i know they had some pretty successful tanks, we need some of there tanks
Yeah, throw in a regular M-4 and see what happens...they make oragami tanks
BOOM.. that happens as the Panzers and T34s tear them ronsons a new one.
Seriously why are there no Japanese Tanks?
:noid
Yeah, it's not like their armor is paper thin..... :rofl
You're joking right? :rofl IMHO anything prior to Comet would be a death sentence to the crew (much like the basic M4), and the Comet barely made it into combat, although it did participate in the Rhine crossing. Again, this is just my opinion, but British armor didn't really begin to shine until Centurian, and that was one formidable beast. :aokComets were at Normandy, the same time as the Firefly was introduced. So your logic means the Firefly barely made it into combat.
Maybe a Matilda for mid-war would be cool, but we'd need short-barreled Pzr III's & IV's to keep it fair. Or how about the M3 Grant? That should get a laugh out of everybody. :D
Comets were at Normandy, the same time as the Firefly was introduced. So your logic means the Firefly barely made it into combat.
Wrong. Comets were delivered in December '44 and were put on the front lines in January '45.
Well, that one would still be up to scratch in AH, since reliability is not an issue.
A decent firepower, and enormous acceleration and speed?
what...75 mm gun, and 42 mph?
Or how about the M3 Grant? That should get a laugh out of everybody. :D
Yea I would love the comet, but I would also love the panther and the J series.
Take a look at the Jagdepanther (http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/tank-hunters/jagdpanther.asp) and youll say screw the panther I want this.
The reason I dont think we need the JagdPanther is because we haven't really incorprated any tank destroyers into the game. The later models (G?) had better protection, had alot of the problems fixed with them. Would probably dominate over the VC Firefly, could be the in-between perk tank of the Firefly and the Tiger. and if we were to get anything better then the Panther (JagdPanther?, Jagdtiger?), it could unperk the Firefly, make the Panther unperked, or LOW (Firefly sorta perk) and those could be moved up.
P.S. Would like to see a good American tank, (M4A-3) (M-26 Pershing?). But we could also use the T-34/85 or the Su-100, Is-2..... if we want uber tanks.
well the jagdpanther could defeat any other tanks in ww2, even other german tanks
You're joking right? :rofl IMHO anything prior to Comet would be a death sentence to the crew (much like the basic M4), and the Comet barely made it into combat, although it did participate in the Rhine crossing. Again, this is just my opinion, but British armor didn't really begin to shine until Centurian, and that was one formidable beast. :aok
but don't think for a second that the jagdpanther would go unscathed against the M36, the Su-100, or, God forbid, the Su-122.
Cant agree, the cromwell would bring speed and a respectable 75mm. Though no Tiger killer in could take on 34, m4 and panzer. Its actually the obvious choice.I believe the ROQF 75 on the Cromwell has less armor penetration than the 6-pounder, being better suited to firing HE than AP, and pales in comparison to the 17-pounder for killing tanks. Besides, I can just see those rivets flying around the inside of the turret when hit. Riveted armor is a bad idea. :uhoh
Realized I fat-fingered that one. make that the Su-152. I believe these things were used after the war in Russian circuses to fire "Human Canonballs". :D
I believe the ROQF 75 on the Cromwell has less armor penetration than the 6-pounder, being better suited to firing HE than AP, and pales in comparison to the 17-pounder for killing tanks. Besides, I can just see those rivets flying around the inside of the turret when hit. Riveted armor is a bad idea. :uhoh
seriously dude we got every tank except british ones :pray
no actually its an american tank with a british gun the 17 pounder was british :saluteIts a tank under British ownership that had the gun replaced; none were used by the Americans. Yes, its a British tank.
if this is wat ur sayin tank guns on tanks such as the comet or sherman and tiger will reach atleast half a mileI've gotten kills at over two miles (probably around 3,500 yards) in the Tiger before.
On the tank destroyers without turrets, what was the azimuth range for the gun? Would it be enough that you could be successful keeping your engine off or is is small enough that you would have to have your engine on to pivot and thereby miss audible cues to incoming enemy?The traverse for the gun varied by vehicle, but I believe about a 20 degree arc was fairly common. In other words, if you had a good idea as to your enemy's direction of approach, you could easily aim your tank in the general direction and be able to train the gun and hit him. If you were not so certain, then the lack of a turret would definitely be a liability.
no actually its an american tank with a british gun the 17 pounder was british :salute
On the tank destroyers without turrets, what was the azimuth range for the gun? Would it be enough that you could be successful keeping your engine off or is is small enough that you would have to have your engine on to pivot and thereby miss audible cues to incoming enemy?My guess would be plus or minus 15 to 20 degrees.
No, actually it was a tank bought by the brits that had a british gun installed and used ONLY by the british thus making it a british tank. Thank you try again.
Actually how did the US guys kill Tigers, Panthers and Late Panzer 4's with US tanks?Occasionally they used Firefly's, M10's, M18's, M36's, etc. , and a very few M26's. But mostly they sacrificed LOTS of M4's (and their crews).
No other allied tank is going to make a dent on the onese we have already...I'm guessing you mean British and American. Late war JS-2's (D-25T gun and improved hull armor) could reliably kill Panther's and Tiger I's, although the JS-2's own armor (especially on the turret) was problematic. And when you throw in all the Russian tank destroyers:
| Su-85 | |
| Su-100 | (probably the best of the lot) |
| Su-122 | (howitzer, so low velocity and less than ideal) |
| Su-152 | (another howitzer with crappy ballistics, but with a projectile weighing 107 lbs who cares? > GROSS OVERKILL) |
Ok but this is not the point. Sherman non firefly is going to struggle so we got the firefly because I dont think any allied tank stacked up other than this one by late war.
On the tank destroyers without turrets, what was the azimuth range for the gun? Would it be enough that you could be successful keeping your engine off or is is small enough that you would have to have your engine on to pivot and thereby miss audible cues to incoming enemy?
Occasionally they used Firefly's, M10's, M18's, M36's, etc. , and a very few M26's. But mostly they sacrificed LOTS of M4's (and their crews).
I'm guessing you mean British and American. Late war JS-2's (D-25T gun and improved hull armor) could reliably kill Panther's and Tiger I's, although the JS-2's own armor (especially on the turret) was problematic. And when you throw in all the Russian tank destroyers:
[