Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: stephen on April 21, 2010, 11:19:49 PM
-
Im glad to see more versions of the M4 being introduced as it made a significant impact, (at-least to the men that crew'd it).
However..., I worry that the VC Firefly will remain at its current perk price, and continue to un-balance gameplay.
I sincerly hope that this move to earlier versions of the M4 is being made in order to raise the Fireflys perk price, by offering an up-gunned Sherman that will fill the void bettween the A3 75mm, and the 76mm Firefly, and still keep the M4 competitive against the MKIV Panzers.
I think these additions (along with a more expensive Firefly) will definatly offset the numerical supperiority of the Firefly when factoring in perk price, and effectivness.
Most countrys had a super tank that had a VERY effective gun, and VERY good armor..., all of which where in service by the end of the war. (Tiger, M-26, and the Stalin tank come to mind)
The VC Firefly fits somwhere bettween these, and actual tank destroyers HISTORICALY..., yet its cheap availability assures that it will be seen in greater numbers in the MA, and it has unbalnced the game as mentiond before.
More versions of tanks, and correct assignment of perk price will level the field once again..., and im truly egstatic when I think what this means for the future of the ground game if implemented correctly.
You guys are drawing a fine line; and though it takes time to empliment, I realise that HT and the crew are doing thier best to further the game, and level the playing field.
Thank you for trying to bring some semblance of fairness to the ground game HT and crew... <S> :aok
-
Now all we need is the Gloster Meteor MkIII. To fill the gap between the tempest and the Me262 in the air game. :aok
-
Im sorry, I just realised that perhaps instead of raising the Firefly's perk cost, the Tiger could be lowerd in cost...
The heavier armor doesnt seem to merit the extravagant perk price that the Tiger currently requires.
MAN this is a good move! :)
-
Raising the Firefly's perk cost would be preferable. Leave the T-34/85 as the cheap perk tank. You don't want to make Tigers and Fireflys so cheap as to make them overly common.
Also, you forgot to mention the British Centurion.
-
It appears that the Centurion was un-available in ww2, (which is a damn shame considering its service history).
Its most un-fortunate in that the best British tank of the war appears to be the Sherman itself, up-gunned to a 17 pounder with a 90% twist.
I would love to see the cruiser tanks added, but im afraid that they wouldnt be truly competitive. :(
-
So it was. For some reason I remembered a few getting in at the very end, but it seems not.
-
believe you were thinking of the british comet tank.. it came in at late 44 or 45 i think, very nice tank
-
The Comet would have a nice use in AH, - fast bugger with a good punch....
-
Im sorry, I just realised that perhaps instead of raising the Firefly's perk cost, the Tiger could be lowerd in cost...
The heavier armor doesnt seem to merit the extravagant perk price that the Tiger currently requires.
MAN this is a good move! :)
Agreed, especially seeing that the Tiger can seemingly be killed by an M8 with 2-3 well placed shots...I wonder how many Tiger vs M8 Greyhound Battles in WW2 were documented? And Ill bet those did not end well for those poor saps rollin those Greyhounds. I must say one thing, I am very impressed Waffle...the M4 new M4 is looking good and I especially like the Rocket Tube Attachment. Will this be another Package like the ability to add Gondies to certain AC or will it be a Perk thing??? Either way, way to go and keep em coming! :aok
-
I worry that the VC Firefly will remain at its current perk price, and continue to un-balance gameplay.
:headscratch: firefly usage (kills+deaths) is only 15%, 3rd after panz at 34% and wirb at 17%. hardly unbalancing. K/D doesnt look excessive either, esp considering its the only dedicated tank destroyer we have.
(http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/4729/gvusage2009.jpg)
(http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/1644/gvkd2009.jpg)
-
Agreed, especially seeing that the Tiger can seemingly be killed by an M8 with 2-3 well placed shots...I wonder how many Tiger vs M8 Greyhound Battles in WW2 were documented? And Ill bet those did not end well for those poor saps rollin those Greyhounds............. :aok
I seem to remember a doc somewhere stating after D-Day it averaged about 3 dead Shermans to every Tiger knocked out.
Given the huge availablity of replacement Shermans it worked out pretty good in the end..................
............unless of course you were a Sherman driver!! :uhoh
...cheers eh! :D
-
I seem to remember a doc somewhere stating after D-Day it averaged about 3 dead Shermans to every Tiger knocked out.
Given the huge availablity of replacement Shermans it worked out pretty good in the end..................
............unless of course you were a Sherman driver!! :uhoh
...cheers eh! :D
I remember reading a book by a Panzer Commander (I don't remember the name) who server on both the Eastern and Western fronts. He said that one Tiger was equal to five T-34s. About the Sherman he said that one Tiger was equal to four Shermans but it seemed like there were always five.
-
Im sorry, I just realised that perhaps instead of raising the Firefly's perk cost, the Tiger could be lowerd in cost...
The Tiger's perk cost was lowered about 40% when the Firefly was introduced.
Personally I think all the GV perk costs should go up. A 5 perk cost is so negligible as to be meaningless. Restore the Tiger's original perk cost and raise the Firefly's to about 20 would be my suggestion (T-34/85 at about 10-15).
-
some charts...
sry, forgot to credit snailguy for the charts ;)
-
Wonder what the perk would be on THIS guy :D
(http://www.allpar.com/images/tanks/sherman-tank.jpg)
-
Israel found a way to do it... why not?
lol :rofl
-
ANYTHING can be killed by ANYTHING with enough bullets :cool: :D
Agreed, especially seeing that the Tiger can seemingly be killed by an M8 with 2-3 well placed shots...I wonder how many Tiger vs M8 Greyhound Battles in WW2 were documented? And Ill bet those did not end well for those poor saps rollin those Greyhounds. I must say one thing, I am very impressed Waffle...the M4 new M4 is looking good and I especially like the Rocket Tube Attachment. Will this be another Package like the ability to add Gondies to certain AC or will it be a Perk thing??? Either way, way to go and keep em coming! :aok
and nothing probley (if thats the 75MM version) cause its as deadly as the T34/76 in game now
Wonder what the perk would be on THIS guy :D
(http://www.allpar.com/images/tanks/sherman-tank.jpg)
-
Israel found a way to do it... why not?
lol :rofl
Heck, the M-51 Sherman carries a 105mm :)
(http://www.wikiwak.com/image/M51-Isherman-latrun-1.jpg)
-
The M4A3 (76mm) sherman we will soon get will be a nice fit between the panzer and the firefly/tiger. The 76mm gun is a good gun and will be able to defeat all tanks except the tiger (given it can penetrate the tiger at the right range and direction). The armor is decent. What makes it attractive to me is that like another poster stated on another board is that it will change some of the tactics we use in the GV world of HTC. Many times I take a GV out just to test a new tactic. Sometimes it works sometimes I die. It will take a few days or so to figure the tank out once we get it. I think it will be a nice fit. I wonder though if it will have a perk along the likes of the T34/85?
BigKev
-
I remember reading a book by a Panzer Commander (I don't remember the name) who server on both the Eastern and Western fronts. He said that one Tiger was equal to five T-34s. About the Sherman he said that one Tiger was equal to four Shermans but it seemed like there were always five.
Kinda depends on what you read I guess :)
"On 18th September 1944 Panthers of the 111th Panzer Brigade began the attack, but in two days of tough fighting they lost 43 tanks for only 5 Shermans and 3 M10 Tank Destroyers." This was Creighton Abrams and his boys, part of the 4th Armored. Apparently tactics and teamwork worked to even things out.
-
if the sherman M4A3 75 and 76 mm are coming in and if there making a rocket version they should make a DD version
-
The tiger had a high amount of fear it put into the minds of anyone who came across them. I had read a book about a battle on the eastern front, in which there were 3 tigers against the t34s. It was recorded the tigers had scored an impressive 54 victories before running out of ammunition and having to withdrawl. The only problem was the t34 would not stop coming, there were just too many. In AH2 the tiger would more than likely be killed by the t34 a lot sooner. I have been killed while in a tiger from over 3200m away with just one shot from a t34; well placed shot or not, unless i had my hatch opened and the shell came right in, this would never happen at those distances in the war. Tiger has definitely been neutered in this game.
<S>
-
The tiger had a high amount of fear it put into the minds of anyone who came across them. I had read a book about a battle on the eastern front, in which there were 3 tigers against the t34s. It was recorded the tigers had scored an impressive 54 victories before running out of ammunition and having to withdrawl. The only problem was the t34 would not stop coming, there were just too many. In AH2 the tiger would more than likely be killed by the t34 a lot sooner. I have been killed while in a tiger from over 3200m away with just one shot from a t34; well placed shot or not, unless i had my hatch opened and the shell came right in, this would never happen at those distances in the war. Tiger has definitely been neutered in this game.
<S>
You discount tactics. Russian tactics, particularly early in the war, sucked really badly.
-
I would agree the Russian tactics were poor, this doen't take into fact the tigers were over 2000m away knocking these tanks out. The t34 had no other option than to charge the tigers. All I am saying is that this game has really taken away the tiger's intimidation. For the amount it is perked in comparison to the Firefly, its a waste of points and time.
-
Wonder what the perk would be on THIS guy :D
(http://www.allpar.com/images/tanks/sherman-tank.jpg)
isnt that the m36?
-
I told a friend about the 75mm and 76mm Shermans we are getting and came across a question. He said "What? It's only 1mm, that is not much difference." So what are the differences between these two?
-
I told a friend about the 75mm and 76mm Shermans we are getting and came across a question. He said "What? It's only 1mm, that is not much difference." So what are the differences between these two?
the M3 75 mm gun used in the A3 has a case length of 350mm
the 17pdr gun used in the Firefly was
76.2x583mm
-
I told a friend about the 75mm and 76mm Shermans we are getting and came across a question. He said "What? It's only 1mm, that is not much difference." So what are the differences between these two?
In game terms -- about an inch penetration at 1000 yards.
-
In game terms -- about an inch penetration at 1000 yards.
in game terms, what thickness of armor the 76mm can penetrate at 1000m, the 75 can pierce at 500m.
-
The tiger was primarily a defensive weapon, on those relatively rare occasions it was deployed in an offensive capacity it didn't do all that well. In fact if you go all the way back to the N. Africa and early Russian campaigns German losses vs allied tanks were equally high. Defensively the Germans had the tremendous advantage of superior AT guns and tactics. US TD elements of all varieties did very well vs German armor...
-
:headscratch: firefly usage (kills+deaths) is only 15%, 3rd after panz at 34% and wirb at 17%. hardly unbalancing. K/D doesnt look excessive either, esp considering its the only dedicated tank destroyer we have.
(http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/4729/gvusage2009.jpg)
(http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/1644/gvkd2009.jpg)
this cheap perk cost will not allow the new M4s to be implicated into battles near the actual amount used and the VCs will still dominate over its peasants
-
Once the M4a3 is introduced, the VC Firefly should have the perks increased; just like the panzer/tiger only an allied variant. This would make the numbers in the game decrease with the qty of fireflies in each battle.
<S>
-
my last post. put implemented in place of implicated :lol dang i was tired.
agreed speak
-
is the M4a3 75 or 76mm?
-
Both. And 105...
HT has indicated that 75mm and 76mm versions are coming. No notification of the 105
-
Both. And 105...
HT has indicated that 75mm and 76mm versions are coming. No notification of the 105
105 wasn't used as much or as well as the 76mm and 75mm
-
Both. And 105...
HT has indicated that 75mm and 76mm versions are coming. No notification of the 105
:huh
why have the 76 sherm when we got the 75 and the firefly.
why not model the M10 instead!!
-
:huh
why have the 76 sherm when we got the 75 and the firefly.
why not model the M10 instead!!
76 didnt have the T34. also the 75 can be a good perk farmer... and not the M-10, M-18 much better :aok
-
76 didnt have the T34. also the 75 can be a good perk farmer... and not the M-10, M-18 much better :aok
was the m18 built more than the M10?
-
was the m18 built more than the M10?
No, 4,993 M-10s compared to 2507 M-18s. The M-10 is more historically significant, but the M-18 has better performance/armament.
-
It appears that the Centurion was un-available in ww2, (which is a damn shame considering its service history).
Its most un-fortunate in that the best British tank of the war appears to be the Sherman itself, up-gunned to a 17 pounder with a 90% twist.
I would love to see the cruiser tanks added, but im afraid that they wouldnt be truly competitive. :(
I would also like to see more tanks added instead of texture every new patch that comes out. Ex: King Tiger, M-18 Hellcat, Pather, jagdpanzar, etc.
-
Now all we need is the Gloster Meteor MkIII. To fill the gap between the tempest and the Me262 in the air game. :aok
This.
-
No, 4,993 M-10s compared to 2507 M-18s. The M-10 is more historically significant, but the M-18 has better performance/armament.
actually this is not true... the M-18 has less frontal armor punch with its gun and less armor... but the M18 makes up for it with speed...speed...oh and speed. 60mph max speed on the M18 vs the M10 at 32mph... M10 was actually developed on the M4A1 hull. The M18 used the M1A1 76mm gun vs the M10's 76.2 (3") M7 main gun.
-
actually this is not true... the M-18 has less frontal armor punch with its gun and less armor... but the M18 makes up for it with speed...speed...oh and speed. 60mph max speed on the M18 vs the M10 at 32mph... M10 was actually developed on the M4A1 hull. The M18 used the M1A1 76mm gun vs the M10's 76.2 (3") M7 main gun.
i dunno
web searching reveals the M7 and the M1A1 main guns neck n neck in muz vel and armor penetration at range!
-
i dunno
web searching reveals the M7 and the M1A1 main guns neck n neck in muz vel and armor penetration at range!
except that i said frontal armor penetration only... this is crucial if facing a PnzrIVH with a 76mm or 76.2mm. The 3 inch actually had a better chance of destroying a tank from the front than the 76mm M1A1
-
except that i said frontal armor penetration only... this is crucial if facing a PnzrIVH with a 76mm or 76.2mm. The 3 inch actually had a better chance of destroying a tank from the front than the 76mm M1A1
i no what u said, but armor is armor.
and 90mm armor is 90mm of armor, and the stats for both these guns are neck in neck in penetration
of 90mm of armor at 1km.
90mm is the normal frontal armor of the PkW4...
now u up that to 100mm of the Tiger, and 120mm/sloped of the Panther, and all bets are off!
-
i no what u said, but armor is armor.
and 90mm armor is 90mm of armor, and the stats for both these guns are neck in neck in penetration
of 90mm of armor at 1km.
90mm is the normal frontal armor of the PkW4...
now u up that to 100mm of the Tiger, and 120mm/sloped of the Panther, and all bets are off!
ever think of distance kenne? yes i understand the 90mm armor can be penetrated. I'm stating a fact that the 3inch has more punch than the 76mm and that the M18 traded this punch along with armor to get the 60mph max speed and the high maneuverability that it was known for...
-
ever think of distance kenne? yes i understand the 90mm armor can be penetrated. I'm stating a fact that the 3inch has more punch than the 76mm and that the M18 traded this punch along with armor to get the 60mph max speed and the high maneuverability that it was known for...
:huh
The armor penetration capabilities of the 76mm M1A2 used on the M18 and M4(76) series of tanks were virtually identical to the 3" M7 used on the M10. It was a newer design and lighter than the M7, but the ammunition was interchangable AFAIK.
I think you are confused with the Comet's "77mm" 17lbr vs. the 76mm 17lbr found on the Firefly and Achilles. That was a true trade of capability for size/weight. The two guns fired the same projectile, but the "77mm" version (called that to prevent confusion from the 76.2mm 17lbr) had a smaller case/less powder and therefore less punch.
-
:huh
The armor penetration capabilities of the 76mm M1A2 used on the M18 and M4(76) series of tanks were virtually identical to the 3" M7 used on the M10. It was a newer design and lighter than the M7, but the ammunition was interchangable AFAIK.
I think you are confused with the Comet's "77mm" 17lbr vs. the 76mm 17lbr found on the Firefly and Achilles. That was a true trade of capability for size/weight. The two guns fired the same projectile, but the "77mm" version (called that to prevent confusion from the 76.2mm 17lbr) had a smaller case/less powder and therefore less punch.
then i was wrong... i only have read that they traded the 3" for the 76mm for weight and and lost the frontal armor punch the 3" had vs the 76mm
-
then i was wrong... i only have read that they traded the 3" for the 76mm for weight and and lost the frontal armor punch the 3" had vs the 76mm
AP rounds don't care if the armor it is striking is on the front, side, rear, top or bottom of an object, so your statement makes no sense.
The M18 had only a half inch of frontal armor vs. 2 inches on the thickest part of the M10, so maybe that is where you are confused about trading weight for frontal armor.
-
105 wasn't used as much or as well as the 76mm and 75mm
The 105 mm Howitzer Motor Carriage M7 (Priest) was used extensively but not as a tank destroyer because that was not its intended role. It was primarily designed to fit the mobile artillery role in which it saw much use. Each US armored division had 3 battalions of M7 Priests to act as mobile artillery to support the armored operations.
ack-ack
-
actually this is not true... the M-18 has less frontal armor punch with its gun and less armor... but the M18 makes up for it with speed...speed...oh and speed. 60mph max speed on the M18 vs the M10 at 32mph... M10 was actually developed on the M4A1 hull. The M18 used the M1A1 76mm gun vs the M10's 76.2 (3") M7 main gun.
The guns had the same performance. Look it up in a decent reference. Anything by Zaloga will do.
-
The 105 mm Howitzer Motor Carriage M7 (Priest) was used extensively but not as a tank destroyer because that was not its intended role. It was primarily designed to fit the mobile artillery role in which it saw much use. Each US armored division had 3 battalions of M7 Priests to act as mobile artillery to support the armored operations.
ack-ack
They were later replaced by Sherman 105s because the open hulled M7s were easy to take out with Arty, at least I am pretty sure. I don't think they were all that rare as someone else suggested.
-
The 105 mm Howitzer Motor Carriage M7 (Priest) was used extensively but not as a tank destroyer because that was not its intended role. It was primarily designed to fit the mobile artillery role in which it saw much use. Each US armored division had 3 battalions of M7 Priests to act as mobile artillery to support the armored operations.
ack-ack
yes i know this but i was talking about tank destroyers. apologies for not stating that
-
Check out this link. Has multiple ideas that could be implemented for a stronger GV assortment.
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/UnitedStates/selfpropelledguns/selfpropelledguns.html
-
I am glad to see the M4A3 being added,it is a great tank and wil be a great addition to AH.However I still have a question,When will it be released?