Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: sethrocon on September 11, 2011, 04:10:23 PM
-
I saw an episode on greatest tank battles. This tank was designed and put in place late in the war. The russians used it to help push the Germans back, had a huge gun on it. What do you thinké
-
How about some more information, armament, gun size, speed, etc
-
id rather have a StuG III Ausf G. or a M26 Pershing...
but until i see some info, then im not taking either side of this.
-
Nah. No where near the impact as the Su-100 or KV-1. I'll have to dig into my sources, but iirc the JS-2 tank had a rate of fire that would make the King Tiger feel like Speedy Gonzolas. The JS-2 tank's 122mm had 2 piece ammunition, the projectile and the propellant were loaded separately by the same crew member. I think there was a max rate of fire of 2-3 rounds a minute (20-30 seconds to reload the main gun!!!). The 122 main gun could penetrate 115mm of armor at 1000, which was almost identical to the Panther's 75mm and Tiger's 88mm, but still inferior to the King Tiger's 88mm cannon's 165mm AP ability. The JS-2 has 120mm of sloped armor on the front, so it was well protected but it was not immune to late war German tank fire. A powerful tank in its own right, but if HTC decides to add another Soviet tank any time soon I think they should add the Su-100. It saw far more action and was far more prevalent on the Ost Front compared to the IS-2.
My 2 cents.
EDIT: I looked up some tid-bits on the JS-2: best speed was 23mph; max ammo load for the main gun was 28 rounds (yes, 28 rounds); its HE round was considered its main asset.
-
I'd love to see the Stug at the spawn just to hear all the campers yell, "SHUT YOUR ENGINE DOWN!!!" Plus, it doesn't sound like it can rotate in place, but has to reverse and pull forward to adjust angle for firing... sounds dangerous. :)
-
I'd love to see the Stug at the spawn just to hear all the campers yell, "SHUT YOUR ENGINE DOWN!!!" Plus, it doesn't sound like it can rotate in place, but has to reverse and pull forward to adjust angle for firing... sounds dangerous. :)
the stug III ausf g. could pivot in place from what i know
-
the stug III ausf g. could pivot in place from what i know
It's built on the PzkwIV chassis, which cannot pivot, isn't it?
wrongway
-
It's built on the PzkwIV chassis, which cannot pivot, isn't it?
wrongway
yes the StuG III was built on a Pz4 chassis but there were over 350 known StuG's that were modified to pivot in place after the battle at kursk. (i think it was the battle of kursk, it may have been an earlier battle but im not sure)
-
I saw an episode on greatest tank battles. This tank was designed and put in place late in the war. The russians used it to help push the Germans back, had a huge gun on it. What do you thinké
Problem with "WishLists" as you need to provide some research to your credit. I cannot find any information on how many Armored Divisions/Brigades or Battalions fought on the Russian side during the war (armed with the IS-2).
I do have a few sources I can read up on and get back to you, however I can probably say its going to not happen (for the IS-2 joining Aces High) same Reason for the M-26 Pershing. Both tanks were in fact designed during World War 2, however they seen extremely limited combat action vs many other weapons that were designed during the war.
If you can provide some resource information with proof of how many IS-2's were in combat, how many were produced, how many Battalions they were filled in, I am sure it will be taken in consideration to be added.
I'm sorry I cannot find enough information placing them in strictly combat scenarios during the war, other then spotted.
-
I don't have the numbers with me, but I am pretty sure the IS-2 saw a few magnitudes more combat in WWII than did the M-26.
There is a chance I am conflating some of the IS-2's combat with later KV tanks though.
-
To put it bluntly, the JS-2 would have armor similar to the Tiger I, a gun similar to the Panther's 75mm or Firefly's 17 Pdr in AP ability, FAR less ammo available (only 28 rounds!!!), and worst of all a reload of about 20 seconds (if HTC sticks by its current "standard" of applying -best known reload- to main guns of tanks). Just who in their right minds would being a tank that has a reload time of 20 seconds and carry only 28 rounds to the camp fests in AH??? No one. It would be see even LESS action that the King Tiger.
There are a great many tanks that saw a great deal more action that should be added to AH. If adding a Soviet tank is the goal the Su-100 TD would be best, imo.
-
A powerful tank in its own right, but if HTC decides to add another Soviet tank any time soon I think they should add the Su-100. It saw far more action and was far more prevalent on the Ost Front compared to the IS-2.
Sources? If going by service entry and total production during the war the IS-2 was more common. 2,210 IS-2 in 1944 alone (and 35 in 1943) compared to the 500 SU-100. In 1945 they both reached a production of just over 1,000 before war ended.
-
My bad, after diving in to some printed sources I had the numbers of the SU-122 and JS-3 in my head.
Even so, the J2-2 would have a hard time in AH with such a slow reload and a main gun that is on par with the Panther, Tiger I, and Firefly. I think it would be a step lower than the Tiger I in terms of survivability. Who knows, I think HTC is not going to add it anytime soon. ;) Su-100 though... I think there is a bigger chance. My 2 cents.
-
Sources? If going by service entry and total production during the war the IS-2 was more common. 2,210 IS-2 in 1944 alone (and 35 in 1943) compared to the 500 SU-100. In 1945 they both reached a production of just over 1,000 before war ended.
where are you getting this info?
-
where are you getting this info?
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/rkkaww2/weapons/afv_production.htm#IS
Source given at the bottom.
-
http://www.armchairgeneral.com/rkkaww2/weapons/afv_production.htm#IS
Source given at the bottom.
armchair general? :lol
just a bit more reliable and more cross references:
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ussr/tanks-heavy/is-2.asp (http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ussr/tanks-heavy/is-2.asp)
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ussr/tank-destroyers/su-100.asp (http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ussr/tank-destroyers/su-100.asp)
-
armchair general? :lol
It's just hosted at AG, no connection otherwise. Actually the RKKA WW2 site has some great information translated from russian sources, not otherwise available in the usual books, and web pages based on these, released in English.
-
It's built on the PzkwIV chassis, which cannot pivot, isn't it?
wrongway
Panzer III chassis. hence the StuG III. StuG IV was a completly different vehicle.
-
Is2 would have much better protection then tiger it's armor has a crazy slope. Lots were made and reason why there HE was considered it's main asset is German infantry were much more a danger when is2 was around only becuase Germans were running low on tanks by it's introduction. I'd like to see a churchhill with that awesome mortar.
-
Is2 would have much better protection then tiger it's armor has a crazy slope. Lots were made and reason why there HE was considered it's main asset is German infantry were much more a danger when is2 was around only becuase Germans were running low on tanks by it's introduction. I'd like to see a churchhill with that awesome mortar.
The Churchill AVRE with the 290mm Petard mortar was a strange brew! The mortar was loaded via the hull position instead of from inside the turret, it was a nasty weapon that had devastating effects. In AH though, it would be a sitting duck because it only had a range of about 100 yards, it moves at 15mph, and in not all that well armored. But true, it would be fun to assault the town center with it. :D
-
IS-2 can't really be compared to the Tiger I, since they're not contemporary.
IMO, the closest you can get for time of introduction without throwing preformance out the window is as follows:
KV-85 and Tiger I
Is2 and Tiger II
Panther and T-34/85
Jagdpanther and Su-100
-
IS-2 can't really be compared to the Tiger I, since they're not contemporary.
IMO, the closest you can get for time of introduction without throwing preformance out the window is as follows:
KV-85 and Tiger I
Is2 and Tiger II
Panther and T-34/85
Jagdpanther and Su-100
:headscratch:
-
Tiger I = 1942 design
IS2 is a 1944 design
Since we already have the Tiger II, I don't see why people are comparing it to the Tiger I (which is often beaten by even the panther).
-
Tiger I = 1942 design
IS2 is a 1944 design
Since we already have the Tiger II, I don't see why people are comparing it to the Tiger I (which is often beaten by even the panther).
Comparing apples to Oranges, The Tiger was the king of the battlefield before most tanks were even on the drawing board. When it was available there were no anti-tank guns designed yet to even knock it out at any range from the front. The Russians tried to find a situation to the Tiger problem, for example the Kv-85, Su-85, T-34/85 which were stop gaps while they were designing newer tanks/AT guns for the problem at hand even then it took over a year and a half.
Nothing can be compared to the Tiger (built in 42/ready for combat in 43) vs a Panther (built 43, bugs fixed it in mid44). Neither American, British or Russian had any options to combat it effectively, however everyone did come up with Viable options to defeat it (Firefly is a prime example).
Same mistake is made with comparing aircraft like a Me109 to a P51D, one plane built before 1939 and the other 1942/43 and both have quite different uses, but based on the same principle.
The same thing has been going on for many years now, the Russians built the Mig-25 and the Americans responded with the F-15 Eagle, both can't be compared as the Mig-25 was designed as a High alt, Bomber interceptor and the F-15 a Air superiority fighter.
Apples 'n Oranges :D
-
It's built on the PzkwIV chassis, which cannot pivot, isn't it?
wrongway
yes the StuG III was built on a Pz4 chassis but there were over 350 known StuG's that were modified to pivot in place after the battle at kursk. (i think it was the battle of kursk, it may have been an earlier battle but im not sure)
Panzer III chassis. hence the StuG III. StuG IV was a completly different vehicle.
what tank said. The Stug III was built on the Pnzr III chassis as was the Stug IV on the Pnzr IV chassis <S> and neither iirc could ever pivot in place as the tigers and panther could. The construction of a new transmission to fit either's chassis would be much more unpredictable in battle and time consuming than to just pump another 500 out and most likely the 350 you heard of were very late war experimental units. Speculation though <S>
-
I've heard accounts of small units (at the company level at the most, more likely the platoon level) field-modding thier StuG's, but no official expieraments with it.
And Butcher, in real life its apples and oranges, but not here. People are talking about the IS2 as if it would be THE answer to the "problem" of the Tiger tank. But the Tiger II already kicked the bar up another 1000ft higher IMO.
-
I've heard accounts of small units (at the company level at the most, more likely the platoon level) field-modding thier StuG's, but no official expieraments with it.
And Butcher, in real life its apples and oranges, but not here. People are talking about the IS2 as if it would be THE answer to the "problem" of the Tiger tank. But the Tiger II already kicked the bar up another 1000ft higher IMO.
There are a few options to counter the Tiger, up a King Tiger, Panther, T34-85 - Each can kill a Tiger at Long/medium/Short range.
In the future there are a number of Soviet options to add, however I do agree other tanks need to be built first rather then "specifically" something to kill the Tiger. Problem with the JS-2 which most don't realize - it will be heavily perked - there are a number of cheaper options to counter a tiger.
-
Not only that, but it will be insanely annoying to use. Gun thats about the same as the Tiger I's, 23mph, 30 second reload time, and likely poor balistics. Its only redeming quality would be its armor.
-
Not only that, but it will be insanely annoying to use. Gun thats about the same as the Tiger I's, 23mph, 30 second reload time, and likely poor balistics. Its only redeming quality would be its armor.
Yeah all those times I scream in an angry german voice when I miss a shot with a PantherG "RELOAD FASTER!!!!" I could imagine the whining that comes from the IS-1 or IS-2.
Think the ISU-122 and ISU-152 were about the same also , 1-2 RFPM every 30 seconds, would be one heck of town killers though.