Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: angelsandair on December 04, 2007, 08:51:55 PM

Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: angelsandair on December 04, 2007, 08:51:55 PM
aces high should have the M-10 Tank Destroyer in the game, with other american and british tanks, we need a larger gv selection
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Bodhi on December 05, 2007, 05:45:51 PM
I would argue that we have a large selection of missing Aircraft.
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: angelsandair on December 05, 2007, 09:43:08 PM
yea personally, i think we should have like more bombers personally, like a b-29 that can carry like 20,000 pounds, i really dont care, or some early war planes like the b-18 or the martin b-10 (forget b-10s other more known name)
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Masherbrum on December 06, 2007, 06:15:41 PM
No n00k laden B-29's

No M10's.  

Now, on with the I.A.R. 81c
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: angelsandair on December 06, 2007, 10:59:59 PM
no i said no nukes, but id like more bombers and gvs im pretty sure there is no prolbem with that
Title: Re: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: trigger2 on December 07, 2007, 12:57:39 AM
Quote
I would argue that we have a large selection of missing Aircraft .


Aircraft, the game is aces HIGH (Ace being a 5 kill pilot) Not "Roll around in a tin can" :aok
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: ded on December 07, 2007, 01:03:16 AM
Why would you want it?  So you can complain about getting 1 shot all the time by anything that glances at you?
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Yarbles on December 07, 2007, 07:05:38 AM
I am sure we have a very similar GV vs Planes exchange about once a month. Perhaps this should be a regular event like K of TH or have a tour of its own with points awarded for the person who can find the most new ways of saying AH is about Planes and not GV'S in a month long tour.

Personally I like the planes and also like fighting them from the ground. I am not bothered about fighting other GV'S but I am glad other people are.
:aok
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Redlegs on December 07, 2007, 01:11:14 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Masherbrum
No n00k laden B-29's

No M10's.  

Now, on with the I.A.R. 81c


Iar 81 would be nice but we need other planes a lot more then that. Like He-111.
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Yossarian on December 07, 2007, 02:19:56 PM
personally I find GVs to be usually unexciting when compared to aircraft.  However, it is fun to do things like sneak into an airfield with a furball etc over it and blow stuff up.  or going on a rampage with a M-8, and killing tigers.  I know that some people will definitely disagree with this, but i think on average aircraft are used way more often than GVs
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: angelsandair on December 07, 2007, 08:55:58 PM
well still if there is a big gv fight i wanna get into i dont have much of a selection, and i think we should have the he-111 or the dornier do 17 (i hope i spelled it right),
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: trigger2 on December 08, 2007, 02:31:17 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Yarbles
I am sure we have a very similar GV vs Planes exchange about once a month. Perhaps this should be a regular event like K of TH or have a tour of its own with points awarded for the person who can find the most new ways of saying AH is about Planes and not GV'S in a month long tour.

Personally I like the planes and also like fighting them from the ground. I am not bothered about fighting other GV'S but I am glad other people are.
:aok


Nah, I just think we should update the ALL the aircraft that haven't, bring in somemore of the primaries (i.e. the P61!!) and THEN work on the ground units.
Think our Navy should be up first after aircraft though :]
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Widewing on December 08, 2007, 07:36:04 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Redlegs
Iar 81 would be nice but we need other planes a lot more then that. Like He-111.


Why do we need a hanger queen? We have enough defenseless, under-used aircraft now. The Ju 88 is faster, with a better bomb load. Yet, they are seldom seen except for torpedo attacks on CVs. The reason for that is they are nearly defenseless against heavily armed fighters.

My regards,

Widewing
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Spikes on December 08, 2007, 08:42:42 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Widewing
Yet, they are seldom seen except for torpedo attacks on CVs.


Doesn't the 88 have more ord load than the B17?

I love flying it for town killing...heck...one scenario I made Hurri's overshoot my 88!
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: angelsandair on December 09, 2007, 07:07:41 PM
spikes i like your pic
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Redlegs on December 09, 2007, 07:28:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Widewing
Why do we need a hanger queen? We have enough defenseless, under-used aircraft now. The Ju 88 is faster, with a better bomb load. Yet, they are seldom seen except for torpedo attacks on CVs. The reason for that is they are nearly defenseless against heavily armed fighters.

My regards,

Widewing


Well, the He-111 would be a good EW bomber. And, it'd be more AH relevant, it could be used in a lot more scenarios, as opposed to Operation Tidal Wave  for
the Iar. 81.
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Masherbrum on December 09, 2007, 07:48:04 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Redlegs
Well, the He-111 would be a good EW bomber. And, it'd be more AH relevant, it could be used in a lot more scenarios, as opposed to Operation Tidal Wave  for
the Iar. 81.
Wrong, but I won't bother tying to convince you otherwise.
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: moot on December 09, 2007, 08:21:45 PM
Masherbrum, I don't know much at all about either the 111 or Iar81.  Could you elaborate a bit?
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Angus on December 11, 2007, 04:26:31 PM
What on earth is a He-111 :D

Anyway, easiest bomber inprevements for AH would probably be different loadouts/added loadouts.

And we do have a 20K bomber BTW :D......hint hint!
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: BaldEagl on December 11, 2007, 04:39:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Yossarian
personally I find GVs to be usually unexciting when compared to aircraft.  However, it is fun to do things like... going on a rampage with a M-8, and killing tigers.  


Good luck with that.  I was alone in a Tiger defending a V base the other night when the 68th rushed it with M-8's.  I took at least a hundred hits, had 10 kills and sent several running off smoking before someone was smart enough to roll a Sherman in and finish me off.
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: WWhiskey on December 15, 2007, 10:11:14 AM
O K lets say you can have what you want, who is going to pay for all these new planes and tanks?the taxpayers the hard working people of this great land? you go explain it to them, why you need another tank,another bomber!


but yes the gv part of this game could use more stuff. alot of players dont fly that much and love to gv (LTARs come to mind). if there were better AA guns on gv,s like the wirbil thang ,i dont remember how to spell it. the tactics of the pilots would have to change. more heavy bombers in the air to bomb gvs makes for more targets in the air for friendly pilots to come shoot down! kind of a win win !:aok
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Captain Virgil Hilts on December 15, 2007, 02:00:38 PM
Why an M-10 when you could have the M-18 instead?
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: bj229r on December 15, 2007, 02:44:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Why an M-10 when you could have the M-18 instead?

I was thinkin same, but noone pointed it out, so I assumed perhaps there WAS an M10:lol ---Saw a restored M18 on Mil channel....neat critter. (50 mph, suspension system that M1A1 uses even now)I didnt remember it having an open compartment, which would suck as a 202 would disable it in 1 pass
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: BaldEagl on December 15, 2007, 02:49:44 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Why an M-10 when you could have the M-18 instead?


If I recall the M10 was produced in much higher numbers.
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: bj229r on December 15, 2007, 07:36:01 PM
Eh....like there were tons of Nikis and Lgheys produced
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: E25280 on December 15, 2007, 08:39:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by WWhiskey
but yes the gv part of this game could use more stuff. alot of players dont fly that much and love to gv (LTARs come to mind). if there were better AA guns on gv,s like the wirbil thang ,i dont remember how to spell it. the tactics of the pilots would have to change. more heavy bombers in the air to bomb gvs makes for more targets in the air for friendly pilots to come shoot down! kind of a win win !:aok
Is this the "wirbil thang" you are talking about?  :D

(http://www.panzer.punkt.pl/artykuly/wirbelwind/Wirbelwind_big.jpg)
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: WWhiskey on December 16, 2007, 10:49:27 AM
yes it is the THANG i was wanting  it is one KOOL looking piece of history is'nt it!
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: angelsandair on December 18, 2007, 12:50:22 AM
ty guys, i just really think that there should be more tanks and have the m-10 about half the price of the tiger, and the churchill tank would be nice in game (dont know much about churchill tank) :D
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: Yarbles on December 18, 2007, 11:17:19 AM
Quote
Originally posted by angelsandair
ty guys, i just really think that there should be more tanks and have the m-10 about half the price of the tiger, and the churchill tank would be nice in game (dont know much about churchill tank) :D


Like the Churchill but with its 13mph top speed who has got the patience other than in defence.
Title: M-10 Tank Destroyer
Post by: angelsandair on December 18, 2007, 08:05:16 PM
still, just throwing tanks off the top of my head =), just need more gvs