanks.
Pyro told me that the Mosquito FB.MK XVIII with the 57mm cannon would not be added due to it's potential to annilate the bombers without the bombers being able to defend against it. This goes to show that the effect of a unit on the gameplay is a consideration for Pyro when he desides what to add and what not to add.
-
Originally posted by Tails
Easy way to defend a Tigger against that problem...dont use the bloody thing without air support!
Seriously, anything that flies and has a gun, or even osties and M16's, would be a threat to the slow maneuvering, slow flying, quite large Stuka air frame. And anyone who has flown the exsisting Stuka knows that it has the same neon SHOOT ME sign that the 262 comes standard with.
Would you take a 262 into a furball at med/low altitude if you knew or were not certain of the presence of higher fighters (especially the dives-like-a-piano P-47)? No.
Would you take an Arado in to bomb something in the same situation, or without some backup to keep your tail-feathers clean? No.
So why should you go plunk the perks on a Tigger, when you dont have the air support to keep the tank-busters off you?
Thats not the way the MA works...
-
Well, if I cant sell you guys on the Stuka-G, how about the MG/FF cannon pods (2 per pod, four cannon total) for our exsisting Stuka? I know the exact model we have didnt have them officially, but then again, our exact model also did not have provisions for the 1800kg bomb either...
-
How about we just the Stuka with 2 MG151/20 and a hangar selerctable choice for the special 20mm AP ammo. (Same for the Fw190 F8)
-
I dont think that the fact that there is an effective weapon against a perk ride means that the weapon shouldnt be introduced.
There are Tempests, that get killed be one hit of the ostie. The ostie is unperked.
Is that a problem?
Yes the Tempest can shoose to stay away from the ground. Just as the tiger can choose to not leave the forest while red planes are around. In both cases the vehicles are ineffective until they decide to take the risk.
The other way around it makes more sense. There should be an effective weapon for everything in the game. Right now there is no gun that can hurt the tiger.
I think there should be a weapon, but since the tiger is very expansive it would be good to have the "tiger-killer" very vulnerable. And with the exception of a C-47 there is nothing more vulnerable than a Stuka.
I'd say add it. Without perks. If it shows that the use of Tigers is really dropping off below bearable levels then maybe perk it. But I dont think it will.
-
That is simply untrue. Hurri-2D, IL-2, Panzer IV.. all have guns that can hurt a Tiger.
Pretty much every USAAF plane can kill a Tiger, albiet with a rocket or bomb, as can the Typhoon, Spit, Niki.. the list goes on and on.
-
An ostwind doesnt go hunting a Tempest.
A Tempest has a decent chance of killing an ostie.
A Tiger has no serious chance of killing the Ju87G.
So its a poor argument you brought up.
If Pyro's stement about the mossies and the bombers holds true the same thing logically applies to the Ju87G.
There are guns to kill tigers, several and a new one is coming in the next version.
The problem wityh Ju87 is that you could consostatly kill tigers (and all other perk tanks) in one shot and there is nothing they can do about it.
-
I don't think the Stuka is any threat to the ground war, or very often Tigers. Why? Because Tigers are used 90% of the time to Defend a base. No one is going to fly the Stuka to an enemy base to attack a Tiger, for the same reason you almost never see an IL2 attacking an enemy base. It takes too long to get there, and you are an easy kill all the way there and back.
Second, if the Tiger is attacking an enemy base, which is relatively rare, the Stuka can now up with the bunker buster bomb and blow a Tiger to bits. How often does that happen? Very rarely. Most Dweebs up a Lancaster Formation and take out an entire platoon of GVs in one pass at 1K alt.
If a Tiger is at an enemy base, he will probably have an Osty with him if he has any brains at all. The Osty will easily deal with the Stuka long before the Stuka can get a shot at the Tiger.
It's not going to be the death of the ground war, and does not need to be perked! However it will be a great boon to the Special Events arena, and an easily added plane to the MA.
-
Bombs are much harder to aim than cannon.
To drop a bomb you have to climb. This takes a long time in a Stuka.
If yiu miss, which is very likely, then yiu have to do over and over. Which takes forever. A cannon stuka has none of these problems...
A 37mm Stuka can just fly up to the side of a tiger and blow it away every time.
-
Honestly, a majority of the pilots of the MA, no offense to them, don't have excellent aim. They will approach a GV at any angle or direction and fire shots into it. With 12 rounds, you don't have many chances to attack. Even then you're still vulernable.
As with the bomber formations, you get a gunner in there, you're pretty much a giant threat to GVs, its not that hard to aim bombs against them.
Besides, this would give the use of planes that people never really thought about, even if it is a tank buster Ju87, it still a Ju87
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
An ostwind doesnt go hunting a Tempest.
A Tempest has a decent chance of killing an ostie.
A Tiger has no serious chance of killing the Ju87G.
So its a poor argument you brought up.
If Pyro's stement about the mossies and the bombers holds true the same thing logically applies to the Ju87G.
There are guns to kill tigers, several and a new one is coming in the next version.
The problem wityh Ju87 is that you could consostatly kill tigers (and all other perk tanks) in one shot and there is nothing they can do about it.
No, the Ostwind waits for the Tempest (just like for any other plane)
The Tiger has a chance as good on killing a bomber as it has on killing the stuka. The stuka has to come straight at the tiger, and be about D200 when firing.
Whats the problem about having a slow plane that has only one option to archieve anything (killing Gvs, not good for anything else) but needs to have certain constraints satisfied (Air Cover).
I dont see why a slow plane with 12 shots (2 rounds per shot) can be unbalancing. Right now a Tiger has to fear almost nothing.
The Stuka is slow, big, and has only 24 Bullets. It has to go directly at the target and get close.
Any fighter, ostie, M16 neaby and its toast. Its not a big threat, its just one plane that has a chance of killing a tiger with jsut 1 or 2 hits. And thats everything it can archieve.
It has one advantage over every other plane in the game (can kill any GV with one shot). But the disadvantages (slow, big, has to get close) set this off i guess.
But, I'd say lets try it. We can perk the plane afterwards if it really has such an impact.
With the Me262 that worked.
-
That is simply untrue. Hurri-2D, IL-2, Panzer IV.. all have guns that can hurt a Tiger.
Pretty much every USAAF plane can kill a Tiger, albiet with a rocket or bomb, as can the Typhoon, Spit, Niki.. the list goes on and on.
Urchin, you have to consider the fact that those 'other planes' need a pilot - a very experienced one - in it to do any real threat to tanks.
Most people are absolutely horrible in dumping bombs/rockets at low altitudes. I'm sure every one of us has the fun experience of sitting in a damaged tank, doing nothing, and racking up humongous number of kills because all the would-be tank buster pilots just auger all around you.
You consider yourself a good Hurri2D pilot, able to plan an approach and aim the correct spot on a tank to destroy it. But really, how many average pilots in the MA can do that? They won't be 'average' if they can do that.
Second, if the Tiger is attacking an enemy base, which is relatively rare, the Stuka can now up with the bunker buster bomb and blow a Tiger to bits. How often does that happen? Very rarely. Most Dweebs up a Lancaster Formation and take out an entire platoon of GVs in one pass at 1K alt.
Ironically Mosq, the point you brought up exactly justifies mine.
Why don't more people use the 1800kg monster bomb to kill tanks when its so powerful and effective?
Because, it takes time to get upto alt. If you sacrifice alt and try dump it at low alts then the accuracy suffers. Like I said the average level of players wouldn't be able to land a bomb inside an area the size of a football field, if they are executing the low-alt, shallow angle bombing.
So, since they lack in skills, they can't use a Hurri2D or IL-2 to do the precision strafing, nor can they use other fighter bombers to any success, since they can't launch rockets or lob bombs neither. So they take off in Lancs, do the low alt carpet bombing - because its the only way they can hit anything. They need all those 42x1000lbs to kill a single tank!
Now here comes a free G Stuka. Take off from field. You don't need much alt, you don't need to consider the approach angle or speed, you don't even have to aim a certain spot. Fly, fire, and boom! Tank destroyed.
A free Ju87G is the end of GV battles as we know it. It'll revert to the old AH days of Osty hordes. Consequentially, as nobody uses any kind of tank anymore, the G Stuka will lose its place as the tank buster, and remain a hangar queen. It'll follow the path of extinction it caused on the tanks.
A Ju87G, in the MA, should be something that players consciously choose despite the risk, to carefully counter Tigers if there are some around, not a free choice.
Tempests and 262s are perked because they are unbalancingly powerful in the job they do. Nobody complains 'you need to fly timid to survive in the Temp' or 'its not easy to shoot something with the 30mms'. The speed they fly is what got them perked.
Same with the Ju87G. Again, it don't matter how easy even a SpitI can shoot it down. The only thing that concerns this issue is how much absolutely better that thing can kill tanks, considered to the current tools of the trade.
100mm armour penetration from all angles? Definately perk material.
-
I think a good case has been made that it would have to be perked.
-
Kweassa,
The Stuka Tank Buster will not be anywhere near as "unbalancing" to GVs as a formation of Lancasters at 1K currently is.
Should we perk Lancasters that drop bombs below 5,000 feet?
That's a rhetorical question, I really don't want this thread hijacked into another discussion on the problems of dive bombing and low level bomber formations. It was just food for thought.
I still think the Stuka would be just another interesting option for attacking GVs. But it's not worth perking. If it turns out you are correct, then HTC can add a perk price to it.
-
If you hide your tiger under the trees like a smart person, By the time that slow '87 gets close enough to a tiger to shoot, he'll be eating an 88mm round in the canopy. No need to perk it.
-
If you hide your tiger under the trees like a smart person, By the time that slow '87 gets close enough to a tiger to shoot, he'll be eating an 88mm round in the canopy. No need to perk it.
'If you keep your SA sharp and start maneuvering quickly like a smart person, By the time that massive 262 gets close enough to shoot 30mms, you'll' already have maneuvered out of the way long time ago. No need to perk it.'
The Stuka Tank Buster will not be anywhere near as "unbalancing" to GVs as a formation of Lancasters at 1K currently is.
Should we perk Lancasters that drop bombs below 5,000 feet?
That's a rhetorical question, I really don't want this thread hijacked into another discussion on the problems of dive bombing and low level bomber formations. It was just food for thought.
I still think the Stuka would be just another interesting option for attacking GVs. But it's not worth perking. If it turns out you are correct, then HTC can add a perk price to it.
Lancasters at low alt deck bomb runs is a totally separate issue to be discussed. Lanc formations taking off and immediately trying to bomb stuff at 500 feet, using F3 externals to release bombs without calibration, should be something fixed not because its a threat to specifically GVs, but because it is an exploit of the general system. It is pretty much irrelevant, even as a rhetoric.
However I'd hardly call 5000 feet 'deck'. If the Lancs actually climb to 5000 feet with a formation to kill one tank, that's a significant lot of time to take for one target. The efficiency of this lumbering behemoth used as a tank buster just cannot be compared with a Ju87G.
If its free its not an interesting 'option'. It's the 'only option' for killing tanks.
Why up a Hurri2D or IL-2, which has about the same difficulties in trying to aim and strafe a tank, but is greatly reduced in its effectivity to damage/destroy tanks according to angle, speed and hitting spot, when a Ju87G will always penetrate and kill a tank with one shot?
An average IL-2 or Hurri2D pilot won't be able to hurt a tank even if he crashes into it guns blazing, if he doesn't have the correct angle, and aims for the correct spot.
An average Ju87G pilot will kill a tank if he crashes into it guns blazing, as long as he gets one hit anywhere anyangle anyspeed.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
An average Ju87G pilot will kill a tank if he crashes into it guns blazing, as long as he gets one hit anywhere anyangle anyspeed.
Be fair. The Ju87G's BK37 cannon aren't that good. They could penetrate (could, not would) 140mm of armor, striking at a 90° angle and from a range of only 100m. I wonder how fast that penetration falls off as the range increases?
Now that would be very easy for anybody even remotely competent at AH to disable a tank with simply by shotting the deck in a reasonabley steep dive. Still, diving at the front armor of the Tiger would produce an angle that would stop the round from penetrating. The sides and rear would be much more vulnerable.
The T-34 and Panzer IV H would both be easily disabled and that brings up another point. Why would the Ju87G be a killer and not a disabler? I see no reason to expect that it would be any more successful at actually getting the credit for killing a tank than the Hurri IID is.
All that said, I still think it's effect on perk tanks, barring something silly and stupid like the Maus (http://www.wwiivehicles.com/html/germany/maus.html),would be too great for it to be uncontroled. It would need a small, F4U-1C like, perk price.
-
I'm gonna have to reiterate my question... have any of you guys bemoaning the fact that the Stuka's 37mm guns are "uber" and can slice through any tank like butter ever tried the Hurri-2D?
You get one shot per pass. While it isn't exactly hard to hit, it isn't exactly childs play either. The round actually has to hit, just landing close isn't good enough. I strongly suspect that the Stuka would be the same way.. most people simply wouldn't be willing to take the time how to use the plane. The IL-2 is much easier to use, and it can knock out a Tiger as well. Plus, it isn't a helpless target against a fighter, it actually stands a chance provided the enemy fighter doesn't know how to fight very well. With the Hurri-2D (and the Stuka, once we get it), you are screwed even if the guy is on his first sortie in AH.
-
And before someone mentions that people could just spray a whole clip on one target (again), let me bring up that the Hurri-2D, with it's wing mounted 40's, noses down considerably every time the cannons fire. the Stuka-G, with cannons mounted in pods below the CG, would produce even more of a nose-down effect. Spraying doesnt work with these things.
-
No the guns really are far better then the s gun and the Stuka is way more controlable in a dive then the Huricane.
The s guns on a hurican are not in wing. they are in pods. Not as far below the wing but pods.
The Stuka without ack to worry about or fighters to bug it would kill tigers pretty easy. As easy as the tiger kills Panzers.
It should be perked if introduced.
-
If added, the JU-87 might have a bunch of good sides to it.
Fearing those big cannons, you wouldn't see those 2k bombers that drop in a dive and then start dogfighting with the enemy planes as often. They'd actually have to learn how to level bomb in a bomber. Pyro can't say that this takes away from the game because if you want to dive, there's all them dive bombers. If you want to level bomb, got up 15-20k and drop from way up there. Nobody in their right mind will sit there and take a Stuka up to 15-20k to lob 12 shots at a bomber formation, but they will use it to take popshots at the dive-drop-dogfight Lancasters and B17s.
The Junkers would also mean the end of a base being captured by five guys in Tigers and an ostie because their bud came in and busted up the ord.
Tigers might actually wait for air support before driving into the open. This does NOT mean they can't go to the base without air cover. Hop in the trees and sneak, buddy! ;)
If you're worth two cents as a tank driver, when you see a stuka coming at you, you turn yer tank.
-
OOZ662,
Um, the Ju87G would be no threat at all to bombers. The guns may be large, but they are firing AP ammo and have only 12 rounds each. The Bf110G-2, Fw190A-8, Mosquito, Typhoon or N1K2-J all have much more firepower when it comes to hurting airplanes. Look at the hurricane Mk IID, it is armed with two 40mm cannon with 16 rounds each and is faster than the Ju87G. How many of those do you see attacking bombers?
-
Having read all that was brought up I still think the Stuka would go well without being perked.
Right now there is almost nothing that a tiger driver has to fear, especially once the ord is killed. This would be a weapon with certain challanges but advantages as well. I think it would be a very good addition.
Its not like having a Jet with 37mm guns that is almost untouchable or something. If there is air cover or a good amount of AA-GVs running around, these Stukas will fall from the sky like flies.
They are big, slow, and have to get very close to hit and have a chance of actually disabling a Tiger. With the reciol and what else is there to make the life of the Stukas diffcult, I think they wont be unbalancing, but they would and should have an affect on the GV-arena. "Dont up a Tiger where you dont have air-superiority", just like "Dont up a Spit 14 from a vulched field".
There are unperked GVs, and an ostie should be able to hold well in a duell.
But, it all doesnt matter. I'd say add it. It doesnt matter if we add it perked or unperked. There will always be the possibillity of changing the perk-price so that the arena stays balanced. I'd say this plane would ba a good addition, because it has some faults. It is not the Monster plane, it has just guns that can kill GVs very good. Apart from that the plane is crap.
So with this plane there are good chances that it wont need perking because its easy prey for any GV except for tanks.
Take an M16. You can steer with the pedals and you have good guns with good flightpaths. Such a stuka should have big problems killing you.
-
ill finally throw my 2¢ in on this fire.
for our squad (by choice as we all have stated numerous times) flies only LW.
we do not have a single plane that can strafe a tank.
the reduction on penetration of the 20mm and below has crippled the LW planes against GV's entirely.
i can take a 110 with the 30mm package and unload 3 passes on a panzer from the direct side or rear and not damage a single part. at the same time in a panzer i can be disabled by hispanos at will, and popcorned in 1 pass by an il2. yes popcorned by only guns, it has happened numerous times.
when AHII came out for the first 2 months we opened the planeset to get used to the new FM's and stuff. this was before the ammo penetration change. i upped a hurri IId with the 40's intenet on landing some kills of GV's just to see it could be done.
after 12 sorties and unloading all my ammo without even damaging a panzer i gave up. i came straight down on him almost augering, and firing at about D250 on the icon, before i had to pull out. i came in at 30deg from the side to kill a track, i cam in 45 deg behind to kill the engine.
not 1 time did i damage the tank and i watched numerous rounds ricchoet, though some did give the hit sprite.
heck i even hit an m16 with no less than 6 rounds with no damage to him.
i have also yet to be attacked by a hurri IId while in a GV. you want to talk about a hangar queen?!?! for those fo you claiming to easily dispatch GV's in it, i will not believe it until i see film. the plane has no use in the game as far as i can see.
the il2 on the other hand is a GV monster. if i am in any GV and an il2 is attacking me with it's guns i can be guarenteed to go to tower, unless some friendly brings me supplies to repair both my tracks, my turret, and engine before the il2 popcorns me.
all the above GV talks are about everything but the flak... which i will not get into other than losing my turret to 2 pings from seafire 303's at D1.2 has made me almost give up on GV's altogether.
for those that say take the LW 30mm, why bother? to strafe out a flak turred use .50's from 1.5k much safer and more assured htis. 30mm vs. tank armor? 90% of the rounds fired from a 110 will ricchoet off any armored GV.more than 95% off a tiger. IIRC the LW 30mm we have is an HE round anyway, not meant for penetrating armor of any magnitude.
i say bring the stuka with the anti tank guns to AH, it's partially what the plane is designed to do especially in the later stages of the war. should it be perked? no. if it is then the il2 HAS to be perked. the il2 is a more formidible foe vs aircraft easily, and carries enough ammo to kill 5-10 GV's versus the 1-2 the supposed stuka is capable of.
lastly the "gameplay" issue of the stuak stopping GV raids. with what i know you have to be so close to fire, the pintle gun will have been shooting your pilot for 5+ seconds already, not to mention the giant lumbering target for the nearby ostwind. 1 ping the stuka is down, heck even a great shot take 2-3 hits on an il2 to down it.
remember this is a fantasy game. nothing is done like the real war because we can get away with things unlike real life. if you want to attack a base alone, or without air support of some kind, face the music.
before you bring up "possible" gameplay discrepencies you can imagine, fix the ones that are already out there. worried a few planes can stop a GV attack? what about a lone la7 or 190 stopping an entire front by strafing out barracks?
thank you for your time.
-
I say perk it. The only problem I see with perking it is it wouldnt be available to the people who need it. The guys that are getting env restrictions against them right when they need to deal with a gaggle of tigers.
-
JB73,
Nice list of extreme exagerations.
I assure you that attacking a Panzer IV H with a Mossie's guns is far more dangerous to the Mossie than to the Panzer. I speak from personal experience on the Mossie's end. Disable the Panzer? Good bloodly luck.
As to the Il-2, well, maybe you're that much better than I, though your Hurri IID account doesn't indicate so, but in my experience the Il-2 has enough ammo to kill one Panzer and disable another. If I get very, very lucky I might be able to get five. Against Tigers I've never had any success without using bombs.
As to you're claim of having lost an Osti's turret to .303s from a Seafire at D1.2, that is just flat out impossible. AH doesn't even track .303s that far. Try going offline, take a Hurri I or Spit I and set the target at 1000 yards. Fire at the target. There will be no hit marks on it.
The Osti's turret is more vulnerable it is true, but not nearly what you claim. If the Osti doesn't see me and I come in at a very shallow angle, firing the quad of Hispanos at the turret the whole way in, breaking off at 100 yards I will almost always get the turret. If I come in at a high angle I get the turret less often. If the Osti sees me making my move, I die.
-
i can kill an osty's turret from straight down about 65% of the time with my cannons, but i personally have lost more turrets to seafires (defending a vulched base with an ostwind aginst a CV attack is the most general time i take up an osty anymore) maybe im having oddball PC problems, but that the CNO skuzzy said mine was working fine, and i am on a rock solid cable connection at home...
either way i heay "zip zip" of 303 mg hits, and my turret goes smoking as im trying to turn into the cluprit.
this happens more with 303's than anything in the game, i have (rarely but have) survived 5-6 passes of .50's to the turret, but never has a 303 missed the target. maybe it is like the pilot wound thing going on who knows, bu i assure you i lose the turret to them.
i suck in an il2, cant hit a thing, but i die every time one attackes my panzer.
as far as the mossie goes.. i never mentioned it. i did mention hispanos, mainly from spits and typh's.
i'd be willing to bet though that the stuka with that tiny ammo load would be hard as heck to hit anything, especially in the trees. i'd also say probably 2/3 of the player base wouldnt have the aim to hit a tank in the right spot to cause major damage, i know after 2.5 years i can't do it. he11 i dont know where to shoot a panzer with another panzer to get that instant kill everyone does. even if i did i can not aim and hit a specific part of the tank unless within 100 yards, then i still dont hit where i want the round to go.
how many players have you watched blaze away with guns and hit nothing? 1/2 the player base doesnt have the patience to fire 1-2 round bursts anyway, what makes you think the induction of 1 plane will change that?
(oh and BTW i never said I could shoot out a osty turret with a 303, i can barely do it with cannons.) ill start filming all my GV runs just for you though if you'd like.
-
I was using the Mossie as my example because it is, by far, the best Hispano platform in AH. It has four of them, with more ammo, and they are concentrated in the belly with no convergence issues. If the Mossie has trouble, the Spit or Typh will have even more.
-
Il-2 will knock out the turret on the Tiger with the 23mm if you come in at about a 45 degree or steeper angle. Same as a Hurri-2D, only the Hurri-2D usually needs less hits to do it (one hit often does the trick).
Oh, and regarding Hispanos... the best "tankbuster" would be the Hurri-2C in my opinion. The Hizookas have had their penetration reduced, but they'll still go through at 300-400 yards in a relatively steep dive. I don't have a problem with that, since that is well within the historical range of penetration. The main reason the Hurri-2C would be better is that it can get closer, in a steeper dive, than something like a Typhoon or Mossie. The Spitfire V is a relatively good "tankbuster" as well, although it only has two Hispanos you can make very good use of them by making relatively steep dives at short ranges.
-
I'm not sure whether I would like to see the Stuka G or one of the heavier gunned HS-129's in AHII (37mm or 50mm, probably not the 75mm), but I'd appreciate either.
mauser
-
To sum up the thread:
I think everyone (except maybe Kweassa) thinks the Stuka 87-G would be a good addition to the planeset.
It adds a LW anti-tank plane to fight the new Russian T-34 s in the SE arena.
It's not an UBER plane like the B-29 or several of the discussed end of war fighters. It is in fact a plane that was obsolete in 1940 in all respects, got a revival in the anti-tank mode, but was then replaced by FW's by late 1944.
The Stuka already exists in the plane set, so it would not require starting from scratch for HTC. Since none of us work at HTC, we don't know what the issues really are for adding a plane in AHII. Could HTC simply add gun pods to the 87-D and call it a 87-G, using the AHI modeling, or do we have to wait for AHII modeling, which could be a couple of years from now till they work down to the Stuka?
The only issue among us as players, is should it be perked? HTC introduced the F4U-1C as a free plane, and after a bit it was decided it needed a small perk price. I hope the same happens here, introduce it, see what happens, and add a small perk if it's needed.
I'd like to thank everyone for their valuable feedback on this thread. That's what makes this community so interesting and keeps AHII alive and well.
PYRO or I COAD, any feedback on the JU87-G idea for us?
-
I read the whole post, Because I would like to see the JU87G with the 37mm Cannons, Ive heard that Stuka Pilots racked up numerous Kills with the Guns.
But also it would have been a very dangerous task, not only on the Russian Front, but in the Aces High MA.
Tony Williams,
Whats the difference between the 37mm carried by the Stuka and the 37mm PAK guns the German Army used. Because If i'm not mistaken wasnt the 37mm PAK basically useless by 1943? Even in the early years of the War in Russia 41/42, 37mm Guns were called Door Knockers, bouncing off Soviet KV-1's and T-34's.
-
Kweassa,
To quote from Tony:
"The BK 3,7 with Hartkernmunition could indeed penetrate up to 140mm, but that was in ideal conditions: 100m, and 90 degree striking angle. Penetration fell off sharply as the striking angle worsened and the range increased. That's why Rudel eventually had his guns harmonised at 100m - it was to stand a chance of penetrating the Russian tanks. "
I doubt the Stuka will be the UBER tank killer you invision. Weapon harmonization at 100 meters. Holy Cow! The Tigers pintle gun will have you in pieces by 300, much less 100!
I can see a whole lot of augers happening if the Stukas are pulling out of an attack at less than 100 meters.
Tony,
I got this data from your excellent web page, Thanks.
BK 3,7
Cartridge Size: 37x263B
Cartridge Weight: 405 gms
Muzzle Velocity: 1,140 m/s
Muzzle Energy: 263,000 joules
Gun Weight: 295 kgs
Gun Length: 363 cm
Rate of Fire: 160rpm
Thanks,
Mosquito
-
To add a little more info, the 37mm PaK used a different cartridge from the BK 3,7. It normally fired a 680g AP at 762 m/s, but was available later with an APCR PzGr.40 shot (like the Hartkern) of 350 g at 1,030 m/s, obviously less powerful than the BK round. It could penetrate:
79mm/100m/90 degrees, 68mm/100m/60 degrees, 50mm/500m/90 degrees, 40mm/500m/60 degrees.
The reason why airborne anti-tank guns were more effective than ground-based one of the same power was that they could get very close before firing, and could always attack at the tank's most vulknerable angle (Rudel preferred the rear). Their performance was also enhanced somewhat by the plane's forward speed.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
-
I have a graph on the 3.7cm BK somewhere, but can`t find it. Anyway, I clearly remember that it was effective at all practical ranges against the majority of tanks in service with the enemy, so this only at 100m, perfect angle etc. thing is a bit of a myth. The BK 3.7cm WAS a horrible tin can opener, it had it all for that. Perhaps a more relevant reason for Rudel and others was not found in problems with penetration, but after-penetration effects, a roughly 10-15mm core that flew inside the tank could do little to take it out of the battle. That same core of the 3.7cm APCR, penetrating into the engine compartment, punching through the soft engine block like hot knife through butter 'fixed' the engine for good on the other hand, effectively neutralizing the tank, and taking it out of service for a few days at least. It could explode right away of course, and the large engine top of the T-34 presented a weakly protected, easy to hit, vulnerable target...
-
I think the main difference is the Stukas were shooting the gun at the thinner top and rear armor, as opposed to the frontal armor.. I could be wrong though.
-
just posted a good article on the hs129 in this forum. hehe 75mm :)
-
Originally posted by Kurfürst
Anyway, I clearly remember that it was effective at all practical ranges against the majority of tanks in service with the enemy, so this only at 100m, perfect angle etc. thing is a bit of a myth.
It is not a myth that Rudel had his guns harmonised at 100m, and why would he do that if they were reliably effective at a longer range?
I have the penetration graph for the BK 3,7 in front of me. At 100m it penetrates 140mm at 90 degrees, about 70mm at 60 degrees and about 45mm at 45 degrees. At 600m (the graph doesn't show any intermediate distances) it penetrates 95mm at 90 degrees, 47mm at 60 degrees and less than 30mm at 45 degrees.
Tony Williams
-
I was very suprised at that in your book Tony.
100 meter harmonization vs a target that is practically stationary must have made for some scary pull ups.
It also indicates that he didnt worry about attacking the top. With 140mm of penetration and a 100 meter harmonization he would have just attacked the sides and rear.
-
At 600m (the graph doesn't show any intermediate distances) it penetrates 95mm at 90 degrees, 47mm at 60 degrees and less than 30mm at 45 degrees.
Wow, the 37mm AP penetration still surpasses the Panzer IV armour even at 600m.
That's a really nasty gun!
-
That doesn't seem all that impressive.. I think the 23mm on the IL-2 can penetrate the roof on a Panzer IV at 600+ meters, as can the Hurri-2D. Only problem for the Hurri is actually connecting at that range.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
That doesn't seem all that impressive.. I think the 23mm on the IL-2 can penetrate the roof on a Panzer IV at 600+ meters, as can the Hurri-2D. Only problem for the Hurri is actually connecting at that range.
Yeah, but the Ju87G penetrates the front hull armor at 600m.
-
Originally posted by Tony Williams
It is not a myth that Rudel had his guns harmonised at 100m, and why would he do that if they were reliably effective at a longer range?
I have the penetration graph for the BK 3,7 in front of me. At 100m it penetrates 140mm at 90 degrees, about 70mm at 60 degrees and about 45mm at 45 degrees. At 600m (the graph doesn't show any intermediate distances) it penetrates 95mm at 90 degrees, 47mm at 60 degrees and less than 30mm at 45 degrees.
Tony Williams
Heck thats much better AP performance than the Sherman's 75mm.
-
It is just a bit worse than the 76.2mm F-34 L/42.5, L/41.51 gun on the T-34/76D firing BR-350P APCR ammo. Noticably worse, but not horribly worse.
-
Allied 76.2mm had a 'shatter gap' problem. Rounds with too high an impact velocity would sometimes fail even though their penetration capability was (theoretically) more than adequate.
This was a problem with the British 2 pounder in the desert, and would have decreased the effectiveness of U.S. 76mm and 3" guns against Tigers, Panthers and other vehicles with armor thickness above 70 mm.
The nose of US armor-piercing ammunition of the period was 'soft' (brittle?). When these projectiles impacted armor which matched or exceeded the projectile diameter at a certain spread of velocities, the projectile would shatter and fail.
For the a 76mm APCBC M62 the shell would shatter and fail between 50 meters and 900 meters. These ammunition deficiencies proved that Ordnance tests claiming the 76 mm gun could penetrate a Tiger I's upper front hull to 2,000 yards (1,800 meters) were sadly incorrect.
Here's one story of 2 Tigers being engaged by a mix of Soviet T34/76 and US lend lease Shermans:
The 13.(Tiger) Kompanie, of Panzer Regiment Großdeutschland, reported on the armor protection of the Tiger: "During a scouting patrol two Tigers encountered about 20 Russian tanks on their front, while additional Russian tanks attacked from behind. A battle developed in which the armor and weapons of the Tiger were extraordinarily successful. Both Tigers were hit (mainly by 76.2 mm armor-piercing shells) 10 or more times at ranges from 500 to 1,000 meters. The armor held up all around. Not a single round penetrated through the armor. Also hits in the running gear, in which the suspension arms were torn away, did not immobilize the Tiger. While 76.2 mm anti-tank shells continuously struck outside the armor, on the inside, undisturbed, the commander, gunner, and loader selected targets, aimed, and fired. The end result was 10 enemy tanks knocked out by two Tigers within 15 minutes" (JENTZ, Thomas L.; Germany's TIGER Tanks - Tiger I and II: Combat Tactics; op. cit.).
All this considered, and analyzing the tables above, it stands clear that, "based on opposing ranges, without considering other factors, the Tiger I had only been outclassed by the Russian Josef Stalin heavy tank with the 122 mm gun" (Again, JENTZ, Thomas L.; Germany's TIGER Tanks - Tiger I and II: Combat Tactics; op. cit.). The rule of thumb was that it took at least five American M4 Sherman medium tanks to knock out a cornered Tiger.
Everyone has seen this image:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/pantherhit.jpg)
-
The first Tiger captured by the British was one of 2 knocked out on the Robaa Rd in NA by 6pdr(57mm) AT guns at ranges from 500 to 800yds. This Tiger was penetrated 4 times. It was then transported to the UK while the other was blown up.
The full report is in this book, ISBN 0-11-290426-2
(http://tiger1.info/saumur/photos/livre5.jpg)
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
The first Tiger captured by the British was one of 2 knocked out on the Robaa Rd in NA by 6pdr(57mm) AT guns at ranges from 500 to 800yds. This Tiger was penetrated 4 times. It was then transported to the UK while the other was blown up.
Yes, that is the gun that was modified to be aurofeeding and was installed on the Mosquito FB.Mk XVIII "Tse Tse".
-
The problem with the BK 3,7 Hartkern rounds is that they were easily disrupted, e.g. by the addition of extra stand-off plates, which would cause the shot to yaw so it didn't hit point-first. Against such targets, ordinary solid shot was recommended, but that had a much lower performance.
It's also worth bearing in mind that only a small tungsten core penetrated the tank, and it was a matter of luck whether or not it hit anything vital, so even a penetrating hit might not knock the tank out. The bigger the lump of metal you could penetrate with, the better.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and Discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
-
Perhaps if we get this (http://www.lordpanzer.com/downloads/ST_Stuka.wmv) Stuka it will need to get perked?
:D
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
The first Tiger captured by the British was one of 2 knocked out on the Robaa Rd in NA by 6pdr(57mm) AT guns at ranges from 500 to 800yds. This Tiger was penetrated 4 times. It was then transported to the UK while the other was blown up.
The full report is in this book, ISBN 0-11-290426-2
Somewhat hard to believe the Tiger was penetrated in combat, given that the Brits laters tested the 6pdr against the Tiger I with live fire, and it proved rather disappointing with the normal rounds being incapable of hurting it at all but suicide ranges, even from the side (the detailed report is recited by Jentz). The first Tunis Tiger was IIRC not penetrated, the 6pdr crew got a lucky hit on the turret ring, that jammed the turret and the crew bailed out. The very reason the tank was captured intact by the Brits and was not blown up by German engineers as standard procedure was that the tank was not seriously hurt, just momentarly put out of action. If the common 6pdr had been a capable weapon against the Tiger, I`d see no reason for why would it create that massive fear in CW tank crews, that only had the 6pdr or the even worser (AP-wise) US 75mm in their tanks, why the need for the 17pdr gun and so on.
-
Originally posted by Tony Williams
It is not a myth that Rudel had his guns harmonised at 100m, and why would he do that if they were reliably effective at a longer range?
[/B]
For a zillion other reasons other than the gun being ineffective penetrating armor, like a tank being an even smaller target to hit than a s-e fighter, for which already less than 2-300 m was preferred, or because of the sights limitations, low ammo count so that not one would miss, or because the stuka was slow enough to conviniently stay so close to the target before firing for maximum effect. Besides, harmonizing at 100m still gives an X pattern for the LOF, with greater chance to hit at a wider range (200m) than just concentrating them at 200m.
I have the penetration graph for the BK 3,7 in front of me. At 100m it penetrates 140mm at 90 degrees, about 70mm at 60 degrees and about 45mm at 45 degrees. At 600m (the graph doesn't show any intermediate distances) it penetrates 95mm at 90 degrees, 47mm at 60 degrees and less than 30mm at 45 degrees.[/B]
47mm at 60 degrees at 600m, in other words a typical T-34 is vulnerable anywhere expect the front at _very_ long distances to the BK 3.7, even at less than perfect angle, the sides being 45mm thick, then top armor hardly more than 20mm...
-
Originally posted by Kurfürst
Somewhat hard to believe the Tiger was penetrated in combat, given that the Brits laters tested the 6pdr against the Tiger I with live fire, and it proved rather disappointing with the normal rounds being incapable of hurting it at all but suicide ranges, even from the side (the detailed report is recited by Jentz). The first Tunis Tiger was IIRC not penetrated, the 6pdr crew got a lucky hit on the turret ring, that jammed the turret and the crew bailed out. The very reason the tank was captured intact by the Brits and was not blown up by German engineers as standard procedure was that the tank was not seriously hurt, just momentarly put out of action. If the common 6pdr had been a capable weapon against the Tiger, I`d see no reason for why would it create that massive fear in CW tank crews, that only had the 6pdr or the even worser (AP-wise) US 75mm in their tanks, why the need for the 17pdr gun and so on.
No Barbi, the Robaa Rd Tiger is not the Djebel Djaffa Tiger. The Djebel Djaffa Tiger had been engaged by Churchills, not AT guns, and had its turret jammed. This Tiger was captured approx 2 months after the Robaa Rd Tiger.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Perhaps if we get this (http://www.lordpanzer.com/downloads/ST_Stuka.wmv) Stuka it will need to get perked?
:D
WTF??
-
perking the stuka?
LOL what a joke
-
Now I would love one of those things. But I feel it should be put under the bomber score and not the fighter/attack score.
Second why perk it? Its slow and cant turn very well. There would be no reason to perk it because if the stuka was used for dogfighting then it would easily be outmatched by the fighters.
Canaris
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
WTF??
From the latest Star Trek Enterprise episode.
-
Originally posted by Kurfürst
47mm at 60 degrees at 600m, in other words a typical T-34 is vulnerable anywhere expect the front at _very_ long distances to the BK 3.7, even at less than perfect angle, the sides being 45mm thick, then top armor hardly more than 20mm...
And how about the Russian heavy tanks?
TW
-
Not something we have to worry about in the game right now tony. But in his memoirs Rudel had alot of trouble killing Is2s with his stuka.
Ya is should be perked. Any half decent pilot will be able to get 5 tank kills per sorti with it. It needs to be perked so that it doesnt remove the panzer from the game and so that it has a perk icon!
-
Pongo, have you ever flown our current Stuka? It doesnt need a perk tag, people drop everything to go kill it anyways!
The Stuka-G would be in the same catagory. Maybe a little more armour, but people will still break off and drop everything to go kill one just the same as with real perk planes.
-
Again, stop thinking it in the A2A category. HT/Pyro doesn't perk stuff according to performance. They perk stuff according to balance.
How easy a Ju87G gets killed by other planes does not matter. The only thing matters, as I said, is how menacing this plane is for the GVs.
One shot penetrates a Panzer at any angle, any range, anywhere hit. Close range shot penetrates a Tiger at any angle, any range, anywhere hit. Think about that.
-
A pair of 40mm rounds blows away planes at any angle, so long as said plane is smaller than an A-20, so why aint the Hurri-2D perked? A suicide pilot in a 37mm-armed Yak-9 can take down any bomber or fighter.
A Stuka-G takes a decent pilot who knows how to fight with those kinds of weapons to do any good. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry we got in the MA wont be able to make use of it.
-
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/pantherhit.jpg)
We don't have panthers.
-
Kweassa,
Just for the heck of it I have been trying out the Stuka against tanks a few times lately. Last night I upped a Stuka with the bunker buster 1800 Kg bomb to fight panzers attacking 135. It was a relatively safe air attack because the Panzers were spawning from 144 (Ozkansas) which is a ways away and they had no air cover.
CapnMike was there in a Panzer on the ground trying to intercept the Nit panzers otw our town.
I upped and climbed to 1000 agl which took about the same time as an IL-2. I spotted a panzer's shell fire on our town. He was buried so deep in the trees no icon was visible. I circled a couple of times to let CapnMike know where he was, then began an attack run. As I closed under D1000 I was surprised to see two panzer icons, side by side. I dropped my bomb into the trees, result, both panzers died. Yipee Skippy, never killed two panzers with one bomb before!
Went back to base and rearmed. The panzers respawned and were headed to town again, but this time I saw them in the open. One in front, the second maybe 6 vehicle lengths back, running full speed across desert type moonscape terrain. CapnMike was close in his panzer, but couldn't fire because of the rough terrain hiding them.
I dropped in from 1500 agl, taking a bead on the lead panzer and dropped just behind him. Much to my amazement, and everyone else's, both panzers blew up! Whoa Baby! 2 x bombs = 4 x dead Panzers! I would have loved to have heard the conversation in the tower back at 144 between the two US squad victims!
CapnMike couldn't stand by and watch this anymore. He landed and upped a Stuka too.
Another panzer upped and made it to the trees before CapnMike got there. He dropped a couple of times too low, his bomb failing to explode while I kept an eye on the panzer's movements. The panzer was very careful to stay in the trees, but to no avail. Capnmike dropped his blockbuster in the clear opening next to the tree line, another dead Panzer!
Besdes being great fun, it was enlightening. I don't think I could have done one bit better with the 37 mm gun pods than I did with the bunker buster.
The ONLY reason I was successful was the panzers had no air cover, and failed to bring an Osty with them. An Osty would have taken me out before my drop each time.
I had no problem climbing high enough to make my attacks. It seemed to take about as much time as in an IL-2 to take off and setup for an attack run.
I don't think the G model will be anymore imbalancing than the current D model is with the 1800 KG bomb.
I now have 10% of all the JU-87D kills on Panzers this tour. I hope to finish with a lot more.
PS Edit: I was on the other night when 616FUBAR upped a formation of Lancasters to defend one of our bases from a massive GV attack. In one pass he took out NINE GVs. Nine!
It was great he was able to stop a GV attack on our base. But it's lame as heck that one player can kill nine panzers, ostys, M-16s and Tigers at one time.
High altitude strategic bombers being used as low level tactical anti-GV bombers is the threat to the ground war you are concerned about. They are a way bigger threat to the ground war than a JU87-G is.
-
And...a new toy for those HO hordes...dual 37MM (shivers up the spine)
-
Mosq,
Ya gotta give credit where it is due. 6 - for all of his hormonal imbalance, demonstrated that Linebacker 2 type raids can be, while draconian, brutally effective when done at the proper times.
Wolfala
-
Originally posted by Red Tail 444
And...a new toy for those HO hordes...dual 37MM (shivers up the spine)
No need to worry we already have a plane with dual 40mm AP - and it flys better than a stuka. But nobody very afraid of it. (Edit to add too it does not get flown very much)
-
The "Blitzkrieg formula" will be complete if we get the stuka T-buster :)
-
WTF indeed...
Originally posted by GScholz
From the latest Star Trek Enterprise episode.
Aren't we supposed to take Star Trek a leetle serious?
What is the background of this episode or is it some kind of joke/fantasy/dream?
Would like to know more.
regards,
Ronald
-
With the T34 arriving there will be a better job for the Stuka, hehe.
-
what's the max load ammo for Ju-87G again?
-
12 rds in each weapon, 24 total.
And I'm still having fun blasting tanks with the bunker buster bomb. If it lands anywhere around 1 or 2 tanks they are gonners!
I have 5 kills on T-34s and Panzers in it and 0 deaths. Here's he MA stats:
Ju 87D-3 has 9 Kills of T-34
T-34 has 1 Kills of Ju 87D-3
Ju 87D-3 has 12 Kills of Panzer IV H
Panzer IV H has 7 Kills of Ju 87D-3
Ju 87D-3 has 3 Kills of Tiger I
Tiger I has 3 Kills of Ju 87D-3
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Need perks for it. Otherwise, if the 37mm tungsten-cored AP shot does what it should do, nobody will ever ride the Hurri2D or Il-2 again.
The Hurri2D and the IL-2 is an excellent tank buster, but the Hurri2D needs a good concentrated aim to the tank roof to explode(not disable) a Panzer. Same with IL-2 - need to find right angles to disable or kill Panzers.
In the case of the Tiger, it is almost impossible to even damage it with the Hurri2D, and the IL-2 needs a very good aim, concentrated hits, and luck too. The Tiger even withstands the mighty RS-182 tankbuster rocket.
However, although it is a bit hard to aim, the 37mms on the Stuka will slice Panzers like knife through a butter and wreck havoc on the Tiger.
It takes some skills to kill a Panzer or hurt a Tiger with a Hurri2D and an IL-2 - just plain sucidal strafes doesn't cut it. But if everybody can have Ju87G for free, and just go crashing into the tank with guns blazing, since a few hits will punch through the armour.. why'd anyone bother to even use a tank?
I suggest 10~15 perks. Yeah, it's a slow lumbering plane, easy kill for a fighter.
But its ability to do what it is intended to do, is more than enough to unbalance the arena in terms of GV battles.
They hurri still is good in the fighter roll where the ju87 would die at. you can atleast jump low flying bomber groups with a hurri mess them up and get away. the ju87g would more likely be chased by bombers then actually attack them. since the G would loose it's big bomb it would be reduced to nothing but tank busting. it's a dead can of spam vs fighter the hurri can do this. it couldn't catch a bomber both the hurri and to some extent the il2 can do this. and it would be dog meat to ack and flack when attacking bases where the il2 excels at the bomber attack roll the G would perty much still only be limited to anti-tank missions the reg ju87 wold be beter at hitting fortified structures and dive bombing in a one hit wonder mode. there really would be no reason to perk the ju87g after the first weak or two your only going to see them used against t34s panzers and tigers specifically while the me110 il2 will mostly be used as general perpose attack roll against all vehilces in general and regular ground targets like guns and buildings. and the huri as an attack fighter against just about every thing from the HO dweeb to bombers to tanks to hangers. the reg ju88 will be used for shore battery bunker busting and major structers as well as tigers and osties. it will also gives another early war bird to use in historical scenerios.