Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Pigslilspaz on June 10, 2011, 07:33:45 PM
-
I would like to see the introduction of smaller tanks, rather than more big ones. Also, I have a slight idea to make them not really hangar queens. Basically with the addition of smaller tanks, I'd like to see a revision of perk values on the larger vehicles like the T-34-75 and 85. Would make it so folks used the smaller ones more, and make the larger tanks seem even more of a threat.
-
Panzer III would be best choice. The 50mm is no slouch, and armor falls in line with the Mk IV.
-
The problem that tanks have is that later tanks with thicker armor pretty much cannot be killed by earlier tanks with smaller caliber guns. In aircraft, ever the two 7.7mm armed D3A can potentially kill an F4U-4, Tempest or Me262 as they have performance advantages, but are not invulnerable to its weapons. A Tiger I is all but immune to a Cruiser Mk IV, no matter how badly the Tiger I player does and no matter how skilled the Cruiser Mk IV player is.
-
The problem that tanks have is that later tanks with thicker armor pretty much cannot be killed by earlier tanks with smaller caliber guns. In aircraft, ever the two 7.7mm armed D3A can potentially kill an F4U-4, Tempest or Me262 as they have performance advantages, but are not invulnerable to its weapons. A Tiger I is all but immune to a Cruiser Mk IV, no matter how badly the Tiger I player does and no matter how skilled the Cruiser Mk IV player is.
That's why I also suggested that if this were implemented, that the vehicle perk values would be reevaluated.
-
That's why I also suggested that if this were implemented, that the vehicle perk values would be reevaluated.
That wouldn't solve the problem though. As I alluded, the perk fighters are all vulnerable to even a D3A's guns. A T-34/76 would be immune to a Cruiser Mk IV's gun, so what is the player in their free Cruiser Mk IV supposed to do when a T-34/76 rolls up at them? If he doesn't have the perk points to grab his own T-34/76 he has no option against it other than grabbing an airplane with bomb capability.
-
That wouldn't solve the problem though. As I alluded, the perk fighters are all vulnerable to even a D3A's guns. A T-34/76 would be immune to a Cruiser Mk IV's gun, so what is the player in their free Cruiser Mk IV supposed to do when a T-34/76 rolls up at them? If he doesn't have the perk points to grab his own T-34/76 he has no option against it other than grabbing an airplane with bomb capability.
Ah, didn't think about it that way, back to the drawing board
-
That wouldn't solve the problem though. As I alluded, the perk fighters are all vulnerable to even a D3A's guns. A T-34/76 would be immune to a Cruiser Mk IV's gun, so what is the player in their free Cruiser Mk IV supposed to do when a T-34/76 rolls up at them? If he doesn't have the perk points to grab his own T-34/76 he has no option against it other than grabbing an airplane with bomb capability.
Somehow work their way around him. Even tanks bow down to the M8 sometimes.
-
Yeah well it still is a shame that so many tanks cannot be added because there are already stronger tanks dominating the LW's and players with years of perks.
Then again, its also a shame so many gv's are missing in early war and mid war arenas. ;) "hint hint"
-
everyone knows the only arena that counts is the late war arena... :rolleyes: :lol nevermind that the earlier arenas could get better populated if more timeline appropriate equipment was available.
-
everyone knows the only arena that counts is the late war arena... :rolleyes: :lol nevermind that the earlier arenas could get better populated if more timeline appropriate equipment was available.
Oh.. I remember the prophecies about how EW will see more action with the B-239 enabled (and the I-16, P-39 and so on...) ;)
So far no addition has prevented relative arena numbers from going down and down and down. And the lack of activity is only to a very small part due to the choice of equipment available.
-
With light tanks and perked heavy tanks something like the Tiger might be invincible to them. Then the Amreican light tanks(M3 Stuart as an example), British ligh tanks (Crusader as an example), German light tanks (Panzer III as an example), Italian light tanks, and Japanese light tanks could get a purpose in the game with perked heavy tanks. (Besides cannon fodder. Don't know many Italian or Japanese light tanks, sorry.)
-
well, lusche ever wonder what would happen if they made the ew arena timeline actual ew with the appropriate equipment...say starting in october 1938 and ending in june 1941? there is also the terrain issue...the same maps being used in the high population lw arena are being used in the ew and mw arenas...put maps 1/2 that size in the lower populated arenas and there will be an increase in activity by people who don't care for the hordes and don't want to fly 40 minutes for a fight.
-
Oh.. I remember the prophecies about how EW will see more action with the B-239 enabled (and the I-16, P-39 and so on...) ;)
So far no addition has prevented relative arena numbers from going down and down and down. And the lack of activity is only to a very small part due to the choice of equipment available.
This reply means nothing without an appropriate pie chart.
-
The problem that tanks have is that later tanks with thicker armor pretty much cannot be killed by earlier tanks with smaller caliber guns. In aircraft, ever the two 7.7mm armed D3A can potentially kill an F4U-4, Tempest or Me262 as they have performance advantages, but are not invulnerable to its weapons. A Tiger I is all but immune to a Cruiser Mk IV, no matter how badly the Tiger I player does and no matter how skilled the Cruiser Mk IV player is.
I don't know about "immune", but certainly difficult.
AH1 lore from "back in the day" said that pilots were capable of killing unwary tanks by shooting their 45 through the driver's vision slit. Similarly, an M-8 could defeat a Tiger by hitting that same vision slit with the 37mm gun. Lore also says that most of these weak spots were eventually modeled out of existence.
Assuming the appropriate shot-traps and weak points were modeled, it would be a matter of 1) developing the knowledge and 2) developing the skill to exploit those weaknesses. Oh, and 3) having an opponent unwary enough to allow you to get close enough to use them.
-
everyone knows the only arena that counts is the late war arena... :rolleyes: :lol nevermind that the earlier arenas could get better populated if more timeline appropriate equipment was available.
My scenario was specifically set in the EWA.
I don't know about "immune", but certainly difficult.
AH1 lore from "back in the day" said that pilots were capable of killing unwary tanks by shooting their 45 through the driver's vision slit. Similarly, an M-8 could defeat a Tiger by hitting that same vision slit with the 37mm gun. Lore also says that most of these weak spots were eventually modeled out of existence.
Assuming the appropriate shot-traps and weak points were modeled, it would be a matter of 1) developing the knowledge and 2) developing the skill to exploit those weaknesses. Oh, and 3) having an opponent unwary enough to allow you to get close enough to use them.
I have never heard that claim, but it is false.
-
I have never heard that claim, but it is false.
There is a trick to getting Tigers though. A T34/76's HVAP can kill a Tiger if you hit it right where you see a small slit and the turret is connected to the chassis. Not so sure about the M8's 37mm though. In real life an M8 defeated a Tiger by hitting the rear with 3 rounds and the Tiger lit in flames.
-
I have never heard that claim, but it is false.
I was never quite sure if it was true or not, but my point stands that if such real life weak spots were modeled, it would give an undergunned tank at least a modicum of a chance.
-
The problem that tanks have is that later tanks with thicker armor pretty much cannot be killed by earlier tanks with smaller caliber guns. In aircraft, ever the two 7.7mm armed D3A can potentially kill an F4U-4, Tempest or Me262 as they have performance advantages, but are not invulnerable to its weapons. A Tiger I is all but immune to a Cruiser Mk IV, no matter how badly the Tiger I player does and no matter how skilled the Cruiser Mk IV player is.
Only the Sith deal in absolutes. There is more than 1 story of an M8 or 3 doing the happy dance to get a flank shot on a Tiger from 200 yards out. The Tiger's Achilles heel is its painfully slow turret traverse rate. The M8 would have a harder time vs the M4A3/75mm than a Tiger.
-
There is a trick to getting Tigers though. A T34/76's HVAP can kill a Tiger if you hit it right where you see a small slit and the turret is connected to the chassis. Not so sure about the M8's 37mm though. In real life an M8 defeated a Tiger by hitting the rear with 3 rounds and the Tiger lit in flames.
The slit isn't there, nor is it needed to hit such a spot to kill a Tiger with a T-43/76' HVAP.
Only the Sith deal in absolutes. There is more than 1 story of an M8 or 3 doing the happy dance to get a flank shot on a Tiger from 200 yards out. The Tiger's Achilles heel is its painfully slow turret traverse rate. The M8 would have a harder time vs the M4A3/75mm than a Tiger.
I've spent a fair amount of time pounding on a Tiger I with a T-34/76 (pre-HVAP) and M8. Due to the Tiger's slow turret rotation you can do it almost indefinitely. I have never had any effect on one. I see no reason to expect a Cruiser Mk IV's 2lber to do anything to a T-34/76, and the T-34/76 does not have a slow turret for the Cruiser MK IV to play with.
-
:aok introduction of lighter GVs will make Heavy gvs more feared as in real life
-
I would like to see the introduction of smaller tanks, rather than more big ones. Also, I have a slight idea to make them not really hangar queens. Basically with the addition of smaller tanks, I'd like to see a revision of perk values on the larger vehicles like the T-34-75 and 85. Would make it so folks used the smaller ones more, and make the larger tanks seem even more of a threat.
For where? The WWI arena?
It sort of doesn't make sense to work on tanks that nobody would use.
-
Light tanks like the Stuart were formidable against opponents like the Panzer IIF, IIIG, IIIH and even the IVE. People so still use Panzers right? Granted you're not likely to kill a Tiger but why not have a few perk farmers in the game?
By the logic that everything else is better we should get rid of the Jeep, M3, M16, M8, M475... Sheesh, how about they unperk everything and limit the GV game to Tigers?
BTW I see people in flaks all the time. They dont stand much of a chance against our weakest tanks. I mean you do realize there's other vehicles in the game other than tanks right?
-
BaldEagl is right the Jeep, M3, M16, M8, M4 (75), does seem useless and its odd when you see a guy in a "surperior" vehicle like a Panther though you could kill it. It is odd when you see ackers shoot their guns even at the M8 and they still lose.
-
+1 New stuff never hurts.
-
Shouldn't the smaller guns of light tanks be capable of tracking a Tiger?
Just wondering
-
Shouldn't the smaller guns of light tanks be capable of tracking a Tiger?
Just wondering
They could track a Tiger, but not sure if the Tiger could always track them. Also, tackling a Tiger with light tanks would be hard unless they someone disables and then everyone moves away/around the Tiger guy gets bored waits for supplies or ends sortie.
-
sounds good
just to put this out there it takes aprox. 10 shots from the m3's 75mm from the rear of a tiger to kill it(at point blank using ap in game)
takes about 8-12 shots to kill a panzer with an m8(shooting the turret at about 100 yards with ap in game)
only advantages these tanks had over the other ones were speed and fire rate in both cases they were out gunned/out armored
lighter tank would imply faster more manuverable tanks(at leaste id hope otherwise this is pointless)just about anything can track a gv 7.7mms even all comes down to amount/range so i do kind of see a use for them if they are faster they could easyily get around a tiger or a firefly if an m3 can do it... a much smaller tank stands a better chance then it if not the same chance... u could at leaste hunt flaks kill troops and m3s and panzers(from the side)
-
M8s are very strong just used in the wrong way. The M8 is a powerful enemy if speed is used against it. You can easily make a "ground BnZ" against in average tank or even run circles around a tank to kill it. Yes, the light tanks are both outgunned and also weakly armored. They say that the M3 takes 1-2 rounds to the back of the turret and then 1-2 to the engine housing. Also, the flack hunting is very easy in a light tank due to the inability for an average tank to maneuver. Ackers often blow the tracks off a tank. Light tanks can sometimes be very useful when it comes to several topics.
-
For where? The WWI arena?
It sort of doesn't make sense to work on tanks that nobody would use.
If that were the case, I'd have said WWI tanks, no light tanks. There (as far as I know) was only one class of tank there. Also, the whole conversation has been about WWII, please read the whole convo.
-
The problem that tanks have is that later tanks with thicker armor pretty much cannot be killed by earlier tanks with smaller caliber guns. In aircraft, ever the two 7.7mm armed D3A can potentially kill an F4U-4, Tempest or Me262 as they have performance advantages, but are not invulnerable to its weapons. A Tiger I is all but immune to a Cruiser Mk IV, no matter how badly the Tiger I player does and no matter how skilled the Cruiser Mk IV player is.
what if you went for tread-shots? nocked out the tigers tracks, then simply camp nearby to score kills off any supply vehicle that comes to rescue him. eventually he'll rage-tower ;)
-
what if you went for tread-shots? nocked out the tigers tracks, then simply camp nearby to score kills off any supply vehicle that comes to rescue him. eventually he'll rage-tower ;)
Almost exactly what I said to get the Tiger. Also, the light tanks idea would give some light tanks a point. They shouldn't just be cannon fodder or used for suicide missions because of its armor/gun.
-
I would still like to see the Panzer MK.III with the high velocity 50MM gun on it as well as other variants of this tank in the game. Anyone who has spent any time tanking in EW knows it get old fast with just a T-34 against T-34. English tanks would be great too in EW . I see a use for the lighter faster tanks in all arenas.
-
Well, with enough light vehicles available, GV availability could be limited by zone or map to make "light fight"
areas as well as heavy. Similar to me163 availability.
-
Well, with enough light vehicles available, GV availability could be limited by zone or map to make "light fight"
areas as well as heavy. Similar to me163 availability.
Also, how well the Vehicle field/airfield is doing. If the vehicle fields hangars are soft the battle might resort to only light tanks on one side (or both.) Or if the battle is in between the fields it is heavy but can allow light tanks. It should be similar to the Me163's availability.
-
The Kw.K.39 L/60 5cm (50MM) gun on the Pz.KpfW.III tank that came out in Dec. 1941 was not a bad gun/tank combo. While not so effective against the T-34 turret. It was very effect against the Sherman and Grant along with all the British tanks in North Africa. The Panzer MK.III would be a vast improvement over the M-8 In all arenas and most welcome in EW.
We may however have to wait for the economy to turn around (after the 2012 election) Then folks well have more disposable income for stuff like AH. I am sure subscriptions are down there too like all business's now. So if we want more tanks & planes here tell a friend that has a job still about AH. Recruit,Recruit,Recruit and then we may well see the Panzer MK.III with the 50mm Kw.K.38 L/60 gun at spawn near you.
-
The Kw.K.39 L/60 5cm (50MM) gun on the Pz.KpfW.III tank that came out in Dec. 1941 was not a bad gun/tank combo. While not so effective against the T-34 turret. It was very effect against the Sherman and Grant along with all the British tanks in North Africa. The Panzer MK.III would be a vast improvement over the M-8 In all arenas and most welcome in EW.
We may however have to wait for the economy to turn around (after the 2012 election) Then folks well have more disposable income for stuff like AH. I am sure subscriptions are down there too like all business's now. So if we want more tanks & planes here tell a friend that has a job still about AH. Recruit,Recruit,Recruit and then we may well see the Panzer MK.III with the 50mm Kw.K.38 L/60 gun at spawn near you.
Very good point regarding the Panzer Mk III. The AP capabilities of the Kw.K.39 L/60 5cm is no worse than the M4/76mm, but with a wee bit faster reload. Not to mention the flatter trajectory and FAR better optics. :)
-
Not to mention the lower profile of the Panzer MK.III compared to the Sherman.
-
Not to mention the lower profile of the Panzer MK.III compared to the Sherman.
That is a +/- in AH. It cant use hills and mounds as well to hide behind as well as the Sherman but is it smaller and more difficult to hit.
-
I would suspect one of the reasons that we do not have "light" tanks is that pretty much any airplane with a cannon could kill it easily.
+1 though, I still want em.
-
I would suspect one of the reasons that we do not have "light" tanks is that pretty much any airplane with a cannon could kill it easily.
+1 though, I still want em.
I just checked the armor differences between the Pzr IV and Pzr III:
Pzr III = 12mm on turret top
Pzr IV = 10mm on turret top.
Pzr III = 17mm on hull top.
Pnr IV = 12mm on hull top.
THe Soviet T70 has 10mm on both turret and hull top.
Interesting finds.
-
Would not have expected the III to have more armor there.
-
T-34/76 weight is 25.5 tons the Sherman is about 30.5 tons and the Panzer MK.III is about 23.3 tons. So of course the panzer MK.III will have thinner armor. the Sherman and the T-34 has a faster road speed than the Panzer MK.III. However it is smaller and lower in profile and the 50MM gun is pretty good.
It is a great improvement over an m-8 in armor and fire power if not in speed. But if it has the same color problem the Panzer IV we now have does maybe the MK.III will just be another easy target. The AH Panzer MK.IV looks like the General Lee from the Dukes of Hazzard sitting in the woods lol.
-
the brit tanks with the 6pdr would be workable in the LW, the APs are comparable to the US 75mm used on the M4 and M3 iirc, the 2pdr otoh ... :uhoh.
(btw wrongway killed 50 panzers using the 75mm M3 GMC last tour ... :rock)
-
Would not have expected the III to have more armor there.
its obvious when you look at the two side by side.
the mkIII looks like a buffed up panzer on steroids.
the mk IV looks like the panzer went anorexic.
-
what if you went for tread-shots? nocked out the tigers tracks, then simply camp nearby to score kills off any supply vehicle that comes to rescue him. eventually he'll rage-tower ;)
I was thinking along the same lines. Make the treads a little more vulnerable to the smaller calibre AP rounds. I know I've had times when I've shot at the tread of a tiger in an M8 up to and including 5-6 and sometimes more from practically point blank range before knocking the tread out. And Im talking hitting the tread from the front or back and not simply the wheel from the side. Now this is opinion only. But I have a hard time believing that tigers treads were that invulnerable to an M8's AP rounds at close range that it could take more then a couple of rounds to cause adverse effects.
So, Maybe make the treads a bit more vulnerable on the heavies. Up the perk cost and let the smaller faster tanks fill the traditional role of say the sherman where it was a numbers advantage to offset the superior tigers and panthers.
-
the Sherman and the T-34 has a faster road speed than the Panzer MK.III.
Now here is an area where the GV game is lacking.
Regardless of terrain. Tanks should be able to travel considerably faster on roads then open field, on open field faster then sand etc.
this would add importance to the roads and bridges
-
So, Maybe make the treads a bit more vulnerable on the heavies. Up the perk cost and let the smaller faster tanks fill the traditional role of say the sherman where it was a numbers advantage to offset the superior tigers and panthers.
Basically exactly what I was thinking.
-
It would be really fun to have 3-4 EW tanks, from the British cruisers and Matilda, German Pzr Mk III, and Soviet T60/70. Mix in the 6 pdr, 45mm, and 50mm tank guns in there and give them some of the high velocity LW ammo available so that they can compete in the LW arenas and scenarios.
I think it makes sense for HTC to NOT add in the 2 Pdr size guns, but instead to keep branching opt 1 level at a time. Meaning the 2cm, 2 Pdr/40mm, etc is too far of a gap from teh 75mm standard we have in AH currently. However, come "1 step down" to the 5cm and 6 Pdr/57mm level and they can still compete to a smaller degree, but more so with the LW high velocity ammo. I say add in those tanks with the 5cm-57mm guns, and give them a few rounds (5?) of the HV sabot stuff and call it good. THEN work with the true EW tanks.
-
The only issue is most EW British cruiser tanks use 2Pdr/40mm cannons. There can be several tanks with 50mm/6Pdr ones (45mm too) then add the 2Pdr/40mm ones. The ones with 2Pdrs saw combat and they fit perfectly into the inclusion. They deserve a rightful place though.
-
The only issue is most EW British cruiser tanks use 2Pdr/40mm cannons. There can be several tanks with 50mm/6Pdr ones (45mm too) then add the 2Pdr/40mm ones. The ones with 2Pdrs saw combat and they fit perfectly into the inclusion. They deserve a rightful place though.
"Deserve" perhaps. Logical and worth while to add in to the game based on what we currently have??? I vote no. Like I said, get the EW tanks (Pzr III, british cruisers like the Valentine, or Soviet T60/70)in to the game with the up graded guns (5cm, 6 pdr, 45mm). Those EW/MW hybrid 3 tanks can compete vs the the LW tanks with the proper ammo at ranges 1600 yards and closer.
Better yet, HTC can intorduce tanks like the British Valentine with the different main tank guns available. The British Valentine is a classic example in which the tank saw an easy upgrade from the 2 Pdr to the 6 Pdr gun without changing anything else but the name of mark. The Panzer Mk III could have the short barreled 5cm and also the long barreled 5cm. HTC did the hybrid thing with the Soviet I-16 fighter so why not expand the horrizons and do the same thing with some mainstay EW/MW tanks??? The Panzer III and Valentine are prime examples of that.
I know the hanger "tables" are limited in slots (6?), so HTC could offer 2 different turrets with 3 different ammo loadouts each. Once the EW tanks with MW "upgrades" options are added, THEN start prodding for the exclusinve EW tanks to be included.