Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Dichotomy on February 11, 2011, 06:48:26 PM

Title: A Tank Killer
Post by: Dichotomy on February 11, 2011, 06:48:26 PM
For the Allies...

I think one has been asked for many times before but I can't seem to remember the model.  Someone help me out here.  :devil

Oh and Foo Fighters.. just one.. for me?
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Yossarian on February 11, 2011, 07:10:30 PM
Someone help me out here.  :devil

B-25H?  :devil
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Karnak on February 11, 2011, 08:00:24 PM
Hurricane Mk IId, Il-2?

Axis are the ones lacking any dedicated air-to-armor units in AH.
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Skulls22 on February 11, 2011, 11:42:23 PM
M18!!
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: M0nkey_Man on February 12, 2011, 12:08:12 AM
M-18  :noid
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: oakranger on February 12, 2011, 12:50:16 AM
P-47D-25
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Pigslilspaz on February 12, 2011, 01:22:43 AM
You mean the Short Stirling, right?  :noid
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Masherbrum on February 12, 2011, 06:39:29 AM
For the Allies...

I think one has been asked for many times before but I can't seem to remember the model.  Someone help me out here.  :devil

Oh and Foo Fighters.. just one.. for me?

I always found a 500 or 1,000lb bomb to work just fine.
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: RTHolmes on February 12, 2011, 07:15:39 AM
(http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/swcrc/37/images/fig4-37.jpg)

:aok
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: SmokinLoon on February 12, 2011, 09:33:43 AM
First, I think the Firefly could get an updated ammo load.  I know there were HE rounds available, but something tells me since they were designated TD's they have far fewer HE rounds on hand than AP rounds.  Why would a Firefly, a designated TD, ever go into the field with only HE??? Just a hunch, though.

Secondly, if there is a TD that could be added to the game with relative ease it would be the M10.  AH already has the chassis and the gun in the game.  The open turret is all that would be needed.

Thirdly, I'd vote for the M18 or Su100.  Both would brig something new to AH.  I hope the Su100 wold open the door for true tread traversing instead of car-like steering, but I know there are "coading" issues involved.  The 100mm D-10S APHE round could penetrate 150mm of 0 degree armor at 1000 yards.  The Su100 had 75mm of sloped armor up front, had 45mm on sides and rear, and 20mm on the top.  Speed was 30mph at best.  The main gun could only traverse 10 degrees left and right, and it carried only 34 rounds of ammo.  It has the same chassis as the T34.  It is void of any MG's for self defense.   

 
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: caldera on February 12, 2011, 09:47:42 AM
I always found a 500 or 1,000lb bomb to work just fine.

Beat me to it.  :lol

(http://i343.photobucket.com/albums/o460/caldera_08/AH2%20screenshots/ww-1.png)
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: LLogann on February 12, 2011, 12:22:52 PM
Are we talking about Tank Destroyers or air to ground?   :headscratch:
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: mthrockmor on February 12, 2011, 12:30:58 PM
I'm not sure but would the P-61 fit this role? If so, sign'r up! :rock

Boo
 :x
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Dichotomy on February 12, 2011, 02:00:54 PM
Are we talking about Tank Destroyers or air to ground?   :headscratch:

There were reports of Foo Fighters on the ground? Hmm... never heard of that.

Hey you're right dude an M18 would be really cool :D
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: SDGhalo on February 12, 2011, 02:26:32 PM
M 10 achillies which has a 17 pounder and the 75mm gun

M 18 Hellcat why not it was the fastest thing on treads.

Beaufighter and the halifax Mk III or the short stirling need to be added if were getting another us 4 engine heavy then its time for one of the other aliied four engine heavies to be added 

and the beaufighter deservesto be here it had a great service record.
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: LLogann on February 12, 2011, 02:34:01 PM
HS129 ?
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Skulls22 on February 12, 2011, 06:22:03 PM
Beaufighter...
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: 321BAR on February 12, 2011, 06:38:17 PM
 :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x
 :x :x :x :x
 :x :x :x :x
 :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x
 :x :x :x
            :x :x :x :x
                      
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: LLogann on February 12, 2011, 06:39:28 PM
It would have been cooler if those smilies were in the shape of "M-18"





 :lol
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: 321BAR on February 12, 2011, 06:41:02 PM
M-18 FOR TEH ^%# #!&* WIN!!! :x
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Dichotomy on February 12, 2011, 07:39:13 PM
 :furious

About freaking time..

you just cost me $20.  What happened? Did you get a life outside of AH or something?
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Masherbrum on February 13, 2011, 09:11:41 PM
M 10 achillies which has a 17 pounder and the 75mm gun

M 18 Hellcat why not it was the fastest thing on treads.

Beaufighter and the halifax Mk III or the short stirling need to be added if were getting another us 4 engine heavy then its time for one of the other aliied four engine heavies to be added  

and the beaufighter deservesto be here it had a great service record.

M-10's had something called "rivets". If they encountered a Tank Round and sheared, it bounced around the innards of the tank/crew.    

The M-18 was most certainly NOT "the fastest thing on treads in WWII".  

The Beau should been added prior to us even getting to vote on a 29.  
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: SDGhalo on February 13, 2011, 09:58:55 PM
[quote 

The M-18 was most certainly NOT "the fastest thing on treads in WWII".     

[/quote]

just found this on wiki and i was watching tank overall and it was about the m 18 hellcat


76 mm Gun Motor Carriage M18
Type Tank destroyer
Place of origin  United States
Service history
In service 1944-1957 (USA)
Specifications
Weight 17.7 metric tons (39,000 lb)
Length 6.68 m (21.9 ft) (with gun)
5.28 m (17.3 ft) (without gun)
Width 2.87 m (9.4 ft)
Height 2.57 m (8.4 ft)
Crew 5 (Commander, gunner, loader, driver, co-driver)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Armor 5 to 25 mm (0.2 to 1.0 in)
Primary weapon 1× 76 mm (76.2 mm) M1A1 gun
45 rounds
Secondary
weapon 1× .50 cal M2HB machine gun
800 rounds
Engine Continental R-975-C4, 9-cylinder, radial piston gasoline engine
340 hp (253 kW)
Power/weight 18.9 hp/t
Suspension Torsion bar
Operational
range 168 km (105 mi)
Speed up to 97 km/h (60 mph, maximum road
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Masherbrum on February 13, 2011, 10:07:31 PM
Keep searching.
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: LLogann on February 13, 2011, 10:26:34 PM
That watermelon is faster than my Durango!!!!
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: oakranger on February 13, 2011, 10:46:40 PM
M-18 FOR TEH ^%# #!&* WIN!!! :x

My P-47D-25 can kick your M-18 ass.   :t
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Tyrannis on February 13, 2011, 10:49:02 PM
Hurricane Mk IId, Il-2?

Axis are the ones lacking any dedicated air-to-armor units in AH.
whats the best convergence to set the IID's 40mm's on?
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: LLogann on February 13, 2011, 11:07:10 PM
[you being silly aside] that really comes down to shooting style.  I always advise people to set it out past the normal 250-400...... At the same time, when attacking gv's it is far less important for you to be hitting the same spot over and over.  (ie. a tank losing it's turret will not kill it compared to a plane losing it's wing)

At the end of the day, it should come down to the cannon you're firing.  (The Russian's shoot a little lower than the American's.)
[/you being silly aside]


whats the best convergence to set the IID's 40mm's on?
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: 321BAR on February 14, 2011, 12:17:41 AM
Keep searching.
i honestly cannot remember the vehicle you're talking about...
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Tyrannis on February 14, 2011, 12:35:50 AM
M-10's had something called "rivets". If they encountered a Tank Round and sheared, it bounced around the innards of the tank/crew.    

The M-18 was most certainly NOT "the fastest thing on treads in WWII".  

The Beau should been added prior to us even getting to vote on a 29.  
opinion=/=fact.
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: LLogann on February 14, 2011, 12:38:11 AM
Last guy you want to mess around with

opinion=/=fact.
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: 321BAR on February 14, 2011, 12:44:01 AM
opinion=/=fact.
masherbrum knows alot more than you on this stuff bud. on both the M10 and M18 he is correct although his beaufighter opinion deserves a little fixing into a
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/M18_hellcat_profile.jpg)
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: Tyrannis on February 14, 2011, 12:45:20 AM
masherbrum knows alot more than you on this stuff bud. on both the M10 and M18 he is correct although his beaufighter opinion deserves a little fixing into a
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48/M18_hellcat_profile.jpg)
oh no i wasent refering to that at all.

i ment about his beu being added before the b29 statement.

i guess i should of just quoted that part  :o
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: haggerty on February 15, 2011, 01:19:27 PM
I would rather have the M36 instead of the M18...I never see the 36 mentioned here or in World of Tanks.
The 36 actually had some armor, and also the 90mm instead of the 76mm.
Unfortunately both would be eaten alive in MA due to the open turret...gun would be popped just as easy as the wirb, but wouldnt be able to fire back.
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: AWwrgwy on February 15, 2011, 02:06:57 PM
I would rather have the M36 instead of the M18...I never see the 36 mentioned here or in World of Tanks.
The 36 actually had some armor, and also the 90mm instead of the 76mm.
Unfortunately both would be eaten alive in MA due to the open turret...gun would be popped just as easy as the wirb, but wouldnt be able to fire back.

+1

And I've wondered the same thing. I've even read, somewhere, some disparaging remarks about the M-18 from crews who were formerly in M-10s.

M-10-->3" former AAA gun.
M-18-->76mm, same as in the M-4(76) in game now.
M-36-->90mm, same as the Pershing.

Bigger is better.  :devil


wrongway
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: NormH3 on February 15, 2011, 02:22:20 PM
panzerjäger tiger
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: SmokinLoon on February 15, 2011, 04:49:10 PM
I still say the Su100 or M18.  Both would add something currently absent from the game in terms of gv's.  Along with a whole host of M3 and SdKfz 251 variants. 
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: 321BAR on February 16, 2011, 12:55:15 AM
+1

And I've wondered the same thing. I've even read, somewhere, some disparaging remarks about the M-18 from crews who were formerly in M-10s.

M-10-->3" former AAA gun.
M-18-->76mm, same as in the M-4(76) in game now.
M-36-->90mm, same as the Pershing.

Bigger is better.  :devil


wrongway
M-18 wont have realism problems in here. By the way... how big is 3" compared to 76mm anyways? ;)
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: morfiend on February 16, 2011, 05:11:17 PM
M-18 wont have realism problems in here. By the way... how big is 3" compared to 76mm anyways? ;)


  There is 2.54 cm in an inch or 25.4 mm so the 76mm is .2 of a mm smaller than 3 inches.


    :salute
Title: Re: A Tank Killer
Post by: 321BAR on February 16, 2011, 06:28:11 PM

  There is 2.54 cm in an inch or 25.4 mm so the 76mm is .2 of a mm smaller than 3 inches.


    :salute
yes i get this but if you noticed he lists bigger is better and 3 inches is bigger than 76mm :aok