Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: GRUNHERZ on March 22, 2007, 09:00:16 AM
-
And its a model with a much more powerful gun than a Tiger I....
Will it be perked?
-
no caus its about time that we got a gv able to kill the bloody Tiger tank!
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
And its a model with a much more powerful gun than a Tiger I....
Will it be perked?
Umm no its not.
Bronk
-
I do not think it should be perked. A T34 can take it out. So yes it can kill a Tiger, but it is very easy to kill..I think it evens things out a bit.
-BB
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
And its a model with a much more powerful gun than a Tiger I....
If it was then everybody would be driving it.
-
As BBBB already said, a t34 can take out a sherman. So no, not everybody will be driving it.
-
i can see 50 enemy unperked shermans camping tank town now...the whole point of the tiger is its extremely difficult to kill...and it cost alot of perkys so people want to kill it...
-
think there may be a reason why it was nicknamed the Tommy Cooker
-
Originally posted by jaxxo
i can see 50 enemy unperked shermans camping tank town now...the whole point of the tiger is its extremely difficult to kill...and it cost alot of perkys so people want to kill it...
And while I carpet bomb I can see...
System: You shot down ShermanPhag #50
-
If the Sherman in modeled correctly, you should be able to up a formation of them (like bombers). AIUI, it took a squad of Shermans working together to kill a single Tiger. (BTW, working together meant several dead Shermans to one dead Tiger)
-
Originally posted by JCLerch
If the Sherman in modeled correctly, you should be able to up a formation of them (like bombers). AIUI, it took a squad of Shermans working together to kill a single Tiger. (BTW, working together meant several dead Shermans to one dead Tiger)
I cry on the inside.
-
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
And its a model with a much more powerful gun than a Tiger I....
Will it be perked?
may be wrong here, but isnt it a 75mm gun on the Sherman, and a 88mm on the Tiger? Doesnt that make the Tiger more powerful?
-
Originally posted by macleod01
may be wrong here, but isnt it a 75mm gun on the Sherman, and a 88mm on the Tiger? Doesnt that make the Tiger more powerful?
We are getting a firefly with a 17 pounder.
Capable of punching through tiger's frontal armor at appox 1000 yards.
Thats with standard ammo.
The trick will be getting that close.
:D
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
Capable of punching through tiger's frontal armor at appox 1000 yards.
And the Tiger could punch through a Shermans frontal armour at...?
-
25 miles, roundabouts :rofl
-
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiight. So WHY do we need to perk the Sherman if th etiger could whip its lousy ass?
-
Originally posted by macleod01
And the Tiger could punch through a Shermans frontal armour at...?
Note i said "The trick will be getting that close.".
Quite sure it that 88 can plink em from much farther out.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by macleod01
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. So WHY do we need to perk the Sherman if th etiger could whip its lousy ass?
I never said it should.
It's a great way to keep lazy campers on their toes.
It's Eny should be close to the panzer . IMHO however.
Bronk
-
wasnt aimed at you Bronk. Grunherz is asking if it is perked, but if its not as good as the tiger, whats the point!
-
The Sherman was fast compared to the Tiger, it could get around it quick , as the Tiger had to start up and pivot to help get its slow moving turret to turn towards the oncoming Sherman.
Sure the Sherman had little frontal armor , and the Tank Crews started naming them " Zippo " cause all it took was 1 strike and it was ablase.
Its going to be interesting to se how this works out with the Sherman, over all it will be a good addition but I feel it will be an easy death trap, and the guys in the PnZr and Tigger will have a field day with this thing.
-
Rgr, was just trying to clarify.
Bronk
-
Originally posted by macleod01
wasnt aimed at you Bronk. Grunherz is asking if it is perked, but if its not as good as the tiger, whats the point!
Same as having the F4U-1C and Me262 both perked. One is cheaper.
Note: This is not an endorsement of perking the Firefly.
-
However, once the inevitable "bugs" / newness are worked out.
If the firefly becomes the spit XVI/La7 of the gv world.
IE almost perk performance without the price.
I'd say that lowering of the tigers perk cost wold be in order.
Bronk
-
I bet Fireflies will be targets of choice for Hurri IID's and Yak 9T's. Even the much underused M-8 can bust it up if it gets close enough and goes for flanking or rear shots.
Expect the upgunned Sherman (weren't they called Ronson's, not zippo's? The motto was "lights first time, every time" for their lighter if I recall correctly) to be quite powerful offensively; however, I don't see it landing any big kill streaks since it will take hits like a 12-yr old girl.
-
Originally posted by Warspawn
I bet Fireflies will be targets of choice for Hurri IID's and Yak 9T's. Even the much underused M-8 can bust it up if it gets close enough and goes for flanking or rear shots.
Expect the upgunned Sherman (weren't they called Ronson's, not zippo's? The motto was "lights first time, every time" for their lighter if I recall correctly) to be quite powerful offensively; however, I don't see it landing any big kill streaks since it will take hits like a 12-yr old girl.
No more or less than the Pz.IV Ausf H or T-34/76(43).
-
Originally posted by quintv
No more or less than the Pz.IV Ausf H or T-34/76(43).
You're comparing Sherman armor to a Panzer IV-H or the T-34?
Everything I've read pointed towards the Sherman's defensive armor to be virtually useless against most of the dedicated anti-armor weapons of the time. Even the Pak36(t) 47mm anti-tank gun would penetrate and light 'em up. I'll go look up some of the details in a bit...
*edit* the Sherman had 2" front armor, while the Panzer had 80mm hull (over 3 inches). 50% more armor on the hull seems like a significant advantage to me. This is before comparing the actual 'type' of steel used and the hull slope. I'm sure there are plenty more folks here with better resources to check the assumption you're making that the Sherman had equivalent armor to the T-34 and PZ-IVH.
-
I would welcome those people to weigh in and enlighten you. There are a good amount of factors here that you seem to not even know off. But this is a battle I don't feel the need to fight, I'm sure HTC will do its best in modeling (within reason, this isn't a Tank sim and I don't expect it the GVs to be treated with that much attention).
The Pak.36 is a 3.7cm weapon.
-
Yep, mistype. Meant the 37mm, not 47mm, lol...although there was a 47mm Pak 35/36 (ö)...
And yeah, I'd love to hear the reasons that a Sherman had better armor protection than a PZ-IVH or the T-34. Type of steel, hardness (homogenous, rolled, ect...even different types of welding methods and plate overlap), slope, ect...even the areas of protection would be important.
-
Originally posted by macleod01
may be wrong here, but isnt it a 75mm gun on the Sherman, and a 88mm on the Tiger? Doesnt that make the Tiger more powerful?
Well, the Sherman had plenty of variants and this "Sherman Firefly" was one of them, its armed with a 17 Pounder that is very capable of destroying a Tiger or (Not in AH) a Panther
-
Well the Sherman 'Firefly' could take out a Tiger but only if the Tiger doesn't see him first. The Tiger will outrange the Firefly easily and the Sherman will burn with one hit.
It will be very interesting to see how it's used on AH. In my experience 'at the front':aok Whenever a Tiger is about it is usually mobbed by a flock of Panzer IV's or T34's. With the Sherman in play, I think there will almost certainly be an echo of historical reality. With a Tiger on the prowl, everyone will up a Sherman. The Tiger will kill most of them but it only takes one to get through!
I think the Sherman will be perked eventually. With that big gun, capable of killing everything up and including a Tiger. Why would you up in anything else except a Tiger?
-
sherman = fun
:p
-
Originally posted by Warspawn
You're comparing Sherman armor to a Panzer IV-H or the T-34?
Everything I've read pointed towards the Sherman's defensive armor to be virtually useless against most of the dedicated anti-armor weapons of the time. Even the Pak36(t) 47mm anti-tank gun would penetrate and light 'em up. I'll go look up some of the details in a bit...
*edit* the Sherman had 2" front armor, while the Panzer had 80mm hull (over 3 inches). 50% more armor on the hull seems like a significant advantage to me. This is before comparing the actual 'type' of steel used and the hull slope. I'm sure there are plenty more folks here with better resources to check the assumption you're making that the Sherman had equivalent armor to the T-34 and PZ-IVH.
Try this site for a quick and dirty view of Sherman armor thicknesses. (http://sitehttp://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m4sherman.html)
You'll notice the early version M4A1 listed shows the often-cited "only 2 inches of armor" statistic on the front hull. You will also notice, however, that the turrets were 3 inches thick in the front, even on the earlier versions. Later versions have thicker armor in the hull. Also note the slope of the frontal armor. A slope increases the "effective thickness" vs. shooting a horizontal metal plate. By comparison, although the frontal armor of the late PzkwIVs was a bit thicker, there was virtually no slope to the armor. So in terms of protection, there was little difference.
Hope that helps a bit.