Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Pongo on September 02, 2000, 04:03:00 PM
-
I am not sure how but Pyro seems to have gotten the idea that the MG34 on the anti aircraft mount of a Panzer IV could only shoot over to the front of the turrent.
This is wrong.There is a ring around the cupola that the mount moves on. The gun can be quickly swung to any quadrant. This would be an advantage of the Panzer over the Sherman. While the Sherman would have a .50 cal mg to defend its self, it is static mounted and the comander can only fire it a limited quadrent of the tank(Front - right - rear) I believe.
I will take this oppertunity to hope that the next two tanks introduced in the game will be the
M4a3(75) and the T34(85)
My reasoning once again is this.
Panzer Good anti armour, some anti aircraft, slow, weak armour.
M4 Weaker anti armour, good anti aircraft, fast, well armoured.
T34 Good anti armour, No anti aircraft, very fast, well armoured.
Of the three the best anti tank vehicle should be the Panzer. But it is the slowest and easiest to kill. By far the best tank in the game would be the Sherman, Unless other tanks showed up.
The T34 would be the best mass tank attack tank, but would be very suseptible to aircraft and could out run its anti aircaft vehicles.
What better ballence could be achieved? The M4A3E8(76) would just give the Americans a supperior tank to everyone else which serves no purpose. In this game the 75mm sherman would rock! It was designed to go behind eneymy lines and wreak havoc...
The 76mm T34 would be too weak.
That leaves some great perk tanks. M4A3E8, Panther, Is2m, Persing, Tiger I and II....
cant wait
-
If looking to T-34 M41 (I believe) with 76L41 F-34 cannon, it is more powerful than Sherman M4 - M4A1 75L38 cannon, if there weren't any special ammunition used, and as I recall, M4A1 or M4 didn't use tungsten rounds.
So all in one, pretty much equal guns.
T-34 M40 had lower velocity cannon (L-11), weaker than M4s.
I figure that T-34 M41 would be quite fearsome anti-tank.
M41 came on same year as M40, with more armor also I believe.
To have equal year T-34 as PZ-IVh, it should be T-34 M43, which I believe is fall/winter '42 and with more armour again, but same F-34 cannon.
T-34 with 85mm would be quite a monster, but it wasn't done until something like mid '44.
US M10 Wolverine would be quite intresting, with fairly low armour and open top, but with 76L54 cannon.
For online play in Main Arena, T-34 M43 would be good choice because of its speed, though, totally lacking self defence when having only coaxial and bow machineguns.. (maybe issue them with PPSh 41G so they can try their luck (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif))
What comes to Pz-IVhs A-A MG34, I'd be happy to see it work like that!
I never wasn't sure of that it would go around like that, so I kept shut.. I hope that its muzzle gets smaller also. (its fairly huge even though it should have flash hider making muzzle effect smaller)
Other that I'd like to see would be anti-tank guns to be pulled with halftracks. (of course this would disable use of troops, because AT-gun crew would be there)
-
The gun on the M4a3(75) would have a poor chance of defeating another sherman or a T34 but a good chance agianst a PZIV. The T34(85) would have a great chance against a panzer IV and a good chance agianst a sherman or T34. The Panzer would would find either of the other tanks a bit harder to kill then it currently finds other panzers but still quite deadly against them.
The panzer should have the same 360 degree AAMG capability as the scarf ring on the M3. They are mounted fundimentaly the same way.
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
The gun on the M4a3(75) would have a poor chance of defeating another sherman or a T34 but a good chance agianst a PZIV. The T34(85) would have a great chance against a panzer IV and a good chance agianst a sherman or T34. The Panzer would would find either of the other tanks a bit harder to kill then it currently finds other panzers but still quite deadly against them.
The panzer should have the same 360 degree AAMG capability as the scarf ring on the M3. They are mounted fundimentaly the same way.
I've only heard accounts of the pindel mount MG34 AAMG on the Panzer IVH and J past '44 (I'd still rather have the MG42 mount, more rounds with less accuracy, but this was rare, as was AAMG mounts on the IV class )
The Sherman's .50 is a side mount, which has about the same are as we have now on the IV, albeit the commande could get out and swivel the gun around, but with the gun laying speed of the Sherman I sure wouldn't (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
There were e8 Shermans that were not up-gunned, although there aren't really any advantages of the e8 over a M4a3 in AH.
The 75L40 of the Panzer IV would still be the best gun if the T-34/85 wasn't around, but the AP and HE capability of the larger gun and it's superior speed would seem to make it best for base strikes (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Shermans would definately have the edge against aircraft, with the thickest roof, a .50, and all roof armor sloped. Couple that with good speed and a good HE gun.
My one suggestion is a Cormwell series for the British. I mean, how can you say no to a Merlin powered tank? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
- Jig
-
If they model the throw of the suspension correctly and the smoothness of the ride than there might be an an advantage to the E8(75) over the straight M4a3. The same applies to the Panther and in the opisite way to the T34. Very rough ride.
-
It is just too bad that I think HTC will see PZ-V too superior to allied tanks and we will not see it (even though it is '42 tank!)
good thing for panther when compared to T-34/85, is that T-34/85 is '44 and Panther is '42 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Bah. Gimme a Panzerschreck & Tommy gun.. ill fend off the whole Air Corps and Panzerarmees.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Fishu its nothing to do with dates and you know it. The Panther is just silly good compared to a Sherman or a T34. The wide open spaces of AH would make it more so. I just hope they can restrain them selves from makeing the American tank the best normal one in the game.
-
Originally posted by Fishu:
It is just too bad that I think HTC will see PZ-V too superior to allied tanks and we will not see it (even though it is '42 tank!)
good thing for panther when compared to T-34/85, is that T-34/85 is '44 and Panther is '42 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Dude, the Pz V is a mid '43 tank. (okay early '43 if you want to include the D)
Panther G was mid '44, Panzer IV H was mid '43 to mid '44
You figure 5,900 Panthers altogather from Jan '43 to mid '45 , while in 1944 and early '45 there were 29500 T-34/85's made.
By the Normandy Invasions there were several tanks on the par with the Panther, namely the IS-2, and the M4A3E2/76 (least it had a chance, anyway (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
If you wanna talk uber, how about the Panzer VI Ausf B, mid '43 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif)
- Jig
-
Fek play Combat Mission and find out how superior the Gerry armour really was. http://www.battlefront.com/cmdemo.html (http://www.battlefront.com/cmdemo.html)
Pershing(Firefly maybe) tanks can match Tigers from what I've seen.
True pongo but lets not forget that the Allies had massive artillery support and airpower, also it was never usually 1 vs 1 but 20 vs 1.When the Allies ran into a roadblocks they just got on the horn and called in Typhoons or groundfire.
[This message has been edited by Torque (edited 09-05-2000).]
-
True torque. The firefly can mutually kill tigers. And the Pershing is on par with the tiger. But the Panther is supperior to all three. If your game does not show that it is play ballanced...
-
I think the M7 Priest is a better choice all around. Artillery is what we need, not a tank. It also has a coupla gun like the M3 halftrack (.50 cal on a 360 degree ring mount).
I would prefer that tank.
Hans.
-
Originally posted by Jigster:
Dude, the Pz V is a mid '43 tank. (okay early '43 if you want to include the D)
Panther G was mid '44, Panzer IV H was mid '43 to mid '44
You figure 5,900 Panthers altogather from Jan '43 to mid '45 , while in 1944 and early '45 there were 29500 T-34/85's made.
By the Normandy Invasions there were several tanks on the par with the Panther, namely the IS-2, and the M4A3E2/76 (least it had a chance, anyway (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
If you wanna talk uber, how about the Panzer VI Ausf B, mid '43 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/eek.gif)
- Jig
Ops, found out that I was looking at PZ-IVg next to the PZ-Va stats..
Yes.. even in my source its '43 as I we're looking at correct line.
D is mid, A is early (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But I think you made the same error, Tiger I is '42 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Tiger I is '42 and Tiger II is mid '44
(Tiger came out before Panther right?)
I wouldn't have anything against Tiger II's 40mm top armour.. (or something close)
[This message has been edited by Fishu (edited 09-05-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Hans:
I think the M7 Priest is a better choice all around. Artillery is what we need, not a tank. It also has a coupla gun like the M3 halftrack (.50 cal on a 360 degree ring mount).
Now this idea would be cool, or even the 75mm howitzer armed M3 halftrack (might be easier to bring into service). Give enough deviation to the HE round so its not like an oversized sniper rifle and enough range to sit behind the friendly tanks, and off I would go to support a base assault (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Cheers
-
Not nearly so good as the 105 armed M4A3.
-
How about JagdTiger with 128mm cannon that could well fit the need for artilery gun (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
(or hummel?)
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
Not nearly so good as the 105 armed M4A3.
Glad I'm not the only supporter of the Sherman 105 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Only problem is range (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif) short barrel version.
M-12 GMC, now thar's a beast.
- Jig
-
Originally posted by Fishu:
Ops, found out that I was looking at PZ-IVg next to the PZ-Va stats..
Yes.. even in my source its '43 as I we're looking at correct line.
D is mid, A is early (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
But I think you made the same error, Tiger I is '42 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Tiger I is '42 and Tiger II is mid '44
(Tiger came out before Panther right?)
I wouldn't have anything against Tiger II's 40mm top armour.. (or something close)
[This message has been edited by Fishu (edited 09-05-2000).]
Panther VD (or 'D') was first then the VA (or 'A')
850 Panther D's made from January '43 to September '43. The D is considered the worst because of the 595 HP Maybach engine, and constant transmission problems, all related to insufficent testing time. Combat debute was Operation Zitadelle, and the Panthers D were almost 8 tons over the original planned combat weight. Thus the whole thing about the Panthers being barely manuverable started. Then the Pz V D2 came out witht he 715 Maybach and things changed in a hurry (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Next came the Pz VA ('Panther A'), 2000 produced between August 1943 and May 1944.
Only real differences were a redesigned turrent and mantlet, and a ball mount for the hull MG34.
Pz VG was produced from March 1944 to April 1945, 3126 made.
Driver slit, replaced with periscope, and the night vision equipment.
Okay okay so the Pz VI Ausf B was a December '43 tank, sorry (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) 489 made between '43 and '45.
- Jig
-
You guys all keep asking for bigger & slower tanks where I would go the other route.
The M24 Chafee light tank.
A 75mm gun w/coax .50, and a .50 AA MG in the commanders position. Plus it will go 35mph.
Of course it don't have the armor a heavy tank would have, but for gameplay, I think the faster tank would be my preference.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Chaffee would be great. 40mm at fields might give it trouble though.
-
I've been asking for the M24 since they first announced that tanks would be in AH. I would love to see that tank. Also I think some of the German recon vehicles with heavier armament would be excellent. And of course the Soviets had a variety of fast, light tanks.
Give me a lot of speed, and enough firepower to take out airfield targets.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 09-05-2000).]
-
Artillery would be a nice addition . Indirect fire requires team work and communication. It would add another facet to this gem, and it would be yet one more reason why this game is superior to other sims .
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
Chaffee would be great. 40mm at fields might give it trouble though.
To follow up on a discussion we had before, I did a test with the 40mm ack offline. I bombed all the ack at 27 except one 40mm. Then I ran a panzer down the hill from 56. The first time I died before I could say "one-one thousand". The second time I died in four seconds. Both times I was being shot in the frontal armor .
-
Here is what I do...try it.
drive towards an ack at non tobagan speeds and stop as soon as it hits you. see how long it takes a 40mm to kill you. I doubt it ever will. frontal shots against a panzer IV from a 40mm dont seem to hurt it. Now if you give it a rear shot well..different matter.
If you let it sneak up within 100 meters..differnt matter too.
If you let a ostwind behind you in a panzer yup...probebly kill ya if it has ap.
But frontally the 37mm will not normally kill a panzer IV. Which is what we were talking about. I just spent another night getting my hull warmed by 40mm please dont tell me they are dangorouse to a reasonably driven panzer...
-
I had stopped before I was in range, then drove up untill I was shot . It didn't give me time to put in R and back out like the 20mm ack does .
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
Here is what I do...try it.
drive towards an ack at non tobagan speeds and stop as soon as it hits you. see how long it takes a 40mm to kill you. I doubt it ever will. frontal shots against a panzer IV from a 40mm dont seem to hurt it. Now if you give it a rear shot well..different matter.
If you let it sneak up within 100 meters..differnt matter too.
If you let a ostwind behind you in a panzer yup...probebly kill ya if it has ap.
But frontally the 37mm will not normally kill a panzer IV. Which is what we were talking about. I just spent another night getting my hull warmed by 40mm please dont tell me they are dangorouse to a reasonably driven panzer...
Acks rarely kills panzer, but wait for Hispano, it's 20mm kills panzer through front (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
* fish's only panzer kill ever in Fw190A-8, done through front hull in very low angle *
-
Originally posted by Jigster:
Panther VD (or 'D') was first then the VA (or 'A')
Okey.. got to give a check for those months (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I don't know months very well in english.. still.
-
Sauve. I dont know what to say. The only time I think I have been killed by it was when it was firing at an AC and I drove a few 100 yards closer befor it fired at me. And I think that was on the side. If I approach it the way I described it never hurts me. Not even damage. And this isnot some small sample I have spent 20 minutes sitting in it fighting other tanks. As long as I stay at 1200 or so and keep my front to it. Nothing.
I must have been hit many thousands of times by 40mm ack and not been hurt by it. I think that my experiace is typical....Are the smaller guns at the airfields 20mm or 50Cal?
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
Sauve. I dont know what to say. The only time I think I have been killed by it was when it was firing at an AC and I drove a few 100 yards closer befor it fired at me. And I think that was on the side. If I approach it the way I described it never hurts me. Not even damage. And this isnot some small sample I have spent 20 minutes sitting in it fighting other tanks. As long as I stay at 1200 or so and keep my front to it. Nothing.
I must have been hit many thousands of times by 40mm ack and not been hurt by it. I think that my experiace is typical....Are the smaller guns at the airfields 20mm or 50Cal?
German 20mm quad's. Nasty guns with a much longer barrel then the MG 151. (At least that's what it APPEARS to be, they could be .50 but the gun plate looks like the German one)
I don't they there are .50 cal ack anymore (least I haven't seen it)
- Jig
-
Originally posted by Pongo:
Sauve. I dont know what to say. The only time I think I have been killed by it was when it was firing at an AC and I drove a few 100 yards closer befor it fired at me. And I think that was on the side. If I approach it the way I described it never hurts me. Not even damage. And this isnot some small sample I have spent 20 minutes sitting in it fighting other tanks. As long as I stay at 1200 or so and keep my front to it. Nothing.
I must have been hit many thousands of times by 40mm ack and not been hurt by it. I think that my experiace is typical....Are the smaller guns at the airfields 20mm or 50Cal?
Those 'small guns' hurts alot, so it is like 20mm.
...at least it does blow up halftracks pretty fine from long range.