Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Softail on March 27, 2008, 07:27:30 PM

Title: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Softail on March 27, 2008, 07:27:30 PM
Replace the M8 with the M18 Hellcat.   M18 is almost as fast, better armour and carries a heavier 76mm gun.  Still open top so it is vulnerable to aircraft, it would pack more punch than the M8 and actually have a fighting chance at disabling or killing an M4, T34 or Tiger.  Right now, the M8 is only effective vs Panzer.  Shots to the M4 turret are useless so you have to shoot the M4 in the side armour at least 5 times at 800 range... or 3 times point blank.   M8 vs T34 will only take out an engine...after about a dozen shots and it has NO effect vs a Tiger.

Keep the speed,  beef up the armour and give us a fighting chance at T34's and Tigers.   Replace the M8 with the M18.

Since it is a late war vehicle....go ahead and perk it.

Softail
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Selino631 on March 27, 2008, 07:29:40 PM
I have killed T34, M4, and Tiger in a M8
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: snowey on March 27, 2008, 07:47:43 PM
i have disabled a tiger i knocked out a tiger by diableing it i hit the turet and engine i disabled both and i hit it about 32 times total in the side and rear and back of turet
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Raptor on March 27, 2008, 07:51:18 PM
Keep m8 and add M18
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Softail on March 27, 2008, 07:54:53 PM
I have killed T34, M4, and Tiger in a M8

I believe the M4.  I didn't say you couldn't I said you could not penetrate the turret even at point blank range.  Best shots are at side armour and you will need at least 3 close and 5 at 800+ out.

 The T34?  Maybe if it was unmanned and just sitting there and you drove up to it and started firing away right into its arnold with no repsonse from the driver.  

The Tiger?  No way.  To that Sir I must call BS!

You may have put enough rounds on the Tiger and someone else blasted it...so you got "the kill" but I would have to say absolutely not on the Tiger.   Just today I shot a tiger 8 times from 400 yards square in the arnold and sprayed it with machine gun fire.   Then someone blasted it with an M4 and killed it.   I got "The Kill" message, but I did little to no real damage to it.  Was just marking its location for the friendly M4.

I would gladly sacrifice a Tiger in the MA to see this done.    Of course if it takes 20+ shots it doesnt matter because any mediocre tanker could easily kill an M8 by the time the 20th round was fired.

Softail

Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Softail on March 27, 2008, 07:57:48 PM
i have disabled a tiger i knocked out a tiger by diableing it i hit the turet and engine i disabled both and i hit it about 32 times total in the side and rear and back of turet

32 rounds and you lived to fire them all?   That is one bad Tiger driver.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Urchin on March 27, 2008, 08:02:28 PM
The M8 can kill a T34 from the front and the rear, not sure about the sides.  I have never killed a Firefly in one, but I imagine it could kill it from the sides and rear. 

The M8 cannot hurt a Tiger, at all, from any angle.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Softail on March 27, 2008, 08:03:24 PM
Keep m8 and add M18

I would have suggested this but thought it would be "undoable" by the power that be.

Don't get me wrong, I love the M8.   My best day with one saw 23 tank kills!   All panzers.   However, its gun is very very limited.  

Generally, if you kill a panzer in an M8...they just up a T34 and hunt you down with almost total impunity.  With an M18, they would still have to be very wary.



Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Softail on March 27, 2008, 08:10:48 PM
The M8 can kill a T34 from the front and the rear, not sure about the sides.  I have never killed a Firefly in one, but I imagine it could kill it from the sides and rear. 

The M8 cannot hurt a Tiger, at all, from any angle.

Firefly from the sides and rear...just not the turret don't ask me why...its thinner than a panzy's.  Add to that you can kill a Panzy turret by hitting it square in the Mantle!  The thickest part of the Turret....but rounds to an M4 Turret just bounce off. 

I have never seen an M8 survive a frontal attack on a T34 but I have knocked out the engine on a T34 after 20 rounds while hiding in a town.  I would venture that true T34 kills in an M8 are rare.

Softail
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Latrobe on March 27, 2008, 09:01:42 PM
With the M8 I've killed Panzers, M4s, T34s, M3s, other M8s, jeeps, B-25 (hehe), and lots of other planes. The M8 OWNS!!
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: EskimoJoe on March 27, 2008, 09:12:47 PM
If we removed the M8 I'd have nothing to hunt down jeeps with  :(
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: snowey on March 27, 2008, 09:25:10 PM
i once did a large killing spre against panzers all you have to do is shoot them in the tail while going around them at full speed
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Latrobe on March 27, 2008, 09:26:55 PM
Not to mention the M8 is the funnest gv to use in TT. Doing Drive-By's with it is too fun to get over.  :D
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Urchin on March 27, 2008, 10:08:28 PM
It doesn't own... it is pretty pathetic actually.  Not really sure why they put it in to begin with. 

But once something is in, it stays in.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Matador on March 27, 2008, 10:13:20 PM
m8 killing a tiger is not BS unfortulantly I was killed by a gang of m8s in my tiger, fortunantly it was only 7 perks. that turret is just so damn slow
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: USRanger on March 27, 2008, 10:22:56 PM
With the rate of fire of the M8, I've shot down quite a few aircraft diving on me.  Just park under a tree so they have to get low to shoot at ya, then put a slug in their face! :aok

Oh yeah, give us the M18 ;)
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Devonai on March 27, 2008, 10:31:22 PM
I'm all for more ground vehicles in AH2, but a pair of M8s working together can wreak havoc on the battlefield.  Plus, the Greyhound is still in use in some countries, which makes me jealous.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Selino631 on March 27, 2008, 10:43:07 PM
a enemy tiger was camping the hanger i managed to get out in a M8 drove around fired on him took out his pintle and kept driving around him shooting  and he coundt get his gun on me, i have done this twice
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: C(Sea)Bass on March 27, 2008, 10:54:55 PM
I forget where it was posted on here but, there is a historical account of an M8 killing a King Tiger with 3 shots to the rear at 75 yards IIRC.

If you get close enough you can kill anything with a M8. It may take 5 or 6 shots to the rear, but it is do able. Also if you want to do it the cheap way, drive up so your turret is inside the NME tank and fire. I accidentally did that and 1 shot killed a tiger.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Larry on March 28, 2008, 12:10:43 AM
m8 killing a tiger is not BS unfortulantly I was killed by a gang of m8s in my tiger, fortunantly it was only 7 perks. that turret is just so damn slow


Why do you say that?


M8 is great to sneak up on takes and blow out thier turret. Once you do that you just sit there making them mad and after a few hits you kill them. BTW 3 or even 5 shots from an M8 are so fast that the tank wouldnt even knew what hit him.

In the early version of AHII when the woods were really thick I waited in them waiting for tanks to pass by then I would fire up and run them down. A tiger came by me and I knocked hit track out with 4 hits. By the time he started trying to turn his turret I was in first gear out running it circleing him poping him in the back of the turret. once that was out I got on the left side of him and started shooting where the driver would be. It only took about twenty rounds to finnish him off.


And like any other great upset I was called a cheater afterwards.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: DPQ5 on March 28, 2008, 01:48:33 AM
was just about 2 make a thread about m18. m18 much better then m8, realy should add it.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Urchin on March 28, 2008, 09:39:57 AM
I was unable to duplicate any of the claims in this thread.  Is there a particular spot on the Tiger than is vulnerable to the 37mm? 

I shot it all over, from every aspect... all the rounds bounce.  Granted, I believe this is how it should be based on armor penetration values for the gun, but I am puzzled as to how people can do what should be impossible and blow up Tigers in an M8.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: DPQ5 on March 28, 2008, 01:17:02 PM
yeah the back is
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: 5PointOh on March 28, 2008, 01:41:59 PM
The M8 is a vulching machine :aok...till the field ack pops :mad:
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: opposum on March 28, 2008, 02:45:18 PM
ive killed a kingtiger with my m8 before
 :noid :noid :noid :noid :noid

one time i was vulching with the m8 on the end of the runway, i got 24 kills and it gave me 149 perks for it, i dont know how but it did







Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: croduh on March 28, 2008, 03:27:11 PM
I've killed whole Seventh United States Army with my old m8 once.Got 150 perks for it.Dunno how but i did
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: E25280 on March 28, 2008, 07:38:07 PM
I was unable to duplicate any of the claims in this thread.  Is there a particular spot on the Tiger than is vulnerable to the 37mm? 

I shot it all over, from every aspect... all the rounds bounce.  Granted, I believe this is how it should be based on armor penetration values for the gun, but I am puzzled as to how people can do what should be impossible and blow up Tigers in an M8.
Point blank at 90 degrees in the rear is your best bet.  Not sure if armor degradation is modeled or a slight randomness to the penetration, but pound them enough, when close enough, they eventually go down.

Also, make sure you are not carrying a mixed ammo load.  For some reason, unlike any of the tanks, the HE is default in an M8.  This might account for some of the bounce if you were close.

Best option IMO is to go for tracking the Tiger first.  You can do this at a greater range than damaging the tank itself.  Once he is tracked, if you are smart, you can fairly easily first track the other side (so he can't pivot), and then even more easily stay out of his oh so slow turret traverse.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: ECHO44 on March 28, 2008, 10:50:39 PM
the m8 is still usefull, when my squad goes on vehicle missions we always have a m8 to scout the area and spot tanks for us. Yes, add the m18 but keep the m8
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: 10thmd on March 29, 2008, 04:56:38 AM
They gotta keep it for the Early War/Specific events. They arent gonna ditch any vehicles or planes even if they are Hanger Queens.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Furball on March 29, 2008, 06:44:12 AM
How about adding something non American instead - another Russian GV perhaps?  Su-100 or ISU 152 maybe?
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Yossarian on March 29, 2008, 10:59:54 AM
Once I 'bounced' a GV mission of Tigers and M-3s when I was in an M-8.  They didn't see me until too late, and I took out about 3 GVs before something got me.  I was very surprised at how easy it was to kill the Tigers.

I was intrigued by the fact that it seemed to require more rounds to kill the M-3(s) than it did for the Tigers.  It might have been lag that caused a time delay between me shooting them and they dying...not sure though.

As for the M18, I say it would be great if HTC's willing.  Also, I think we should keep the M8.

<S>

Yossarian
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: zoozoo on March 29, 2008, 12:38:20 PM
how about both?
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Latrobe on March 29, 2008, 03:36:24 PM
Get a CAP on a field and there will be gvs everywhere. That's when you get the M8 out and just floor it! Don't stop and drive straight through the base firing at anything you see. Always fun!
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Rino on March 29, 2008, 03:44:18 PM
How about adding something non American instead - another Russian GV perhaps?  Su-100 or ISU 152 maybe?

We have 2 german, 1 russian and 1 brit tank...yeah those americans just cluttering up
the GV scene  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Larry on March 29, 2008, 05:06:07 PM
We have 2 german, 1 russian and 1 brit tank...yeah those americans just cluttering up
the GV scene  :rolleyes:

M3
M8
M16
LVT2
LVT4
Jeep


Yes they are.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Chewybacca on March 29, 2008, 05:20:16 PM
I like the idea
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Nisky on March 29, 2008, 06:41:24 PM
Just yesterday i was playing in an m8 about D200 from a panzer started lighting him up I richceted and kill shot myself. I thought it was pretty funny.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Chewybacca on March 29, 2008, 09:25:28 PM
Just yesterday i was playing in an m8 about D200 from a panzer started lighting him up I richceted and kill shot myself. I thought it was pretty funny.

Nice job.  :aok  :rofl
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Matador on March 29, 2008, 10:22:36 PM
The M18 would be a great addition as a tank destroyer as in not giving it the capability of killing buildings efficiently only AP rounds. I just saw the restoration of one on the military channel and it looks pretty mean, it was the fastest fully tracked vehicle of the war and it has the same 76mm main gun as the Firefly, It would be a great addition no question about it
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: ECHO44 on March 30, 2008, 08:30:01 PM
We have 2 german, 1 russian and 1 brit tank...yeah those americans just cluttering up
the GV scene  :rolleyes:
we have a british tank?
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Fatboy26 on March 31, 2008, 01:35:19 AM
The "Firefly" was a British modification to lend-lease Amercian M4 Shermans.  The main gun is actually a British 17 pounder AT gun that had to be laid on its side to fit in the turret.  The "Firefly" is strictly a British design with the exception of a few made under contract in Canada.  So technically it is British.  That and the code name Firefly has never been found in any military documentation, it's more or less just a soldiers nickname for the tank. 

Back to the thread topic don't get rid of the M8 and add all the new GV's possible.  I like variety.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Furball on March 31, 2008, 01:27:41 PM
We have 2 german, 1 russian and 1 brit tank...yeah those americans just cluttering up
the GV scene  :rolleyes:

M3
M8
M16
LVT2
LVT4
Jeep


Yes they are.

^ What he said.  Also the "Brit Tank" is just an American tank with a British Gun, so may as well be American.

Add to the fact that the last few aircraft added were American, most of the last updates were on American aircraft, all the CV's are American, the only spawnable boat in game is American...

I don't have a problem with American equipment, apart from trying to adress the imbalance and constant requesting of their equipment by Americans.  I can understand it and am probably quite hypocritical, as i generally request British equipment because that is what i know best, but understand the need to add representations from other countries. <S>
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Solar10 on April 02, 2008, 11:29:05 AM
M8 will take out an M4s turret.  With 1 shot.  You do need to hit it square from the rear.  The problem with this is that it turns so quickly it's hard to get that shot.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: DPQ5 on April 03, 2008, 09:12:29 PM
How about adding something non American instead - another Russian GV perhaps?  Su-100 or ISU 152 maybe?



YES YES YES IS2  :rock :rock :rock
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: DPQ5 on April 03, 2008, 09:30:56 PM
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/1181_1207276146_stug1.jpg)


how about the stug
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: uberslet on April 04, 2008, 05:52:36 AM
Keep m8 and add M18
agree, i have been killed in my M4 by Tull in his M8-O-Death at tank town :confused: <S> Tull, made me mad, couldnt hit you.
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: ECHO44 on April 05, 2008, 10:04:47 AM
i just saw a documentary on the tiger and it was basically the best tank of the war
the american sherman guns couldn't pierce its armor plus it has a huge gun witch could tear through any tanks armor, so its highly unrealistic for a m8 to kill a tiger
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Softail on April 15, 2008, 07:40:04 AM
Hmmmmmmmmm....must be different AP amo than I am using.  I've plugged Tiggers in da arnold at D600 with an M8...I couldn't even get penetration on the ENGINE armour let alone the turret (which was facing away from me).

As I stated b4....anyone that wants....I will up a Tigger at a spawn point.....come and kill it with a single M8.   I won't shoot back...but I will move the turret.  To me, learning how to do this would be worth the perkie points lost.   I would also be willing to loose an M4 to a one shot kill of the turret to see it done in the MA.

Softail
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Larry on April 15, 2008, 07:53:33 AM
so its highly unrealistic for a m8 to kill a tiger


From Official Army After Action Reports describing the battle at St. Vith, Belgium, during the Battle of The Bulge:

"While the northern and eastern flanks had been heavily engaged, the northeastern sector (Troop A, 87th Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron; Company A, 38th Armored Infantry Battalion; Troop E, 87th Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron) had been rather quiet. The only excitement there had been when an M8 armored car from Troop B destroyed a (King) Tiger tank.

The armored car had been in a concealed position near the boundary of Troop 3, 87th Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron and Company A, 38th Armored Infantry Battalion, when the Tiger approached the lines at right angles to move along a trail in front of the main line of resistance. As the tank passed the armored car, the latter slipped out of position and started up the trail behind the Tiger, accelerating in an attempt to close. At the same moment the German tank commander saw the M8, and started traversing his gun to bear on it. It was a race between the Americans, who were attempting to close so that their 37-mm gun would be effective on the Tiger's thin rear armor, and the Germans, who were desperately striving to bring their 88 to bear. Rapidly the M8 closed to 25 yards, and quickly pumped in three rounds; the lumbering Tiger stopped and shuddered; there was a muffled explosion, followed by flames which billowed out of the turret and engine ports, after which the armored car returned to its position."

Sound familiar?

My regards,

Widewing
Title: Re: Suggesting M8 Replacement
Post by: Softail on April 15, 2008, 10:54:45 AM
From Official Army After Action Reports describing the battle at St. Vith, Belgium, during the Battle of The Bulge:

"While the northern and eastern flanks had been heavily engaged, the northeastern sector (Troop A, 87th Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron; Company A, 38th Armored Infantry Battalion; Troop E, 87th Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron) had been rather quiet. The only excitement there had been when an M8 armored car from Troop B destroyed a (King) Tiger tank.

The armored car had been in a concealed position near the boundary of Troop 3, 87th Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron and Company A, 38th Armored Infantry Battalion, when the Tiger approached the lines at right angles to move along a trail in front of the main line of resistance. As the tank passed the armored car, the latter slipped out of position and started up the trail behind the Tiger, accelerating in an attempt to close. At the same moment the German tank commander saw the M8, and started traversing his gun to bear on it. It was a race between the Americans, who were attempting to close so that their 37-mm gun would be effective on the Tiger's thin rear armor, and the Germans, who were desperately striving to bring their 88 to bear. Rapidly the M8 closed to 25 yards, and quickly pumped in three rounds; the lumbering Tiger stopped and shuddered; there was a muffled explosion, followed by flames which billowed out of the turret and engine ports, after which the armored car returned to its position."

Sound familiar?

My regards,

Widewing


The only noted exception I would make is that this was a  KING Tiger II Tank...not a Tiger I.   The King Tiger tank had a rear escape hatch and pistol port on the back of the turret.  A weak point.  The Tiger I did not have this...it was 80mm thick with an 8 degree slope.   It was  thicker than the front armor on an M4!


The stats on the Bofors 37mm Anti-Tank Gun.

 Penetration:    Range, m     mm at 60 degrees
                         300         40   
                         457         33     
                         600         30   
                         900         20   
                       1000         20     
                       1200         15 

The US 37 MM

Distance in yards                                                                457     914      1,371       1,828
AP M74 Shot (meet angle 0°)[2]                                        36mm   
AP M74 Shot (meet angle 20°)[5]                                      25mm   
APC M51 Shot (meet angle 0°)[2]                                      61 mm   
APC M51 Shot (meet angle 20°)[5]                                     53mm   
APC M51 Shot (meet angle 30°, homogeneous armor)[21]      53mm     46mm     40mm       35 mm
APC M51 Shot (meet angle 30°, face-hardened armor)[21]     46mm    40mm     38mm       33mm

Wonder what Shell HTC modeled the M8 with.

Softail.