Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: mjtaylor on January 17, 2007, 03:25:16 PM
-
although the M4 Sherman is weak and all (with fire power and protection), it still was a lethal war winning machine and most widely used! we need it!
-
Heck YES! I don't care what you guys say this tank is Important! I don't care if it sucks, I'm sick and tired of T-34s, Panzers, and Tigers. I want that Sherman, I don't care which modle it is, but I want one. I don't care what you "That tank would be outclassed" people say. I want an American tank, and I want it when HTC says lets make a GV now guys. I can wait HTC, but please let the next vehical that comes out be the sherman. Like I said in another post long long time ago. The more heavily armored tanks we get in this game, the less tanks like the sherman we well get. Please no more heavy tanks for awhile (as in fire power and armor)
-
Why don't you try making it?
-
Be cool to see for a bit I have to admit. Would get tiring though, you'de up, shoot two ineffective shells at a panzer, get blasted.
Up, get blasted, up, get blasted.
Up...run 5 feet, get blasted.
-
if u want american armor i would say M-10 Tank Destroyer
(http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/m10.jpg)
it could have a fighting chance aganst a Panzer:rolleyes:
-
There was some kid a while back that posted a topic about making models, I think the thread was called "im doing something cool when not on the internet" or something like that. Beware though, the models he made looked like total and absolute garbage. Better study his so yours wont look as bad
-
admit we need a different tank, you know it
panzers are good, shermans suck, but its somthin better that a t34 to face a panzer
-
Originally posted by Meatwad
There was some kid a while back that posted a topic about making models, i think the thread was called "im doing something cool when not on the internet" or something like that. Beare though, the models he made looked like total and absolute garbage. Better study his so yours wont look as bad
(absolete spelled wrong, corrected)
who was that person thing?
-
Originally posted by Meatwad
There was some kid a while back that posted a topic about making models, i think the thread was called "im doing something cool when not on the internet" or something like that. Beare though, the models he made looked like total and absolete garbage. Better study his so yours wont look as bad
:rofl
-
who was it?
-
Originally posted by VooWho
Heck YES! I don't care what you guys say this tank is Important! I don't care if it sucks, I'm sick and tired of T-34s, Panzers, and Tigers. I want that Sherman, I don't care which modle it is, but I want one. I don't care what you "That tank would be outclassed" people say. I want an American tank, and I want it when HTC says lets make a GV now guys. I can wait HTC, but please let the next vehical that comes out be the sherman. Like I said in another post long long time ago. The more heavily armored tanks we get in this game, the less tanks like the sherman we well get. Please no more heavy tanks for awhile (as in fire power and armor)
amen
-
Originally posted by Denholm
Why don't you try making it?
how?
-
http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=185898
:lol
-
The sherman would be a bit overmatched by the PZIV. The upgunned "easy 8" would be a better option but still a bit overmatched. Realistically the best varient would be the "firefly". This was a british varient utilizing the 17pder. It was capable of penetrating a tigers frontal armour at 1000M with standard AP rounds. When the APDS rounds were available it could defeat a tiger at 2000M (frontal armour)....
-
Greetings,
Depending on the variant, the Sherman is a match for the Pnzr IV. The Pnzr V and VI out matched it on a 'nose to nose' basis. The only question I have is how well the armor on different arcs is assessed in the game.
Almost anything (at least from 50mm AT wpn on up) should be able to take out a Pnzr VI from the rear. Caliber .50 should pentrate from the top.
History shows the US traded 4 Shermans to get one Tiger. Fortunately, we were able to build and man 5....
Regards,
-
Originally posted by humble
The sherman would be a bit overmatched by the PZIV. The upgunned "easy 8" would be a better option but still a bit overmatched. Realistically the best varient would be the "firefly". This was a british varient utilizing the 17pder. It was capable of penetrating a tigers frontal armour at 1000M with standard AP rounds. When the APDS rounds were available it could defeat a tiger at 2000M (frontal armour)....
what was the most used sherman type? the plain M4 type! even the tiger was more produced then the firefly! remember go to: http://www.battletanks.com
see how cool the sherman was!
-
Originally posted by MWL
Greetings,
Depending on the variant, the Sherman is a match for the Pnzr IV. The Pnzr V and VI out matched it on a 'nose to nose' basis. The only question I have is how well the armor on different arcs is assessed in the game.
Almost anything (at least from 50mm AT wpn on up) should be able to take out a Pnzr VI from the rear. Caliber .50 should pentrate from the top.
History shows the US traded 4 Shermans to get one Tiger. Fortunately, we were able to build and man 5....
Regards,
any sherman can fight a panzer!
-
but we should atleast get a sherman DD for water attacks!
-
Originally posted by Denholm
http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=185898
:lol
This is hilarious!
:rofl
-
He still doesn't know!:lol :rofl
-
I agree we need more tanks, esp since theres only one perk tank thats not alot of selection for hard earned perks. I would love to see a king tiger ( tiger II) in game just to watch everyone and thier mother try to gang rape you.
We have 2000 variations of 109s spits and fws but not the whole german or american tank line. Maybe all the current effort is going into CT but would be cool to have a bone thrown to the gv dogs.
And actually I read that the german panther tank was better overall, better gun speed and armor. Gimme!
90prf
-
As VooWho said, the more heavy armored tanks we get in this game, the less likely they will get a sherman. So..... GIMMIE THE PANTHER!:cool:
-
Thats right. I'll take a panther.
-
Wow, now it's really easy to see how badly you want an M4.:D
-
I really want one man. Just a sexy tank. I'll take it to battle. I'll even take it to battle today. (The Isreal Type)
-
Originally posted by Denholm
http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=185898
:lol
Can't believe those guys in that thread fell for the troll.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Can't believe those guys in that thread fell for the troll.
ack-ack
If you ignore taylor, it was a nice thread. That's what I was doing most of the time (ignoring taylor)
-
If you were going to introduce the Sherman chassis it would have to be the Firefly or one of the tank destroyer variants, if you put in a TD then you'll have non-stop complaints about how .303's knocked out my tank...better to go with the firefly. Granted the regular old M-4 was the most widely used but even the people who thought it was a good tank admitted it was outclassed by nearly everything on the field ( except maybe the Stuart :lol ). It was fast & maneuverable but that won't help much in the AH world.
-
Yep, make it the Firefly or go with the M-10.
-
I agree with you, Sherman is a must have, maybe the Firefly is the best choice.
But a Matilda or a Grant would be also very welcome! I even promise to produce a Desert Rats skin for them! It's half made, anyway, but on a Panzer...
When a British or American tank comes in, I'll also make a Desert Rats skin for the M3, M8 and Jeep.
Cheers,
Sparow
249 Sqn RAF "Gold Coast"
-
we can always use it to divert germans gvs from our base:p
but we need a lot cuz the tigers would fry our sherman butts XD
or we can use it to kill light armored tanks. like M3,jeep,M16, maybe panzer if we hit right spot.
-
Why not the Pershing? Would add a US armored vehicle capable of going toe to toe with a Tiger.
ack-ack
-
Why does no one want the Sherman. A Sherman can take out a tiger, if you get on its butt. Yes the Pershing would be nice, but this thread is about the Sherman. Like I've said, you start adding all these late war tanks, (like the planes) we won't get no Sherman or any earlier weaker tank of the war, that saw great numbers. The reason why we don't have French fighters, or early war fighters is because we have too many 1943-45 planes that would just smoke the early fighters in every thing. If we get a sherman, add the panzer III to the game or something, that it could match.
-
Haven't you noticed why we're talking about all these other great heavy armored tanks? We want the chances of the M4 becoming part of the game to be SLIM.
-
Originally posted by mjtaylor
although the M4 Sherman is weak and all (with fire power and protection), it still was a lethal war winning machine and most widely used! we need it!
It was a machine of attrition. The Allies could afford to loose Sherman tanks at 3 or 4 times the rate of the (fuel-starved) Germans, and still push them back.
You want a Sherman? Take out an M-8, and stay in first or second gear only. THAT is a Sherman. See how well you do in it against Panzers and Tigers.
Only reason a sherman could kill a tiger from behind, was the tiger was busy killing all the sherman's fellow tanks.
A Sherman tank would be nothing more than a hangar queen in this game. Too easy to kill.
-
I agree with most of that, the Sherman gun was more powerful than the M-8 & it was better armored but as the modeling in this game goes it would be close to the same thing. Firefly (it's a Sherman be glad), the Pershing or my #1 want, the Panther. We need a mid perk tank to combat the Tigers when we are eny strapped, but even that won't help a lot of the time..I couldn't even up a panzer the other day, just a T-34 because of the eny.
Giving the T-34 a high velocity gun or perked HV ammo even would be a big plus, that could also be done with the Sherman if we had one.
The allies do need a tank in the game & the Firefly would be the best all around choice imo because, it was a Sherman for all intents & purposes but it was a British tank so it could be used in Scenarios easier with different skins & gun packages applied it would sort of kill two birds with one stone so to speak.
-
SHERMAN want it the most. M10 awsome panther awsome. NEED MORE GVS german american british japaneese and Russian give us all of them HTC i would use shermans alot but we need tanks...we have 3 tanks, an M8, some anti air gvs and transport but WE NEED TANKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! b00bman
-
Why don't you guys spend your effort on getting tunnels before GV's? That way the game is more fun, and you get some GV's to add to the excitement afterwards.
-
well if u do put the m-4 sherman get the m-4 sherman firefly it have the same gun as the t-34
-
Originally posted by flyboy97
well if u do put the m-4 sherman get the m-4 sherman firefly it have the same gun as the t-34
:lol That's comedy. :lol
-
Originally posted by Krusty
If you ignore taylor, it was a nice thread. That's what I was doing most of the time (ignoring taylor)
Yep, me and Krusty had a good conversation, then some others guys joined in. It was a good time.
If you want a Sherman, take up an M8. It's nearly ineffective against tanks and it's armor sucks.:aok Oh, and it's faster.
-
Originally posted by tedrbr
It was a machine of attrition. The Allies could afford to loose Sherman tanks at 3 or 4 times the rate of the (fuel-starved) Germans, and still push them back.
You want a Sherman? Take out an M-8, and stay in first or second gear only. THAT is a Sherman. See how well you do in it against Panzers and Tigers.
Only reason a sherman could kill a tiger from behind, was the tiger was busy killing all the sherman's fellow tanks.
A Sherman tank would be nothing more than a hangar queen in this game. Too easy to kill.
ummm will we just stick with the sherman! all the tanks that r in here r late war production! just give us the sherman! take peabody for example, he uses the T-34 because there isn't a good american or japanese tank on here! Say since the D-Day map thing just won't come out i'll work on a great 1! I'll need the DD sherman though :D for an allied tank to land!!!!!!
Also, why isn't there a western front tank for the allies that was medium? We could use the churchhill, what about that????? So either we get a great western allied tank or this game is just plain boreing!!!!! You have to give the western front allies some credit!
-
http://www.battletanks.com/new_page_15.htm
http://www.battletanks.com/m4_w_flamethrower.htm
http://www.battletanks.com/m4_w_dd.htm
http://www.battletanks.com/m4_w_rocket_l.htm
http://www.battletanks.com/m4a3_sherman.htm
also check out more tanks at:
www.battletanks.com (http://www.battletanks.com)
-
If you think that not giving this game a western front tank will make this game boring, check the credentials:
download.com > Simulation > Flight > WWII > Aces High II
I would never doubt C/NET, nor download.com ontop of that!
-
althou having a allied tank wold be nice... the M-4 Sherman is nothing more than a large metal casket...
this would be how many shots it would take to take down a M-4...
pnzr - 1-2 shots
tiger - 1 shot (anywhere)
t-34 - 1-2 shots
m8 - 3-6 shots
the only reason the m-4 was good was because of the number made...
alone the m-4 is worse than the m-16
and last but not least, the only version of the m-4 I would want is the firefly, other wise it would be the official GV hangar queen...
-
The only reason why no one wants the Sherman is because theres no tanks that it can compete with in AH. How about we add more sucky tanks instead of the ultimate tanks of the war. How about we get a Sherman, Panzer III, Matilda, Crusader, those other russian tanks, those crappy japanese tanks, those crappy Italian tanks, and all those other tanks. If we had more of these tanks, then the Sherman would have more tanks in its class. If we get more tanks like the tiger, panther, and those big prettythang German tanks, then we well never see anything like the sherman in the game, because people well say this "It won't match up to the Tiger" "Its has a crappy gun" "It has thin armor" "Its too slow" "Its got no competition" blah blah blah. If we get say the King Tiger then there is no hope for anymore tanks as though "Nothing can compete with it" Add the Sherman it won't kill us to have a sucky tank.
-
I wouldnt mind having a Matilda II or a Crusader III (perked maybe?)
-
Originally posted by Nemeth
althou having a allied tank wold be nice... the M-4 Sherman is nothing more than a large metal casket...
this would be how many shots it would take to take down a M-4...
pnzr - 1-2 shots
tiger - 1 shot (anywhere)
t-34 - 1-2 shots
m8 - 3-6 shots
the only reason the m-4 was good was because of the number made...
alone the m-4 is worse than the m-16
and last but not least, the only version of the m-4 I would want is the firefly, other wise it would be the official GV hangar queen...
I do not understand your reasoning. How many shots does it take to kill the current Pzkw IV?
pnzr - 1-2 shots
tiger - 1 shot (anywhere)
t-34 - 1-2 shots
m8 - 3-6 shots
And the only difference between that and firing against the T-34 is with the slope on the T-34, you are more prone to get a richochet.
As for the snub 75mm on the standard M-4, it would be about as effective as the T-34's 76mm gun, but with a higher rate of fire and better visability. (It also had a more effective HE round, but I doubt that would be modeled.) Add on the .50cal AAMG on the Sherman, and I would take it over the T-34 on most occasions in AH.
The only reason the modeled Pzkw IV has any advantage on the standard Sherman is the better gun. That is due to the fact that the we have the (H) model IV, i.e. a late war variant. If the Sherman were modeled to its later variants, it would probably be the E8, which had a gun equal to the IV (H), or the Firefly, which had a gun superior to even the Tiger in terms of armor penetration.
Model an early war Pzkw IV(C) through (E), and it is inferior to the standard M-4. Model a mid-war (F) or (G), and they are about identical.
The standard M-4 is an early-to-mid-war, medium tank. Because it couldn't go toe-to-toe with late war and heavier tanks, it was a dog? LMAO, people.
-
lol, we can use it as a scout tank like the M8 or we can use it to immobilize the enemy gvs by shooting their tracks.:D
-
Why aim for tracks when you can clearly see their heads?
-
M-36 jackson = pwn
M-36b1 = M4
-
personally im a fan of the m4...but i do also realize that it would get slaughtered almost instantly if left in the open. however, it would make the game more realistic. And those of u that dont want the sherman just dont drive it. But dont cry when i blast you away.:t
Flameboy
-
Hi chaps,
I agree with many of you. The problem is that armour in AH started with very good, very late war models.
In an ideal world we would have at least a medium and a heavy tank of each Allied and Axis country - maybe not the Japanese, French and Italian - but certainly, German, Russian, British, and American for each period, Early, Medium and Late War, what would give us lots of room to play with balance and perks. A minimum of 24 models is a lot to ask...
How would I solve it? It's simple: Panzer III and Matilda for Early War, Sherman (Firefly), Panzer 4 and T34 for Mid War, all + Tiger (perked) for Late War! Only two new models and a downgrade, if you consider the Pz III and the IV shared basically the same chassis, with less armour, less power and a smaller gun, for the III!
This setup would be just enough to let us have more realistic Special Events, and historical maps.
Just my €0,02 cents,
Sparrow
249 Sqn RAF "Gold Coast"
-
Originally posted by sparow
Hi chaps,
I agree with many of you. The problem is that armour in AH started with very good, very late war models.
In an ideal world we would have at least a medium and a heavy tank of each Allied and Axis country - maybe not the Japanese, French and Italian - but certainly, German, Russian, British, and American for each period, Early, Medium and Late War, what would give us lots of room to play with balance and perks. A minimum of 24 models is a lot to ask...
How would I solve it? It's simple: Panzer III and Matilda for Early War, Sherman (Firefly), Panzer 4 and T34 for Mid War, all + Tiger (perked) for Late War! Only two new models and a downgrade, if you consider the Pz III and the IV shared basically the same chassis, with less armour, less power and a smaller gun, for the III!
This setup would be just enough to let us have more realistic Special Events, and historical maps.
Just my €0,02 cents,
Sparrow
249 Sqn RAF "Gold Coast"
Now thats a plan for AH. I like it. Gives us tanks from all time periods.
-
There were many late war models that were tough, the Tiger wasn't what I would consider a "late war" tank, mid war maybe for the accumulation of decent numbers of them, but the first production model was available in July of 1942...mid war for the Germans, early war for the U.S.
A King Tiger was destroyed by a Pershing near the end of the war, so it's clear the gun on the Pershing would get the job done even on the German "super heavies" (not counting the one of a kind specialty tanks like the Maus). I am with the poster (Sparow?) who says put in tanks that require as little modeling as possible. That's what I was saying about the Firefly, it can serve as more than one tank with minor changes.
You could have later model T-34's with changes in the gun package available, it's little things like that, that could add variety with minimal effort.
I seriously doubt that HTC is going to add anything more powerful than the Tiger in the foreseeable future, like the Jagdtiger, Sturmtiger, Elephant, Jagdpanther etc. etc. I would like to see a Panther added, but an allied heavy tank that can stand a chance against the Tiger in open field would be sweet too.
-
I wouldnt mind seeing towable AA/AT/howitzer guns, but the about of tone needed to code that into the game would be too time consuming as this current time
-
Cromwell? Comet? Pretty please...
-
Originally posted by sparow
Hi chaps,
I agree with many of you. The problem is that armour in AH started with very good, very late war models.
In an ideal world we would have at least a medium and a heavy tank of each Allied and Axis country - maybe not the Japanese, French and Italian - but certainly, German, Russian, British, and American for each period, Early, Medium and Late War, what would give us lots of room to play with balance and perks. A minimum of 24 models is a lot to ask...
How would I solve it? It's simple: Panzer III and Matilda for Early War, Sherman (Firefly), Panzer 4 and T34 for Mid War, all + Tiger (perked) for Late War! Only two new models and a downgrade, if you consider the Pz III and the IV shared basically the same chassis, with less armour, less power and a smaller gun, for the III!
This setup would be just enough to let us have more realistic Special Events, and historical maps.
Just my €0,02 cents,
Sparrow
249 Sqn RAF "Gold Coast"
Amen!!!
Armoured cars too? the 222, 232, 234?
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_VIII_Maus
Looks like this could have been the winner!
-
wish we had that 1st tank thing.....was really hard to kill from air.....too much armor....easy for panzer + tiger...but still
-
Originally posted by VooWho
The only reason why no one wants the Sherman is because theres no tanks that it can compete with in AH. How about we add more sucky tanks instead of the ultimate tanks of the war. How about we get a Sherman, Panzer III, Matilda, Crusader, those other russian tanks, those crappy japanese tanks, those crappy Italian tanks, and all those other tanks. If we had more of these tanks, then the Sherman would have more tanks in its class. If we get more tanks like the tiger, panther, and those big prettythang German tanks, then we well never see anything like the sherman in the game, because people well say this "It won't match up to the Tiger" "Its has a crappy gun" "It has thin armor" "Its too slow" "Its got no competition" blah blah blah. If we get say the King Tiger then there is no hope for anymore tanks as though "Nothing can compete with it" Add the Sherman it won't kill us to have a sucky tank.
amen, hey if we have thein 8-player, it would be called "BAD TANKS OF THE WAR AND 1 GOOD 1 (THE M4 SHERMAN)" :lol :rofl :p :cool: :D ;) :)
-
Originally posted by Martyn
Cromwell? Comet? Pretty please...
cromwell is like the sherman, low volocity 75mm cannon, but thicker armor (slightly) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cromwell_tank http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_Sherman (well according to those same, well worse)
comet would be alright, it would nice though, but want sherman!
who watches The Military Channel's "Tank OverHaul"?
-
(http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/sign0094.gif) (http://www.thesmilies.com)
A little reality check for the thread:
VooWho The only reason why no one wants the Sherman is because theres no tanks that it can compete with in AH. How about we add more sucky tanks instead of the ultimate tanks of the war.
sparow I agree with many of you. The problem is that armour in AH started with very good, very late war models.
In an ideal world we would have at least a medium and a heavy tank of each Allied and Axis country - maybe not the Japanese, French and Italian - but certainly, German, Russian, British, and American for each period, Early, Medium and Late War, what would give us lots of room to play with balance and perks.
* Most seem to agree that the Sherman added, alone and on it's own merits to the game with the current GV's in use now, would be a hangar queen, and unable to compete with the other tanks in the game.
* By sparow'spost: So, at a minimum add 5 additional tanks to the existing 3? The answer in order to get Shermans in-game, and playable as opposed to being hangar queens, is to add large numbers of weaker tanks, and I suppose heavily perk the heavy tanks?
* All these weaker tanks you want would be just so much cannon fodder to IL-2's, Hurries, Mossies, and Yak-9T's prowling over the fields, and fewer GV's able to afford the perk price of the heavier tanks (priced to force players into weaker tanks in the first place). I can kill multiple Osties, Panzers and even Tiger's with an IL-2 sortie.... what chance would a Sherman have?
* You are talking about adding a half dozen GV's to what is primarily an air combat game, where the fighter and bomber pilots can't get any additions to the planeset. We've seen, what, the F4U-1A (which still doesn't show on the website) and the Jeep in the last 1-1/2 to 2 years? What are the chances of seeing more than 1 GV addition in the next 2 years? You'll be luck to see 1 addition, you certainly are not going to see multiple GV's added to the game.
Now, I've argued elsewhere that both the buff drivers and the GVr's need an addition each for their perks. For GVr's, I've suggested a Towed 88mm Flak 36 would be the best choice.... around for Early War, enable a manned puffy ack to force buffs to higher altitudes, and help in defense, add player controlled indirect artillery with HE and Smoke, and add a long distance direct fire AP weapon. Weak defense due to exposed crews is the trade off. Light perk to limit overuse.
Thread Here (http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=198029) It gives you something different with multiple roles, while asking for just one addition to the GV-set. I doubt it would be a hangar queen.
So, given that you get the possibility of ONE addition to the GV set in the foreseeable future, EW, MW, or LW timeframe: would YOU chose the Sherman?
(http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/confused0050.gif) (http://www.thesmilies.com)
-
Originally posted by tedrbr
(http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/sign0094.gif) (http://www.thesmilies.com)
A little reality check for the thread:
* Most seem to agree that the Sherman added, alone and on it's own merits to the game with the current GV's in use now, would be a hangar queen, and unable to compete with the other tanks in the game.
I disagree. See my previous post.
Originally posted by tedrbr
* By sparow'spost: So, at a minimum add 5 additional tanks to the existing 3? The answer in order to get Shermans in-game, and playable as opposed to being hangar queens, is to add large numbers of weaker tanks, and I suppose heavily perk the heavy tanks?
Presupposes the Sherman would be a hanger queen. It would not. Therefore, invalid point.
Originally posted by tedrbr
* All these weaker tanks you want would be just so much cannon fodder to IL-2's, Hurries, Mossies, and Yak-9T's prowling over the fields, and fewer GV's able to afford the perk price of the heavier tanks (priced to force players into weaker tanks in the first place). I can kill multiple Osties, Panzers and even Tiger's with an IL-2 sortie.... what chance would a Sherman have?
Better chance than the Panzer due to the more effective AA gun.
Originally posted by tedrbr
* You are talking about adding a half dozen GV's to what is primarily an air combat game, where the fighter and bomber pilots can't get any additions to the planeset. We've seen, what, the F4U-1A (which still doesn't show on the website) and the Jeep in the last 1-1/2 to 2 years? What are the chances of seeing more than 1 GV addition in the next 2 years? You'll be luck to see 1 addition, you certainly are not going to see multiple GV's added to the game.
Still operating off of the first erroneous assumption. Invalid point.
Originally posted by tedrbr
Now, I've argued elsewhere that both the buff drivers and the GVr's need an addition each for their perks. For GVr's, I've suggested a Towed 88mm Flak 36 would be the best choice.... around for Early War, enable a manned puffy ack to force buffs to higher altitudes, and help in defense, add player controlled indirect artillery with HE and Smoke, and add a long distance direct fire AP weapon. Weak defense due to exposed crews is the trade off. Light perk to limit overuse.
Thread Here (http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=198029) It gives you something different with multiple roles, while asking for just one addition to the GV-set. I doubt it would be a hangar queen.
But it would seem this would require an entirely different code set vs. adding another tank to the game. This makes your suggestion less likely.
Originally posted by tedrbr
So, given that you get the possibility of ONE addition to the GV set in the foreseeable future, EW, MW, or LW timeframe: would YOU chose the Sherman?
(http://www.thesmilies.com/smilies/confused0050.gif) (http://www.thesmilies.com)
Absolutely.
Those who resist the idea of the Sherman tend to do so due to the Sherman's reputation. I predict that, if modeled correctly, the Sherman would be very competitive -- and the BBs would erupt with complaints about the "overmodeling" of the Sherman, the same as we have constant complainers about the flight models of this-or-that aircraft. HiTech uses hard data to model these things. Hard data about the Sherman suggests even the earlier models would be competitive in AH vs the current set, and some later versions would dominate all but the Tiger.
-
some later versions would dominate all but the Tiger.
:huh say whut? i don't think they would dominate the T-34's:p
-
Originally posted by Wes14
:huh say whut? i don't think they would dominate the T-34's:p
The version of the T-34 in AH is an earlier version with the 76mm gun. If we were to get a Sherman Firefly with the British 17 Pounder, for example (better AT gun than the Tiger's 88mm), then yes, the AH T-34 is dominated. :aok
-
i dunno its the driver/gunner more then the tank (unless a fighter(player) uses a M8,lol)
in a H2h room i was in a 30-ish minute fire fight ina T-34 against a tiger (ended in Tie):D
-
Originally posted by E25280
Those who resist the idea of the Sherman tend to do so due to the Sherman's reputation. I predict that, if modeled correctly, the Sherman would be very competitive -- and the BBs would erupt with complaints about the "overmodeling" of the Sherman, the same as we have constant complainers about the flight models of this-or-that aircraft. HiTech uses hard data to model these things. Hard data about the Sherman suggests even the earlier models would be competitive in AH vs the current set, and some later versions would dominate all but the Tiger.
Presupposes the Sherman would be a hanger queen. It would not. Therefore, invalid point.
The Sherman's early 75mm would be typically out-ranged by the Panzer IV's 75mm, though the IV's lower velocity 75mm (compared to Panther's HV 75mm and Tiger's 88mm) may take two shots to kill a Sherman at range. Sherman's armor designed to withstand 50mm rounds. Or you could go with the later Sherman 76mm HVAP gun and rounds, and limit the use of the Sherman to Late War arenas only, but it would be more effective vs the Panzer at longer ranges. So less competitive and MW (maybe EW, forget what years that includes), or more competitive and limited to LW.
The only thing really going for the Sherman over a T-34 is that it mounts a .50 in the cupola. It *might* be a couple miles an hour faster on hardball. Otherwise the T-34 is pretty close in capabilities as the Sherman... so I guess I have to concede the point, the Sherman would not be the hangar queen, the T-34 would be....
End result; gaining one uncommonly used tank while reducing a similar tank to obsolescence in-game. Does not seem an economical use of programming and development time. As far as game modeling, a Sherman would be very nearly a T-34 with a cupola gun added.
Better chance than the Panzer due to the more effective AA gun.
No more effective than the .50 cal mounted on the M3 or jeep now, as far as game code would be concerned. So, no, no better chance than the Panzer, as the Panzer IV has more armor to protect it from the front, maybe a little less to the sides. Just AA, which the T-34 does not have.
Regarding 88mm Flak36: But it would seem this would require an entirely different code set vs. adding another tank to the game. This makes your suggestion less likely.
Most of the code already exists for current GV's like the M16 and M3, Puffy Ack, and the 5 inch guns on CV and CA. A Flak36 would probably resemble a 5-inch gun in use (firing) more than anything. No more difficult than making the adjustments and spec changes for a new tank, just pulling the code from different areas. It's not as if they need to start from scratch. And an 88mm Flak would cover EW to LW.
Finally, the American plane set and GV set are already pretty large compared to everything else in the game already. 6 American Vehicles, 3 German, 1 Russian. A little more variety would not be a bad thing here, especially to support the SEA and AvA Heavy Metal Mondays.