Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Eric19 on November 19, 2012, 04:50:18 PM
-
The M36 Slugger which carried the 90mm M3 gun or the 76 m1a2 it served from 1943 to 1945 with about 2000 built between 43' and 45' it would almost as powerful as the tiger2 with the 90mm but with less armor
The M10 Wolverine which carried the 76mm m7 gun or the 76mm M1A1 same as the one on our M4A3W(76)
The m10 served from 1943 to 1945
:salute Eric19
-
I'd rather have the M-26 Pershing, give the US a tank that can finally face the heavy tanks in this game.
ack-ack
-
I'd rather have the M-26 Pershing, give the US a tank that can finally face the heavy tanks in this game.
ack-ack
I totally forgot about the Pershing lol lets throw that one in to the mix as well lol
-
Didn't the slugger actually have slightly thicker frontal armor than the Pershing? Lighter, faster, and better armored from the front. Also, being a TD, it would have had priority on any APCR rounds the are shipped to Europe, and so might have a chance of getting them in the game.
It sounds like the M36 might actually be a bit better for our purposes than the Pershing would be.
-
I'd rather have the M-26 Pershing, give the US a tank that can finally face the heavy tanks in this game.
ack-ack
+1 :salute
-
i always use the panther as a sub for the Pershing. its close, but not quite the same. it definitely evens thing with the tiger.
-
I'd rather have the M-26 Pershing, give the US a tank that can finally face the heavy tanks in this game.
ack-ack
This is a win for players, Aces High, and the bottom line... +1
-
No no no and no to the Pershing or M36. The Pershing would be on par with the Panther (yeah, look it up) in terms of firepower and armor, but not speed. Not sure about reload or turret traverse.
if HTC wants to add something we currently do not have, the StG III (or IV) would be good, or better yet the Su-100. The whole turret-less thing is a major hang up though, neither has the ability to traverse in place, both would have to "worm" their way around if they want to change.
I still think HTC would do well to add multiple variants of the Panzer III, or a early or mid-war British tank with multiple variants (2 pdr and 6 pdr main guns). The Crusader and Valentine come to mind. Though, it has been shown that the players want the "flash-bang" of having the best there is in WWII and most anything from EW simply isnt flashy enough.
EDIT: You guys crying about the US not having a tank that can go toe to toe with the Germans are missing a few marbles. You're asking for something that never really happened. The Pershing was at best equal to the Panther. Double check the US 76mm already in game, check the ranges in which it is effective and use it to your advantage. There is a reason the M18 is a major pain in the backside to Tiger tanks (any tank), run like you stole something and get to a flank. Sometimes it isn't about standing and fighting.
-
EDIT: You guys crying about the US not having a tank that can go toe to toe with the Germans are missing a few marbles. You're asking for something that never really happened. The Pershing was at best equal to the Panther.
What really never happened? Pershings going against heavy German tanks in the last months of the war?
ack-ack
-
What really never happened? Pershings going against heavy German tanks in the last months of the war?
ack-ack
Pershing's faced german tanks, what many wanted were the Super Pershings which "believed" to go toe-to-toe with the King Tiger, which isn't true.
Pershing is just a heavier version of the Panther, less agility at 25mph, armor wise wasn't any better then a panther or less. The Gun can knock out a Tiger tank under 1,000 yards easy with HVAP, otherwise its AP rounds wouldn't dent a Tiger/Panther.
-
What really never happened? Pershings going against heavy German tanks in the last months of the war?
ack-ack
I think he means the alot of people think that the Pershing is =/> then any heavy tank the germans had, like its the American equivalent of a tigerII.
-
I think he means the alot of people think that the Pershing is =/> then any heavy tank the germans had, like its the American equivalent of a tigerII.
That's a misunderstood statement just like the Me-410 was. When people looked at the gun package they assumed it would beat a Thunderbolt in a dive, out turn a spitfire, when in fact it was simply an overweight buff killer.
The germans attempted to field most if not all Medium Tank Platoons in Normandy with Panthers, the early Pershings were actually to field 76mm guns. One of the reasons was Patton who actually knew NOTHING about tanks at thie time, his technical judgement was quite poor, in fact he wanted nothing
to do with the pershing since "Shermans" were adaquate for the job. Other generals played ball with their ideas, one suggested the 76mm being it was enough to take down Panzer 4s since "Tigers and Panthers are non-existant" you have to look at pre-normandy invasion for this, Italy for example.
Eventually the 90mm gun was used, due to its "similar" hitting power of the German 8.8cm L/56 of the Tiger tank, however certain rounds played a role in this as well.
Many ideas were thrown around over the years, my argument has always been if the Americans appreciated the intelligence of the status of Panther Tanks deployed in France in 1944, then the Americans might of accelerated research on such things as a 90mm gun on the Sherman or producing quite a few more 76mm HVAP ammo.
The first M26 could of reached combat in June 1944 if certain generals had their way, but influenced generals like Patton really killed this, the first prototype came about around Feb of 1944.
The Pershing was not a "Tiger killer" or King Tiger killer, as this argument has played out so many times on this BBS, however German units were routinely operating at minimal strength - with most the armor units fighting in the East.
US and Brit tanks were simply no match for german tanks period, if it wasn't for the limited German units, the Pershing would of probably been ramped into production majorly, instead barely 40 or so were completed before 1944 came to an end.
On a fun note - a Panzer 4 was knocked out at 1,200 yards in Feb 1945 by a M26, beyond operating range of US tanks.
The First M26 was knocked out by 2 direct hits from a 150mm Howitzer, disabling its turret and tracks, the tank was repaired and brought back into service.
The most famous engagement by a groupd called Zebra mission (to evaluate the M26) was on March 6, 1945 - when a Panther tank from 9th Panzer division stationed in a courtyard in front of the cathedral at Cologne, ambushed an M4 sherman, blowing it up, however an T26E3 was sent into to deal with the Panther and slammed 3 rounds into it blowing the tank up, which was actually caught on camera by signal corps. You can see this film on youtube actually.
-
Pershing's faced german tanks, what many wanted were the Super Pershings which "believed" to go toe-to-toe with the King Tiger, which isn't true.
Pershing is just a heavier version of the Panther, less agility at 25mph, armor wise wasn't any better then a panther or less. The Gun can knock out a Tiger tank under 1,000 yards easy with HVAP, otherwise its AP rounds wouldn't dent a Tiger/Panther.
This seems like a pretty complicated account for a "belief"
http://www.3ad.com/history/news/super.pershing.1.htm (http://www.3ad.com/history/news/super.pershing.1.htm)
-
The M36 Slugger which carried the 90mm M3 gun or the 76 m1a2 it served from 1943 to 1945 with about 2000 built between 43' and 45' it would almost as powerful as the tiger2 with the 90mm but with less armor
The M10 Wolverine which carried the 76mm m7 gun or the 76mm M1A1 same as the one on our M4A3W(76)
The m10 served from 1943 to 1945
:salute Eric19
Why, why, oh why would you want this Eric, an m16 in this game can take out a Tiger2, so why do we need a new tank killer :salute
-
This seems like a pretty complicated account for a "belief"
http://www.3ad.com/history/news/super.pershing.1.htm (http://www.3ad.com/history/news/super.pershing.1.htm)
Here's the problem, I've read the same account in half a dozen articles - it isn't known if it was a Tiger or King Tiger - what reports I have read states its a Tiger tank that was knocked at 1,200 yards. A couple of things need to be taken into account first... Look at the time stamp,
the German army was pretty much destroyed, no veteran crews left - and tanks were designed pretty poor since late 1944.
It was one engagement, one tank on one - there is no eye witness to this, and its incredibly hard to give a judgement on this engagement. I read this same article 10 years ago, if you search the forums you will find the same link to the super pershing used a dozen times.
I wouldn't say 1 thing on the wishlist forum unless I actually researched the hell out of it, for example all my info comes from Osprey Vangards M-26/46 Pershing.
-
Why, why, oh why would you want this Eric, an m16 in this game can take out a Tiger2, so why do we need a new tank killer :salute
because it would be cool hawk I want a 90mm gun lol need something to atleast have a chance of killing a tiger from the front
-
because it would be cool hawk I want a 90mm gun lol need something to atleast have a chance of killing a tiger from the front
your missing all the fun drive up behind the tiger 2 in your m-18 then ping it with your machine gun a bit then,as he slowly painfully tries to turn towards you, knock out his turret fun fun
-
your missing all the fun drive up behind the tiger 2 in your m-18 then ping it with your machine gun a bit then,as he slowly painfully tries to turn towards you, knock out his turret fun fun
LOL
-
because it would be cool hawk I want a 90mm gun lol need something to atleast have a chance of killing a tiger from the front
a m16 will kill a tiger 2 from the front, so will a m3. might want to ask to fix what we have before asking for new toys :salute
-
a m16 will kill a tiger 2 from the front, so will a m3. might want to ask to fix what we have before asking for new toys :salute
I would like to see some proof of an M16 firing at, and destroying a TigerII by hitting its frontal armor. I can promise you will not be able to show this.
Your turn, prove me wrong.
-
What really never happened? Pershings going against heavy German tanks in the last months of the war?
ack-ack
I think he means having a tank that can get up there, and slug things out with the Panthers and Tiger II's.
And people need to remember, there were a grand total of 4 guns in service with Allied or Soviet armored forces that were capable of penetrating the main frontal armor of a Tiger II at any real range. And at least two, maybe even 3 off them, needed special ammunition to do even that much.
100mm (only non-axis gun that almost all sources put as being able to penetrate a Tiger II's turret front with standard ammunition)
122mm (Depends on source. Either it was almost able to do so, or it could barely do so with standard ammunition.) Disregarding outliers that put it at 211mm with standard APC ammunition, most sources put it between 166mm and somewhere in the neighborhood of 190mm.
90mm. Needed HVAP.
17lber(/77mm?). Needed APDS (really inaccurate)
So, yeah. Theres no real chance of getting something that can truely slug things out with a Tiger II at long-range, since no such thing saw combat in WWII. The best 3 for that job would be the ISU-152 with its HE gun, the SU-100, and the M36 firing APCR.
Pershing is just a heavier version of the Panther, less agility at 25mph, armor wise wasn't any better then a panther or less. The Gun can knock out a Tiger tank under 1,000 yards easy with HVAP, otherwise its AP rounds wouldn't dent a Tiger/Panther.
Turret and side armor are a bit better. Biggest advantage over the Panther I can see it having is the .50cal. But its gun could kill a Tiger I from a bit over 2000m away on paper, maybe a tad under 2000m in reality. Basically, if the Tiger I can kill it, the Pershing could kill it.
The First M26 was knocked out by 2 direct hits from a 150mm Howitzer, disabling its turret and tracks, the tank was repaired and brought back into service.
I always heard it was a Nashorn that knocked out the first one. From the story I read, it fired into the Pershing at less than 500m from ambush. With the 88mm L/71, any square hit is an almost guaranteed penetration at that range.
-
Here's the problem, I've read the same account in half a dozen articles - it isn't known if it was a Tiger or King Tiger - what reports I have read states its a Tiger tank that was knocked at 1,200 yards. A couple of things need to be taken into account first... Look at the time stamp,
the German army was pretty much destroyed, no veteran crews left - and tanks were designed pretty poor since late 1944.
It was one engagement, one tank on one - there is no eye witness to this, and its incredibly hard to give a judgement on this engagement. I read this same article 10 years ago, if you search the forums you will find the same link to the super pershing used a dozen times.
I wouldn't say 1 thing on the wishlist forum unless I actually researched the hell out of it, for example all my info comes from Osprey Vangards M-26/46 Pershing.
It is known that it was a Tiger II, what is not known if it was the Tiger II or some other anti-tank weapon that hit the turret of the Super Pershing, but make no mistake about it, a Super Pershing killed a Tiger II at Dessau. There were plenty of witnesses as well, as the Super Pershings were moving along with the infantry through Dessau.
Sources: Spearhead in the West (1946 edition); the book Death Traps by Belton Cooper; and the book Another River, Another Town and personal writings by John P. Irwin (gunner in the Super Pershing).
Then there is this video of an engagement between a regular Pershing against a Panther tank during the Battle of Cologne.
M26 Pershing vs. Panther tank - Battle of Cologne (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFG2i4y3kXs)
Here is a picture of the dead Panther.
(http://www.network54.com/Realm/tank_picture/panther_cologne.jpg)
From another angle
(http://i.ytimg.com/vi/D6LqB-RYUvY/mqdefault.jpg)
ack-ack
-
It doesn't matter, Butcher has his mind made up. He can't be bothered with factual evidence, his beloved Tiger II cannot be
destroyed by mere mortals :rolleyes:
-
It doesn't matter, Butcher has his mind made up. He can't be bothered with factual evidence, his beloved Tiger II cannot be
destroyed by mere mortals :rolleyes:
Hardly, theres an entire thread of him talking about how it would be possible for the IS-2 to knock them out at beyond 2000m range :lol.
-
It doesn't matter, Butcher has his mind made up. He can't be bothered with factual evidence, his beloved Tiger II cannot be
destroyed by mere mortals :rolleyes:
umm, hey kid - I go by facts you know *researching* more then just wikipedia - if you been around long enough you'd know I go by factual information other then what wikipedia tells you.
Fact is I have no interest in the Tiger 2, and I only drove the Tiger 2 maybe 5 times since It came out. So how did I make up my mind again kiddo?
if Ack-Ack comments on it I know I can trust his judgement, however for the past 5 years? the SAME 3rd armored URL gets brought into every forum post on the "Super Pershing", only ONE source.... Hey just like Wikipedia.
I prefer having some cross-references material to make sure everything is accurate as possible.
Ack-ack, never read anything by John Irwin - one of those few books I haven't gotten around to finding yet.
Hardly, theres an entire thread of him talking about how it would be possible for the IS-2 to knock them out at beyond 2000m range :lol.
And I showed sourced information where you simply still believe no tank can be knocked out by a HE round period any range. In your mind its A) a King Tiger and B) HE round, nope no HE round ever disabled a tank period.
Lets forget simpler things like a PTRD Anti Tank rifle at Kursk disabling a Tiger tank. Your logic? ZOMG 14mm Anti tank gun cannot disable a Tiger, in fact one did - killing the driver causing the crew to bail out.
-
And I showed sourced information where you simply still believe no tank can be knocked out by a HE round period any range. In your mind its A) a King Tiger and B) HE round, nope no HE round ever disabled a tank period.
OK, so completely wrong on both points. A) it was skepticism about IS-2's ability to beat the Tiger II's in a gun duel at extended ranges (more specifically, its ability to hit said tiger II at extended range before the Tiger II hits it); a fight which favors the Tiger II in every way. And B) in your mind, a hit with an HE shell is a guaranteed kill of the tank, while it the hardened steel penetrator of the Pz.Gr. 39/43 round was liable to just bounce off of the IS-2 at such ranges.
The weakness of the Tiger II was its in its flanks, and its mobility, not its front. I have no great love of the Tiger II; my favorite tank is still the Panther. I'm simply better able to recognize the fact that no tank we get in Aces High will be able to slug things out with a Tiger II unless HTC either gives the US 90mm APCR rounds, the 17lber APDS, or reworks the HE mechanics to allow HE shells to damage tanks.
Lets forget simpler things like a PTRD Anti Tank rifle at Kursk disabling a Tiger tank. Your logic? ZOMG 14mm Anti tank gun cannot disable a Tiger, in fact one did - killing the driver causing the crew to bail out.
Disabled vs destroyed. To me, just disabling the tank isn't any great accomplishment, and doesn't say much about a tank's strenght or weaknesses, since you can "disable" an M4 as easily as you can disable a Tiger II, and as easily as you can disable a T-34.
Hell, you could disable a tank with a .17cal if you got lucky. Just happen to hit the driver in the eye, and the tank is as disabled as it would be if you had shot the driver with a 14mm round, or even somehow killed the driver with a 155mm while doing no damage to the tank or other crew members.
-
I would like to see some proof of an M16 firing at, and destroying a TigerII by hitting its frontal armor. I can promise you will not be able to show this.
Your turn, prove me wrong.
:rofl :rofl :rofl Forget the M15, lol...I wanna see proof that an M3 can knock out a King Tiger by hitting it in its frontal armor! :bolt:
-
:rofl :rofl :rofl Forget the M15, lol...I wanna see proof that an M3 can knock out a King Tiger by hitting it in its frontal armor! :bolt:
first day it came out I in my little M3 with the 75MM gun shot and killed a tigger2 from 600 yds out with one shot and then I :bolt: outta there lol
-
:rofl :rofl :rofl Forget the M15, lol...I wanna see proof that an M3 can knock out a King Tiger by hitting it in its frontal armor! :bolt:
From the front according to AH statistics that isn't going to happen. An M3 at 0yrds has a penetration of 91mm and at 1000yrds 80mm. The TigerII's weakest frontal armor is the lower hull at 100mm which additionally is angled. Vision ports,other weak areas? Perhaps, but does AH model this? Even if it did, that is extremely unlikely. And the idea of an M16 destroying a TigerII from the front is laughable to the point of being ridiculous.
The side and rear armor are an entirely different matter however, and yes an m3/75 can absolutley knock out a TigerII.
-
umm, hey kid - I go by facts you know *researching* more then just wikipedia - if you been around long enough you'd know I go by factual information other then what wikipedia tells you.
Fact is I have no interest in the Tiger 2, and I only drove the Tiger 2 maybe 5 times since It came out. So how did I make up my mind again kiddo?
if Ack-Ack comments on it I know I can trust his judgement, however for the past 5 years? the SAME 3rd armored URL gets brought into every forum post on the "Super Pershing", only ONE source.... Hey just like Wikipedia.
I prefer having some cross-references material to make sure everything is accurate as possible.
Ack-ack, never read anything by John Irwin - one of those few books I haven't gotten around to finding yet.
And I showed sourced information where you simply still believe no tank can be knocked out by a HE round period any range. In your mind its A) a King Tiger and B) HE round, nope no HE round ever disabled a tank period.
Lets forget simpler things like a PTRD Anti Tank rifle at Kursk disabling a Tiger tank. Your logic? ZOMG 14mm Anti tank gun cannot disable a Tiger, in fact one did - killing the driver causing the crew to bail out.
Hmmm, well since I'm just a kid I guess I should bow to your vast and infallible knowledge. After all your second or third hand information
MUST be more accurate than mine. Of course you have absolutely no clue where I get my information, so it might be a bit problematical to
prove that opinion.
I also don't spend alot of my time obsessing over the virtual minutiae of virtual armor thicknesses and angles in a ground combat game
that in no way resembles actual armored combat. GVing can be fun, but it's just a game. I have no idea how smart you are, but I know
how smart you sound.
-
Some of you guys swinging purses need to check the raw data that AH is using. If an M3 or M4 armed with 75mm AP defeats a King Tiger or a Tiger from the front then we know something is wrong with the programming. I do believe that once upon a time Looshy sent in a bug report regarding the M4/75mm being able to kill the Tiger with a frontal shot and Pyro determined it had to do with the shot hitting the top armor and not the front armor. Otherwise, the 75mm can NOT defeat the Tiger or King Tiger from the front, period.
HE rounds can damage tanks in AH. It may not destroy then but HE rounds can certainly track a tank. In fact, just an FYI: I never take a full ammo supply of AP only, at minimum I will take the smallest load of HE to use against M3's, M8's, M18's, FLAKS, etc. A near miss will damage turrets, wheels, tracks, engines, or even outright destroy them. If there is an enemy tank hiding behind a berm and is abusing the terrain (sticking his barrel through the berm that allows him to shoot but fully protects him from incoming rounds), and you have a Tiger, T34/85, or M4/785, may I suggest lobbing in some HE and see what it does. :aok
-
I have used 75 mm HE at short range against the side armor of panzers to kill them , if that is not correct , some let me know and I'll recreate to show how I've done it. So it can be fixed, I believe however,,m that it is correct.
-
It very well might be correct. It really depends. If its representing the shell penetrating the tank before it detonates, then its correct. If its representing the shell exploding on the outside of the tank, and then the tank dying to spalling, then its partially incorrect, as the driver would be safe-ish depending on hit location (the only crew member you have to kill to destroy the tank, it seems), and spalling might not do a thing to the engine (and HE hits seem to be guaranteed kills).
However, it seems to be the former, as I have yet to see a low velocity HE shell kill a tank at extended ranges, which clearly indicates that the shell is simply failing to penetrate the armor at extended ranges, and this is doing no damage.
HE rounds can damage tanks in AH. It may not destroy then but HE rounds can certainly track a tank.
True. But we can't reasonably expect a 122mm to destroy a Tiger II from the front with our current modeling. About the best we could hope for is that a near miss from something like a 152mm has sufficient blast to destroy with a near miss, in a manner simmilar to the 8" gun (although I have no idea if the 8"er can even destroy a Tiger II, since I haven't tested it, and even a 152mm seems a bit small to contain a sufficient explosive charge).
-
True. But we can't reasonably expect a 122mm to destroy a Tiger II from the front with our current modeling. About the best we could hope for is that a near miss from something like a 152mm has sufficient blast to destroy with a near miss, in a manner simmilar to the 8" gun (although I have no idea if the 8"er can even destroy a Tiger II, since I haven't tested it, and even a 152mm seems a bit small to contain a sufficient explosive charge).
Tank Ace think of the 8IN as a 500lb bomb because you have 3 in 1 salvo it takes 2 salvos to kill a hangar thus equaling about 3,000lbs of ordance I do believe the 8in could kill a KT
-
Tank Ace think of the 8IN as a 500lb bomb because you have 3 in 1 salvo it takes 2 salvos to kill a hangar thus equaling about 3,000lbs of ordance I do believe the 8in could kill a KT
True. Although I'm not going to take it as a guaranteed thing untill I see proof. AH being the simulation that it is, might be something screwy.
-
At this time I'd be willing to bet that a King Tiger and Tiger can not be defeated by any tank HE in the game. If and when the Su-100 arrives it wont have any better of a chance to defeat a King Tiger or Tiger than the Panther using AP or HE. The Su-152 on the other hand... I wont place any bets against that thing.
-
At this time I'd be willing to bet that a King Tiger and Tiger can not be defeated by any tank HE in the game. If and when the Su-100 arrives it wont have any better of a chance to defeat a King Tiger or Tiger than the Panther using AP or HE. The Su-152 on the other hand... I wont place any bets against that thing.
Really depends on how big of a blast the HE shell creates. AP penetration wasn't stellar or anything, and without the effects of poor steel quality and the stress of such a large projectile hitting the armor, it wouldn't penetrate the glacis plate or the turret.