Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: DPQ5 on April 24, 2008, 04:13:06 PM

Title: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: DPQ5 on April 24, 2008, 04:13:06 PM
ok i know i know has been asked for befor but just realy think about this



(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/1181_1209071504_ktongunrange.jpg)


and another picture, guess what the pictures are of

(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/1181_1209071715_kingtiger20.jpg)

(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/1181_1209071921_kingtiger-502a.jpg)
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: carli176 on April 24, 2008, 04:21:46 PM
want the king tiger???eh??
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: pengu146 on April 24, 2008, 04:40:56 PM
Was a really good tank but if it was put in game i would have to push for it reliability too.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: Pannono on April 24, 2008, 04:42:33 PM
perk it 100 points lol
the 1/2 262 of tanks
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: Cthulhu on April 24, 2008, 05:20:57 PM
Yeah Yeah, we all agree the Tiger II would be uber, but which turret? I vote for the Porsche turret on general coolness :aok

Oh, and perk the snot out of it, but be fair. King Tigers were far more numerous than 262's, so if the perk cost for the 262 is any measure, something between 100 & 200 would sound about right.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: E25280 on April 24, 2008, 06:31:32 PM
King Tigers were far more numerous than 262's, so if the perk cost for the 262 is any measure, something between 100 & 200 would sound about right.
No, they were not.  Less than 500 King Tigers were built.  About 1400 262s were built.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: DPQ5 on April 24, 2008, 08:38:08 PM
lol how about 70 perks
and its just a kool tank
like awsomist armor
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: ShrkBite on April 24, 2008, 09:11:34 PM
Hell, if they put THAT in the Game, Bipolar could Stop a WHOLE mission with just one sortie.

NO
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: Lusche on April 24, 2008, 09:14:35 PM
Hell, if they put THAT in the Game, Bipolar could Stop a WHOLE mission with just one sortie.

- The enemy can up them as well.
- One bomb still kills it as good as a Tiger I.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: DaddyAck on April 24, 2008, 10:13:30 PM
I say yes to it.  Perk it, but fairly
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: SuBWaYCH on April 24, 2008, 10:32:24 PM
Did anyone happen to notice there were other countries involved in WW2 that do not have a solid Gv representation? (Japan, England)
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: angelsandair on April 24, 2008, 10:41:21 PM
uhh.... IF we get the Tiger II, we should get the Is-2, Su-100, OR the T-34/85 to sorta counter it.  :aok
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: DPQ5 on April 24, 2008, 11:06:01 PM
uhh.... IF we get the Tiger II, we should get the Is-2, Su-100, OR the T-34/85 to sorta counter it.  :aok


hey hey were talkin about the kingtiger not tiger 2 or is2
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: angelsandair on April 25, 2008, 01:54:56 AM
Hey genius, Tiger 2 is the Kingtiger. And we need something to counter the Tiger II better then a Tiger I. Is-2 has a 100mm gun IIRC and the Su-100 has the same. T-34/85 we need as a good medium tank.  :aok
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: uberslet on April 25, 2008, 07:56:45 AM
If we get the Tiger II i would say a perk of 100 perks sound about right.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: ridley1 on April 25, 2008, 10:30:50 AM
Japan had ground vehicles? I mean....worthy of putting into the game?
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: Cthulhu on April 25, 2008, 12:34:21 PM
No, they were not.  Less than 500 King Tigers were built.  About 1400 262s were built.

But how many 262's saw combat? :D
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: uberslet on April 25, 2008, 12:49:31 PM
But how many 262's saw combat? :D
i think only a couple hundred were produced that actually saw combat. numbers wernt that big
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: BigPlay on April 25, 2008, 01:21:26 PM
Was a really good tank but if it was put in game i would have to push for it reliability too.

It's not like a whole lot of traveling is done by any GV in this game, plus a lot of factors added to it's known problems mainly transmission related. The King Tiger had the ability to reverse one tract while forwarding the other enabling it to spin on a dime. From what I read  this kinda tore up the tranni a bit as well as the sheer weight of the tank. The engine was the typical Maybach and from my understanding had to run at full blast just to get the tank moving. Also the added steering problems again attributed to the weight. I really think the Panther would be a better addition. If the King Tiger is perked which it would be , the effect of eny would make it so the other guy couldn't up one to kill it. The Panther would be able to be killed by the Firefly and Tiger and if the panzers remain the same that should be able to kill it as well.

Just my thoughts
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: BigPlay on April 25, 2008, 01:25:36 PM
Did anyone happen to notice there were other countries involved in WW2 that do not have a solid Gv representation? (Japan, England)

Who would use them, both countrys didn't make a tank that could compete even with the T-34 or MkIV
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: BigPlay on April 25, 2008, 01:27:44 PM
uhh.... IF we get the Tiger II, we should get the Is-2, Su-100, OR the T-34/85 to sorta counter it.  :aok

Su-100 and T-34/85 don't match up very well with the King Tiger unless close. Is-2 would be a decent counter.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: Karnak on April 25, 2008, 01:35:22 PM
Who would use them, both countrys didn't make a tank that could compete even with the T-34 or MkIV
The UK had some ok tanks and even some good ones thjat saw limited combat.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: Cthulhu on April 25, 2008, 02:13:59 PM
Who would use them, both countrys didn't make a tank that could compete even with the T-34 or MkIV

The A34 Comet would do a number on both the MkIV's and the T-34/76's we have now.

I say HiTech should make like Christmas and give us the Panther and the T-34/85 at the same time. :aok
You GV'ers wouldn't go to bed for 1 week. :D
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: DPQ5 on April 25, 2008, 02:57:04 PM
It's not like a whole lot of traveling is done by any GV in this game, plus a lot of factors added to it's known problems mainly transmission related. The King Tiger had the ability to reverse one tract while forwarding the other enabling it to spin on a dime. From what I read  this kinda tore up the tranni a bit as well as the sheer weight of the tank. The engine was the typical Maybach and from my understanding had to run at full blast just to get the tank moving. Also the added steering problems again attributed to the weight. I really think the Panther would be a better addition. If the King Tiger is perked which it would be , the effect of eny would make it so the other guy couldn't up one to kill it. The Panther would be able to be killed by the Firefly and Tiger and if the panzers remain the same that should be able to kill it as well.

Just my thoughts



the panther also had transmission problems, the gears were made for a smaller tank, probly the panther would be also hard 2 kill in a head 2 head fight
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: BigPlay on April 25, 2008, 04:07:56 PM
The A34 Comet would do a number on both the MkIV's and the T-34/76's we have now.

I say HiTech should make like Christmas and give us the Panther and the T-34/85 at the same time. :aok
You GV'ers wouldn't go to bed for 1 week. :D

Comet was a decent tank but only 1400 were delivered by wars end and non saw any real combat. The remainder of the British tanks were rather under gunned and were considered infantry support tanks. Again the Comet could compete but I don't think would make much diffrence or get used as much as say a new german or russian tank.

Look at the P-39. I saw the skies full of them the first week and now I  see one about once a week and it generally doesn't stay in the air very long after it's spotted. I guess if HT was going to put 3-4 new tanks in the comet could be considered but as long as it's taken to get new planes in I would opt for something that people are going to use day in  day out like they would the Panther of a T-35/85
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: BigPlay on April 25, 2008, 04:09:29 PM


the panther also had transmission problems, the gears were made for a smaller tank, probly the panther would be also hard 2 kill in a head 2 head fight

All the Panther's problems were worked out by the G model
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: Cthulhu on April 25, 2008, 04:18:18 PM
Comet was a decent tank but only 1400 were delivered by wars end and non saw any real combat. The remainder of the British tanks were rather under gunned and were considered infantry support tanks. Again the Comet could compete but I don't think would make much diffrence or get used as much as say a new german or russian tank.

Look at the P-39. I saw the skies full of them the first week and now I  see one about once a week and it generally doesn't stay in the air very long after it's spotted. I guess if HT was going to put 3-4 new tanks in the comet could be considered but as long as it's taken to get new planes in I would opt for something that people are going to use day in  day out like they would the Panther of a T-35/85
Your comment was that neither the Japanese or the Brits made a tank that could handle the MkIV or the T-34/76. As I said, the Comet could defeat both quite handily.

As I also said, and you've apparently agreed with, the Panther and the T-34/85 would be the most logical next additions for tanks.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: BigPlay on April 25, 2008, 04:25:30 PM
The UK had some ok tanks and even some good ones thjat saw limited combat.

Nothing the Brits produced were comparable to what the German's had. Again most of their tanks were used as infantry support. Up until Normandy the Allies never really got to engage any of the German Uber tanks. The Russian front was where the real tank battles took place and where most tank design evolved. Armor got thicker and main guns got bigger. In 1944 D-Day the America's main battle tank was the Sherman which was incapable of competing with the Tigers, Panthers and even the late MkIV's. It had a low velocity main gun that was useless at standoff ranges . It was the Russian's who forced the Germans to produce these tanks and if was the Germans who forced the allies especially the Americans to come up with new designs to combat the German armor. The Brits did at wars end have a couple of decent tanks but nothing special in regards to design, armor and main guns. The 17 pounder was fine up to the Tiger but was once again out classed by the King Tigers and late war tank destroyers armor and main gun. The penetrating power of the King Tigers main gun at range was enough to combat even the latest Russian tanks.The Brits had nothing to counter these tanks.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: BigPlay on April 25, 2008, 04:27:58 PM
Your comment was that neither the Japanese or the Brits made a tank that could handle the MkIV or the T-34/76. As I said, the Comet could defeat both quite handily.

As I also said, and you've apparently agreed with, the Panther and the T-34/85 would be the most logical next additions for tanks.

The comet never really saw action. Doesn't that seems to be a criteria with most people. I said the T-34/85 could not compete with the King Tiger.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: Willfly on April 25, 2008, 04:39:23 PM
this story was from a while back but didnt someone post a thing about an M8 Armored car crew that succesfully destroyed a King Tiger in the Battle of the Bulge (From Point blank range of course)

After a bunch of research I found out the armor on the rear of the KT was in fact thin enough to be penetrated by the 37mm on the M8
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: Pannono on April 25, 2008, 04:44:19 PM

hey hey were talkin about the kingtiger not tiger 2 or is2
lmao dp u dont know much about tanks do u?
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: DPQ5 on April 25, 2008, 07:56:36 PM
lmao dp u dont know much about tanks do u?

lol pan shut up
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: angelsandair on April 27, 2008, 10:00:17 AM
Su-100 and T-34/85 don't match up very well with the King Tiger unless close. Is-2 would be a decent counter.

which model of the Is-2? the 1 with the 122mm main gun? IIRC, the Js-2s (Is-2s) with the 122mm main gun only had HE rounds distrubuted during the war.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: dirt911 on April 27, 2008, 03:41:58 PM
its a very good tank its slanted armor {102mm} and that big 88mm cannon makes it very reliable and surviable :rock :O :salute :aok
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: Rich46yo on April 27, 2008, 04:24:06 PM
which model of the Is-2? the 1 with the 122mm main gun? IIRC, the Js-2s (Is-2s) with the 122mm main gun only had HE rounds distrubuted during the war.

Yeah if I remember right there was such a shortage of 100mm barrels that the Uncle Joe tank had to use the 122mm. The Reds made a tank killer tho with the 100mm gun didnt they? the SU-100? With the best gun of the war on it?
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: dirt911 on April 27, 2008, 08:00:17 PM
oh i dont no i thout all tanks could kill each other :huh
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: uberslet on April 27, 2008, 09:07:39 PM
oh i dont no i thout all tanks could kill each other :huh
same here lol  :lol
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: angelsandair on April 27, 2008, 10:30:57 PM
But if they did give the Is-2 the 122mm AP rounds LETS SEE IT!!.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: BigPlay on April 28, 2008, 11:26:09 AM
Yeah if I remember right there was such a shortage of 100mm barrels that the Uncle Joe tank had to use the 122mm. The Reds made a tank killer tho with the 100mm gun didnt they? the SU-100? With the best gun of the war on it?

The best gun the Russians had but the high velocity 88 was the best anti tank gun hands down in the war, well maybe the JadgTigers gun was more lethal but it was designed as a naval gun.
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: Cthulhu on April 28, 2008, 03:52:20 PM
which model of the Is-2? the 1 with the 122mm main gun? IIRC, the Js-2s (Is-2s) with the 122mm main gun only had HE rounds distrubuted during the war.

The D-25T gun fired a combination round (BR-471 APHE) which proved to be pretty effective against German armor late in the war, but largely because the Germans helped! Due to a shortage of manganese starting in the summer of '44, the Germans were forced to switch to nickel alloyed high-carbon steel, which if you're familiar with metallurgy means HARD but BRITTLE. In many cases the JS-2's 122mm didn't penetrate, but shatter the panzer's armor, especially at the welds.

Here's some interesting reading:
http://www.battlefield.ru/content/view/32/47/lang,en/
Title: Re: The king on the WW2 battlefield
Post by: angelsandair on April 28, 2008, 04:31:48 PM
well then..... LETS BRING IN THE IS-2!!!!!  :D