Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Tank-Ace on December 03, 2011, 03:04:39 AM
-
The SdKfz 251/22 is an SdKfz 251 with a PaK 40 mounted ontop of the vehicle. 22 rounds of ammunition were carried.
Why should this be added? What would it give us over the M3(75)?
1) it would provide us with a free, mobile, and easily concealed, if very easily destroyed, vehicle capable of effeciently engaging enemy tanks at long range.
2) it would be a good proof-of-concept vehicle for turretless tank destroyers, better than the M3, because its speed is closer to that of other turretless tank destroyers, so manuverability and speed will not greatly affect their preformance, giving us a clear picture of how effective such vehicles would be. This would open the door for the Jagdpanzer and Jagdpanther, the Su-85 and Su-100, the StuG, the Su-76, and the Nashorn.
3) it would be a relativly easy addition, since all existing components are in the game. It would require adding/updating some graphics, reworking the center of gravity and weight for the vehicle, and not a whole lot else.
4) it would be fun for its own sake. You could pull it up inside of an undestroyed barn, and you would basicly be untoucable. They couldn't see you, they couldn't hit you, odds are they probably won't know where the fire is coming from untill they're already dead.
The SdKfz 251/21 was an SdKfz 251 with 3 20mm Mg 151/20s mounted in a tripple turret on top of the vehicle. What would we get over the wirblewind with this?
1) a powerfully armed AA vehicle thats capable of keeping up with fast tanks such as the T-34's and the Panther, which would allow GV's to work with better (if admittedly still wanting) AA protection, which would itself result in improved GV fights.
2) Better concealability. You can tuck inside of a barn, and most aircraft probably won't see you untill those first 20mm rounds punch through their canopy.
3) better view. You're much lower to the ground, so the blindspots created by the turret armor will be much smaller.
Thoughts?
-
meh...
-
The SdKfz/9 would be easy to add, it was armed with a 75 mm L/24, a fast firing infantry support cannon. It'd be great for hammering towns, etc.
The SdKfz/22 would be easy to add as well, the 75 mm PaK40 L/46 gun is already represented in the Panzer F KwK40 L/43.
The SdKfz/21 would be easy to add, too. The (triple) German 20mm MG 151 are already in game, and it would offer a more mobile/faster AA platform with firepower between the M16 and Wirby.
FWIW, when say "easy", I say that only because the weapons and chassis are already done, "only" the the graphics of adding the mounts, etc, need to be done. I'd like to believe that the process if minimized.
-
I would love to see them added. You never see anyone using a 251 anymore...
-
+1 to all
-
I would love to see them added. You never see anyone using a 251 anymore...
Which is too bad. If a person were to map out the distances between certain areas in a town, and then apply the known distances for the for the 251's 28cm rockets, two 251's with rockets and reloads could level a town in less than a minute. ... oh wait... ;)
Why take a 251 for base capture when the M3 offers the same # of troops, is 20mph faster, and has a better AA weapon? Yhe only thing the 251 offers over the M3 are the 28cm rockets which no one takes the time to learn or use. The stars and the sun and the moon all need to align just right for the 251 to be of much use.
-
Which is too bad. If a person were to map out the distances between certain areas in a town, and then apply the known distances for the for the 251's 28cm rockets, two 251's with rockets and reloads could level a town in less than a minute. ... oh wait... ;)
Why take a 251 for base capture when the M3 offers the same # of troops, is 20mph faster, and has a better AA weapon? Yhe only thing the 251 offers over the M3 are the 28cm rockets which no one takes the time to learn or use. The stars and the sun and the moon all need to align just right for the 251 to be of much use.
you have motivated me to learn how to use the rockets haha
-
you have motivated me to learn how to use the rockets haha
Good. :)
If you can get a squad mate or two to de-ack the town via aircraft prior to your arrival, that would be good. The auto ack in a town is your biggest threat. Once upon a time I had a squad mate the town, then fly low and directly over the main plaza marking its distance from me. Once close enough, I let loose a volley of 2 rockets and I got 15-18 buildings down that quickly with just 2 rockets, I had trouble duplicating those results but by the time I used up all by gv supply crates and rockets I had the town 2/3 to 3/4 the way to a white flag without even getting inside the town. :aok
-
Good. :)
If you can get a squad mate or two to de-ack the town via aircraft prior to your arrival, that would be good. The auto ack in a town is your biggest threat. Once upon a time I had a squad mate the town, then fly low and directly over the main plaza marking its distance from me. Once close enough, I let loose a volley of 2 rockets and I got 15-18 buildings down that quickly with just 2 rockets, I had trouble duplicating those results but by the time I used up all by gv supply crates and rockets I had the town 2/3 to 3/4 the way to a white flag without even getting inside the town. :aok
Wow!
-
It would get the SdKfz 251 some use, it would give us multiple vehicles for the price of one. And above all they would be unique in their play styles from anything else in the game. I imagine using the 251/22 as a mobile AT gun, rather than a tank destroyer or a tank would probably be the most succesfull.
And we could even expand the line even further, getting the 251/9 with the short 75mm mounted on the Panzer IV, and the 251/10, armed with a 37mm Pak 36, which would either be added after the Panzer III, or give us an excuse to get the Panzer III.
-
It would get the SdKfz 251 some use, it would give us multiple vehicles for the price of one. And above all they would be unique in their play styles from anything else in the game. I imagine using the 251/22 as a mobile AT gun, rather than a tank destroyer or a tank would probably be the most succesfull.
And we could even expand the line even further, getting the 251/9 with the short 75mm mounted on the Panzer IV, and the 251/10, armed with a 37mm Pak 36, which would either be added after the Panzer III, or give us an excuse to get the Panzer III.
I'd vote on the Sdkfz 251/17 being a single 20mm anti aircraft mount, however being the 251 was just added awhile back Its going to be forever before it ever gets upgraded.
-
Why? it would be both slower and lighter-armed than the M16 then. Really no reason to take it out with the 20mm mount in that case.
M16 would give you a fast, reasonably armed AA vehcile, with basicly no armor
SdKfz 251/21 would give you a moderate-speed, heavily armed AA vehicle, again with basicly no armor
The Wirblewind/ostiwind would give you a slow, heavily armed AA vehicle, with pretty good armor
If we're going to go to the trouble of updating the SdKfz 251 so we can add variants of it, we might as well add variants that offer something over our current vehilces.
-
If we're going to go to the trouble of updating the SdKfz 251 so we can add variants of it, we might as well add variants that offer something over our current vehilces.
It will likely be years before it gets updated.
-
+1
-
Why? it would be both slower and lighter-armed than the M16 then. Really no reason to take it out with the 20mm mount in that case.
Slower, yes, but better armored, and the 20mm (even a single 20mm) would be a lot better than quad .50s. The thing about 20mm is it does more damage per ping. With the quad fiddy you have a higher chance of getting a ping (a wall of lead for the bad guy to fly into) but bringing down a target is a waste of time when you have ostwinds and wirbles. You may still only get 1 "ping" on the target with a single 20mm, but that ping may be enough.
A single 20mm platform, even if slower, would be far better than the M16 in in-game results.
-
Thats kind of questionable. If an Il-2 is strafing, then I'd rather have the quad .50's, simply because theres a greater chance I'm going to kill the pilot, or take out his guns through simple volume of fire, even if the overall damage the two weapons can do in, say, 30 seconds is the same (which its not).
If simply doing damage, no matter how insignificant, is the be-all and end-all of your sortie, yes, the 20mm would probably be a better choice. But the purpose of AA vehicles is to kill aircraft, or damage them to the point where they are no longer combat-effecive, which a single 20mm round is HIGHLY unlikely to do.
-
Thats kind of questionable. If an Il-2 is strafing, then I'd rather have the quad .50's, simply because theres a greater chance I'm going to kill the pilot, or take out his guns through simple volume of fire, even if the overall damage the two weapons can do in, say, 30 seconds is the same (which its not).
If simply doing damage, no matter how insignificant, is the be-all and end-all of your sortie, yes, the 20mm would probably be a better choice. But the purpose of AA vehicles is to kill aircraft, or damage them to the point where they are no longer combat-effecive, which a single 20mm round is HIGHLY unlikely to do.
Krusty is correct on this, a single 20mm is worth something like 3x 50 cal hits, hitting someone with 1x 20mm means you need 3x 50 cal rounds hitting to get the same damage, volume of fire is the only thing the M-16 has to an advanage, where the single 20mm has the hitting power of actually bringing down the aircraft.
You might be able to score some hits with the volume of fire, but to actually bring an aircraft like the Il-2 down - then you would rather want that single 20mm. Same idea went towards the British early War aircraft putting 8 then 12 .303s on the Spit/hurris, the idea was volume of fire at close range would do the damage, where the germans opted for Accurate aiming with a pair of 20mms instead for damage.
Case point:
"Comparisons of the effectiveness of the British and German armament are not unlike the comparisons of the aircraft – each had its strengths and weaknesses. The British armament had a very high rate of fire (160 v. 50 rounds per second for the Bf 109), increasing the chance of scoring a hit. In weight of fire the German guns had a slight advantage (2.0 v. 1.8 kg per second), whereas in total muzzle energy there was nothing to choose between them. The key difference was of course the high explosive in the 20mm shells, which was enough to give the Bf 109E-4 almost double the destructive power of the British fighters. The M-Geschoss were not good at penetrating armour but this was considered a reasonable price to pay for the increased HE blast effect. The Luftwaffe discovered that the most reliable way of bringing down aircraft was the general destructive effect of HE blast within the structure, rather than relying on being able to hit vital but small areas (e.g. the pilot!), which could be, and quickly were, protected by armour. For this reason, AP projectiles eventually disappeared from German cannon ammunition belts except for special purposes."
To sum up, the British armament was highly effective against unarmoured fighters and the high firing rate improved the chances of hitting. At the start of the war it was probably the best armament available against fighters. However, the rapid introduction of armour protection during 1940 greatly reduced the effectiveness of all rifle-calibre machine guns and gave the cannon a clear advantage, especially against bombers which were easier to hit but more difficult to destroy. Many German bombers made it back to base despite being riddled by up to 200 .303 bullets, protected by crew seat armour and self-sealing fuel tanks. This compensated to some extent for their poor defensive armament, which consisted of hand-aimed 7.92mm MG 15 guns in single mountings.
Yes I understand this is the 303 vs 20mm test, however it gives a broad view of what you are asking.
-
Thats also real life, where things don't keep functioning perfectly right up untill the minute they fall off the plane.
Where as that 1 20mm round in real life would probably be more effective than 5-6 .50 caliber rounds, the inverse is almost certinally true in the game, where it all comes down to dealing damage to a part untill it falls off.
Real life? Yeah, of course I would take the 20mm
Aces High? I'll take the .50's.