Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Rendar on May 09, 2001, 02:09:00 PM
-
It's a good companion to the Jumbo Sherman proposed by another player. Here is a link to the StuG III specs: ]http://www.achtungpanzer.com/stug.htm (http://www.achtungpanzer.com/stug.htm) . Look at the very bottom of the page, Ausfuhrung G. This would not be an uber vehicle, but it would be sufficiently different from the Panzer IV H to include in AH. It would be great to get a T-34/76 + StuG III G package.
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/stulg.jpg)
------------------
Rendar
[This message has been edited by Rendar (edited 05-12-2001).]
-
And Yanks can drive it too (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
(http://www.kolumbus.fi/staga/usastug.jpg)
-
I suggest it would be more useful to include a vehicle that could be used in a scenario - i.e. Allied as opposed to Axis.
T-34 maybe.
But I want to fly the Il-2 in a campaign, so maybe I'm biased. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Anyway HTC has already done 50% of StuG (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
The 76.2mm of the T-34, though. If it was the 85mm, then the Germans would need to have the Panther G or such. T-34 and StuG III really need to be included. Also, the Ju-87G would have to make it in the same release so both sides would have a tank killing plane.
------------------
Rendar
-
punt! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Rendar
-
I love the stug III but can there possibly be a vehicle that is less important to add to AH?
Same gun as the only tank we have.
Same mg as the only tank we have
same speed as the only tank we have
equivilent armour to the only tank we have
same colour as the only tank we have
Why not just not use your turret travers on the panzer and you are there......
Or introduce the Panzer IVG as an important variant.
-
The StuG's armor is only slightly sub-par to that of the Panther. Also, it is a low-profile vehicle. It's not the same color as StuGs may be painted colors other than what we have right now. If you want the T-34/76, you will need to give the Germans the StuG III G. Plain and simple. In my post I stated that the StuG III G should come in a package with the T-34/76, not just by itself.
Another, how can you say that its not important? It had tens of thousands of tank kills during the war! If it's "the same thing as the Panzer IV H", then why did the IV not get tens of thousands of tank kills? True, StuG crews were sometimes better trained, but you can't ignore the numbers.
------------------
Rendar
[This message has been edited by Rendar (edited 05-11-2001).]
-
The StuG's armor is only slightly sub-par to that of the Panther.[quuote]
Panther frontal and side armor far is superior to Stug's. Stug's armor plates are mostly in vertival or in small angle unlike Panthers which has well slanted plates, some in 60 degree angle making them very hard to penetrate.
If you want the T-34/76, you will need to give the Germans the StuG III G. Plain and simple. In my post I stated that the StuG III G should come in a package with the T-34/76, not just by itself.
What would Stug III do better than PzKw IVH? It is only bit smaller and armor is not that different. It does not have AAMG making it very vulnerable to air attacks. It is forced to turn its whole hull if target is outside of its narrow frontal sector.
Stug III was only stop gap measure to counter large number of soviet tanks. It was a substitute for real tank.
Why introduce Stug III which is similar to PzKw IVH we already have?
------------------
jochen / Gefechtsverband Kowalewski
Units: I. and II./KG 51, II. and III./KG 76, NSGr 1, NSGr 2, NSGr 20.
Planes: Do 17Z, Ju 87D, Ju 88A, He 111H, Ar 234A, Me 410A, Me 262A, Fw 190A, Fw 190F, Fw 190G.
Sieg oder bolschevismus!
-
Fine...I'm to tired to argue...
------------------
Rendar
-
Could we possibly get some GV's from other nations first? Or is that simply out of the question?
M-3
M-16
Ostwind
Panzer IV Type H
Hmmm. Two US trucks and two German armored vehicles.
Did any other country field anything of note?
Guess not. Sorry. Ignore this post.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Originally posted by Jochen:
Stug III was only stop gap measure to counter large number of soviet tanks. It was a substitute for real tank.
Huhm. No. And not by far. The StuGIII (and all sturmgeschutz series) were NOT intended to counter tanks. They were FIELD ARTILLERY weapons in a tank's turretless chassis. If fact they were owned by the Artillery branch of the Wehrmacht, not by the Panzerwaffe.
What happened is that,from 1943 onwards, the shortage of real tanks made the Germans use sometimes this weapons in the tank role when they had nothing more at hand because they had a decent SECONDARY antitank capability.
But they were SELF PROPELLED FIELD GUNS, to provide direct fire support to the Infantry. And this, they did pretty well. Not so in the tank role.
I think you are thinking about the Jagdpanzer series but these had nothing to do with the StuG-type weapons.
The Jagdpanzers were modified, uparmored, turretless tank chassis with BIG antitank weapons, not field guns. And IMO they have a place in this game. I dont know you, but I would drool driving a JagdPanther... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 05-11-2001).]
-
My point is that it would be 90% identical in a game sence to the panzer IV. Why spend time modeling it? The Sherman M4A3-75 and the T34-85 are waiting....
-
It's an older tank, but how about the British Grant. 2 main guns (75mm and 37mm IIRC) would be pretty fun to fight with...
-
Originally posted by Gargoyle:
It's an older tank, but how about the British Grant. 2 main guns (75mm and 37mm IIRC) would be pretty fun to fight with...
The British Grant is actually the American-built M3 General Lee medium tank... it is totally outclassed by the Panzer IV.
-
<sits, back, twittles thumbs> (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
-
Oh and if one of the German Assault guns HAS to be done, at least insist on a StuH or a Brumbar, so at least it would have a different (and more effective) gun.
-
OK...so how about this:
T-34/85
Panther G
Jagdpanther (late-model)
Sherman Firefly
All of these vehicles have their pros and cons. For example, the Firefly has a big gun, its fairly fast, but is has little armor. The Jagdpanther is as fast as the Panther, has more armor than the Panther, but can be ambushed from the rear. The Panther G and the T-34/85 are good all-around.
------------------
Rendar
-
Originally posted by Jigster:
Oh and if one of the German Assault guns HAS to be done, at least insist on a StuH or a Brumbar, so at least it would have a different (and more effective) gun.
A brummbar? for what?...man, that was a street fighting mass of steel, wich almost no cross country capability and slow as hell. THe 150mm howitzer was good for shredding buildings, yes, but the lack of mobility of that thing would make it unplayable in the current AH maps.
As an assault gun the StuG42 is perfect. Good mobility, good armor (slightly better than the PzIV's),and a good gun (A 105mm howitzer with decent anti armor capability and very good HE capability).
But I agree that we need more tanks first. A Sherman, a T-34/76 and maybe even a Cronwell (sp?). Then assault guns, or better yet, self-propelled artillery (someone said "Hummel"? or even Maultier? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif))
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 05-11-2001).]
-
StuH 42 would actually seem more useful in AH, as we could sure use some artillery. Here is some stuff about the StuH 42 (taken from Achtung Panzer):
(http://www.achtungpanzer.com/stuh_er.jpg)
In October of 1942 Sturmhaubitze 42 was produced by Alkett, its design was based on Stug III Ausf F and F/8's chassis and it was armed with 105mm StuH 42 L/28 (L/30) howitzer. From 1943 onwards StuH 42 was built on Ausf G's chassis. From October of 1942 to February of 1945, 1212 StuH 42s were produced. In May and June of 1943, 10 of retired and battle damaged Stug III Ausf F/8 were converted into flame-thrower tanks armed with 14mm Flammenwerfer. They were designated as Sturmgeschutz III (Fl). From of 1943 to January of 1944, all Sturmgeschutz III (Fl) were used for training in Germany, while from January to April of 1944 all were rearmed with 75mm StuK 40 L/48 guns.
In 1944 and 1945, small number of Stug III Ausf Gs were converted into (75mm/105mm rounds) ammunition carriers by the removal of the gun and covering the opening with a piece of armor plate. Those vehicles were known as Munitionspanzer auf Fahrgestell Sturmgeschutz III Ausf G / Munitionpanzer Sturmgeschütz III Ausf G.
------------------
Rendar
[This message has been edited by Rendar (edited 05-12-2001).]
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
My point is that it would be 90% identical in a game sence to the panzer IV. Why spend time modeling it? The Sherman M4A3-75 and the T34-85 are waiting....
---------------------------------------------
Riiight, and that would also explain the A5,A8,F8, the soon to be 3 types of Thunderbolts,G2,G6,G10 etc.
I personally would like to see tanks like the T-34/76,T-34/85, SU assault guns, M3 Lee etc.
Tronsky
-
Well I guess you told me tronski...
So you would like a game with the only fighters being a SpitIX and Spit VIII ?
-
Don't forget the Panther...it needs to go with the T-34/85.
------------------
Rendar
-
Yup. The panther would be a great perk tank once the T34-85 is arround as a non perk soviet tank.
-
Actually pongo i was being sarcastic.
Tronsky
-
Why dick around, introduce the damn Tiger tank. That or the Panther are the only extra tanks I would waste time making for the Germans. Dedicated field arty is otw, so says HTC, so lets wait and see what they bring!
-
Tiger II would need to have a counterpart...M26 Pershing maybe?
------------------
Rendar
-
When you look at the ranges we are attacking vehicle to vehicle now, I would think we have M1a's and T80's. We shoot at each other with great effect from up to 2,000 yards! WWII tanks would not have dreamt to engage at those ranges because they would have no chance of damaging each other. Most engagements happened under 500 yards. Hopeful this will be one of the things that they are working on in 1.07
Muttz
-
Just so you know, the IS-2 could kill a Tiger II from 1 km away. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Rendar
-
There are claims of 3k plus tank kills from ww2.
I would certainly take my chances in a long range gun duel in a kingtiger vs an Is2.
-
When it comes to armour i think perks SHOULD reflect numbers in the field.
Germany had these massive tanks sure but NOT in enough numbers.So a panther should be a perk tank i think
T34 on the other hand was incredibly numerous and so should not be perked
if I want to play as an axis tank and its a rare version(say a jagdpanther) it should be hard to aquire the privalige i think.
Masses of t34s charging small numbers of superior Axis models is how is was on the eastern front.
Kursk, the largest tank battle of WW2 was a prime example of numbers/attrition warfare.The german tanks were able to kill the russians at greater distances and ratios and had great armour but the russians could afford the losses and inevitably the germans ran out of tanks and could never launch such a large scale assault again.
Sure the russians suffered greater losses but they had so many it hardly mattered to their leaders nor did they seem to care.
Many of the russian wars were fought similarly including the finland-russian war where a small finnish army decimated russias human wave like attacks.But eventually the Finnish had to call a halt to the war and agree on losing land to the Russians.It wasnt pretty but it worked.
ThOse RuSSKi's WerE CrAZy (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
------------------
Hazed
9./JG54
[This message has been edited by hazed- (edited 05-18-2001).]
-
While I aggree that rarity should be an issue for wether something is perked or not, I think like in aircraft the supperiorty is more important.
Non perk-Panzer IV H, T34-85, M4a3-75
Cheaper perk M4A376(W), JpzerIVl70, Brumbar,isu122
Expensive Perk Panther VG, IS2m,JadgPanther, Tiger, Pershing
Very expensive KingTiger,SuperPershing,Panther II,IsIII
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
While I aggree that rarity should be an issue for wether something is perked or not, I think like in aircraft the supperiorty is more important.
Non perk-Panzer IV H, T34-85, M4a3-75
Cheaper perk M4A376(W), JpzerIVl70, Brumbar,isu122
Expensive Perk Panther VG, IS2m,JadgPanther, Tiger, Pershing
Very expensive KingTiger,SuperPershing,Panther II,IsIII
In that case the T-34/85 should be replaced by a T-34/76, and the 85 moved toward the expensive Perky group.
The 85 is far superior than the IV-H, and is more on par to the Panther series.
Tronksy
-
btw id rather see an allied tank before another axis myself.
A m4 sherman with a 75mm in desert colours please? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
THEN WE REDO THE MED SCENARIO (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) YAY!!!!
or snow camoflage? that white/grey on a winter type map would be great.
-
Originally posted by -tronski-:
In that case the T-34/85 should be replaced by a T-34/76, and the 85 moved toward the expensive Perky group.
The 85 is far superior than the IV-H, and is more on par to the Panther series.
Tronksy
I dont think so. The T34-85 will be faster and better armoured then the Panzer IV H but it will have similar firepower and no anti aircraft machine gun. They have very simular abilities to kill each other. If some way can be found to show the supperiority of german optics over russian(limit the zoom on the T34?) then the real ballance would be shown. Yes the T34 is supperior. But not perk supperior. The T34-76 is clearly inferior to the Panzer IVJ.
The T34-85 is no match for a Panther. The panther is nearly as fast and has far better anti tank capability and armour protection. Its hull is borderline invlunerable to a T34-85 while its own gun can easily defeat the T34-85 out to 1.5-2k. Its ability to shoot after moving is far better then the T34.The panther is not only a perk tank but an expensive one.
The M4A3-75 might seem like a strange choice vs the 76mm version or a Firefly. But the 50 cal aamg and the rudimentery stabilization and high rof and high speed turrent traverse along with T34 level armour and speed make it a neat ballance against the T34-85 and the Panzer IVh. Obviosly not for toe to toe fights because its gun is weaker.
-
M4 was used by all the allies and the SU. It was used in Africa, Europe, and the Pacific. It could be used is most senerios involving tanks and still be historicly accurate (maybe not to the subtype.)
Also, there were a bunch of vehicles that used it's chassis as a base.
-
Panther G an expensive perk? Come on, it was the most widely produced tank in Germany from 1944-45.
------------------
Rendar
-
Rarity is not the issue. Capability is.
If a Panzer IVH is the tank we want to compare to, then the Panther is a very expensive perk. The Tiger 1 would be a 30 pt perk. the Panther would be a 70 pt perk the Tiger II would be a 100+ pt perk.
The Sherman firefly would be 30 the IS2m would be 70.