Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: YamaRaja on February 01, 2012, 09:06:48 PM
-
Has anyone ever suggested the Comet or Cromwell tanks?
Yama
-
Many times.
Thing is though, the 2/3 of the British tanks are very well represented: the M4/75mm Sherman and the Firefly. The next best thing to add for LW would be the Cromwell, and that offers nothing but 5-6 mph more speed than the M4/75mm it would be fighting along side.
IMO, if HTC wanted to kill 2birds with 1 stone they'd add an EW/MW British tank such as the Crusader or Valentine with multiple gun options (2pdr and 6pdr) like they did for the Panzer IV F. They'd be adding an EW/MW tank (very limited line-up) and adding a true British tank (currently non-existent) at the same time.
-
Many times.
Thing is though, the 2/3 of the British tanks are very well represented: the M4/75mm Sherman and the Firefly. The next best thing to add for LW would be the Cromwell, and that offers nothing but 5-6 mph more speed than the M4/75mm it would be fighting along side.
IMO, if HTC wanted to kill 2birds with 1 stone they'd add an EW/MW British tank such as the Crusader or Valentine with multiple gun options (2pdr and 6pdr) like they did for the Panzer IV F. They'd be adding an EW/MW tank (very limited line-up) and adding a true British tank (currently non-existent) at the same time.
The Cromwell with the Brit version of the 17 pounder would be nice (shorter casing than the Firefly version)
With its increased armor it would be an interesting combo. Lower profile, better armor than an M4 or Firefly.
Gun stronger than an M4/76 but not quite as strong as the 17 pounder in the Firefly.
Give the Panther and perhaps even the Tiger 1 some allied competition.
-
I'd like any British tank with the 6pdr added. :devil
-
There's been plenty of posts on the British tanks to be added, I certainly want the Cruiser Tanks added, Cromwell yes and possibly the Churchill tank with its variety of configuration.
I posted enough times for the Cromwell and Churchill, both could fill the ranks as well as Cruiser Tanks. Throw in a Panzer III and we have a pretty fun tank setup.
-
more tanks is always good
-
I would like to see the Churchill with the AVRE version it has. Imagine what the Churchill AVRE could do to a town center. Only problem is they are very slow.
If you were able to protect them with other tanks, they could decimate a town.
-
Having the Churchill in AH is pointless, IMO. With a top speed of 15mph, it would be good for nothing, at least in AH anyways. Even if HTC would spend their very valuable time in developing the Churchill AVRE with the 290mm spigot mortar for use in raping towns, it would take it TWICE as long to get to the enemy town as other tanks. The AVRE version fire about a round a minute and had about a 100 yard max range.
http://www.timemoneyandblood.com/HTML/normandy/HobartsFunnies/hf_petard.html
Oh, and the Churchill was not a cruiser tank in any sense, it was designed from the start as an infantry support tank. The Cromwell, Crusader, and A10 were Britain's best examples of the cruiser tank designs. The Crusader and A10 both had variants where the main guns (2 Pdr for both and later 6 Pdr for Crusader) were replaced with the 3.7in howitzer for "close infantry support".
-
(http://i570.photobucket.com/albums/ss147/tnelson3_bucket/9d50c5fdd6a7.jpg)
:neener:
-
Don't forget Italian tanks! :D
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_PQX1Y2Ay0us/S6pFlPlXw8I/AAAAAAAAAaw/jMoZggamroI/s1600/800px-DaVinciTankAtAmboise.jpeg)
-
Having the Churchill in AH is pointless, IMO. With a top speed of 15mph, it would be good for nothing, at least in AH anyways. Even if HTC would spend their very valuable time in developing the Churchill AVRE with the 290mm spigot mortar for use in raping towns, it would take it TWICE as long to get to the enemy town as other tanks. The AVRE version fire about a round a minute and had about a 100 yard max range.
http://www.timemoneyandblood.com/HTML/normandy/HobartsFunnies/hf_petard.html
Oh, and the Churchill was not a cruiser tank in any sense, it was designed from the start as an infantry support tank. The Cromwell, Crusader, and A10 were Britain's best examples of the cruiser tank designs. The Crusader and A10 both had variants where the main guns (2 Pdr for both and later 6 Pdr for Crusader) were replaced with the 3.7in howitzer for "close infantry support".
I agree the Churchill is slow - however that does not make it pointless to be added, case point: everyone whined the M-18 would be useless since it has absolutely no armor and a tap from the triggers with .303s takes its turret out. I see M18s all over the place.
Its slower with better armor protection then a standard Panzer F/H - it would simply just be another "mid ENY option" tank. Given people want the Boomerang in Aces High - why not a Churchill tank? It would be used and served quite well.
It might not go toe to toe with a Tiger tank - then why was the M4-75 added ?
-
I agree the Churchill is slow - however that does not make it pointless to be added, case point: everyone whined the M-18 would be useless since it has absolutely no armor and a tap from the triggers with .303s takes its turret out. I see M18s all over the place.
Its slower with better armor protection then a standard Panzer F/H - it would simply just be another "mid ENY option" tank. Given people want the Boomerang in Aces High - why not a Churchill tank? It would be used and served quite well.
It might not go toe to toe with a Tiger tank - then why was the M4-75 added ?
I dont remember seeing a wave of complaints about the M18's lack of armor. I remember seeing people, me in particular, saying it will have very thin armor (as in M8 thickness) and it wont take much to disable. I was spot on. In terms of the Churchill's top speed being 15mph, that will keep it parked in the hanger more than you think because other than in the MW arena, it is at best equal in firepower to the M4/75mm and T34/76. The Churchill does offer up some impressive armor that rivals the Tiger and King Tiger, but other than that nothing. No pivot in place ability, no pintle MG, no added ability to traverse harsh terrain (in AH, anyways). So perhaps not "pointless" as I said at first, but certainly questionable, imo. :)
-
I dont remember seeing a wave of complaints about the M18's lack of armor. I remember seeing people, me in particular, saying it will have very thin armor (as in M8 thickness) and it wont take much to disable. I was spot on. In terms of the Churchill's top speed being 15mph, that will keep it parked in the hanger more than you think because other than in the MW arena, it is at best equal in firepower to the M4/75mm and T34/76. The Churchill does offer up some impressive armor that rivals the Tiger and King Tiger, but other than that nothing. No pivot in place ability, no pintle MG, no added ability to traverse harsh terrain (in AH, anyways). So perhaps not "pointless" as I said at first, but certainly questionable, imo. :)
The same questions that was brought up about the M-18 is basically what you are implying. Yes it is slow, however its armor value makes up for it same as the Speed makes up for the lack of armor the M-18 brings to the fight.
No Pintle MG? It comes with two Besa machine guns - if you forget the PanzerF doesn't come with a pintle either, and it gets used more then you think lets not forget about the T34.... also No ability to travel harsh terrain? neither can the T-34. Either case - The Panzer F And T-34/85 get used far more frequent then you want to think.
My point is: there was plenty of doubts a no armored m-18 would last in the main arena - a few 303s knocks it out. However it has its place, and so would the Churchill tank.
You might be misunderstanding me, Just because I believe it should be added, doesn't mean I'd vote on it over a number of tanks I feel should be added first hand. For example the Crusader and Panzer III would fit nicely for midwar and early war. The Churchill tank would be nothing more then a filler for the late war arena, however it still deserves its spot in the roster eventually, given the time frame for adding equipment to Aces High - this could be years down the road.
-
The same questions that was brought up about the M-18 is basically what you are implying. Yes it is slow, however its armor value makes up for it same as the Speed makes up for the lack of armor the M-18 brings to the fight.
No Pintle MG? It comes with two Besa machine guns - if you forget the PanzerF doesn't come with a pintle either, and it gets used more then you think lets not forget about the T34.... also No ability to travel harsh terrain? neither can the T-34. Either case - The Panzer F And T-34/85 get used far more frequent then you want to think.
My point is: there was plenty of doubts a no armored m-18 would last in the main arena - a few 303s knocks it out. However it has its place, and so would the Churchill tank.
You might be misunderstanding me, Just because I believe it should be added, doesn't mean I'd vote on it over a number of tanks I feel should be added first hand. For example the Crusader and Panzer III would fit nicely for midwar and early war. The Churchill tank would be nothing more then a filler for the late war arena, however it still deserves its spot in the roster eventually, given the time frame for adding equipment to Aces High - this could be years down the road.
I'm well aware of how much the T34's get used, them not having a pintle gun has no bearing on their usage. The T34's speed and armor are what carries it. My point on the Churchill was that it only has armor to stand on. The hull and co-axial MG's are not going to do much good vs low flying aircraft. Regarding the M18's worth, it has no match in what it can do (run at 51mph, flank, and utilize and very good AP gun). Vs the big tanks, usually 1 shot from the big guns will take out most other tanks so the M18's armor is a moot point vs other tanks. The M18's Achilles heel is aircraft and with the new icon ranges it seems to be getting a wee bit less pressure from aircraft.
I agree %100 regarding the Panzer III and Crusader, they'd be very worthy additions to AH. EW and MW could use some more tanks. But only after HTC gets the He111 added. :aok
-
I agree %100 regarding the Panzer III and Crusader, they'd be very worthy additions to AH. EW and MW could use some more tanks. But only after HTC gets the He111 added. :aok
I've been trying to research the He-111, I have all the documents and information needed with plenty of sources - the only problem is everything is written in German which is severely limiting me.
-
Lusche read German I think, try contacting him.
If its in a non-electronic format, what you could do is go to Google Translate and type it up. Copy and paste the English translation to a word document one paragraph at a time. It would be slow and arduous, but it would do the job.
-
Lusche read German I think, try contacting him.
If its in a non-electronic format, what you could do is go to Google Translate and type it up. Copy and paste the English translation to a word document one paragraph at a time. It would be slow and arduous, but it would do the job.
You do realize some of the books and documents I have go into hundreds if not thousands of pages?
-
Well then you're pretty much screwed either way.
You have 3 choices:
1) learn german
2) do as I suggested with google translate. I guess you could translate/copy the index or directory page first, and then only translate/copy the information you need. But either way, you still have a fair bit of work ahead of you.
3) find someone who reads german and have him copy it down
Past that, you really don't have any real options for getting the information out of those books.