Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Blinder on April 14, 2014, 08:04:04 PM
-
I'd like to see some tankettes like the L3/35
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-201-1561-20%2C_Balkan%2C_italienische_Panzer%2C_Krad_mit_Beiwagen.jpg)
And some of their primo armor like the L5/21 and L5/30
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/26/Fiat3000.jpg)
the Carro Armato L6/40
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cc/Fiat-Ansaldo_L6_40.jpg)
the Carro Armato Celere Sahariano M16/43
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/22/Celere-Sahariano.jpg)
the Fiat-Ansaldo M11/39
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Captured_Italian_tanks_005042.jpg)
the Fiat-Ansaldo M13/40
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-B16002%2C_Nordafrika%2C_Truppenparade_in_Tripolis.jpg)
and the Carro Armato P 40
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/P26-40_tank.jpg)
Yes. I am a crazy insane tanker. :old: (but I am being serious here)
-
I wonder how Italian and Japanese tanks would do if ranged against one another?
I doubt they are more than a speed bump for German, Russian, British or American armored fighting vehicles.
I wouldn't mind seeing some added, but it would likely be good to start with the absolute best they fielded.
-
I wonder how Italian and Japanese tanks would do if ranged against one another?
I doubt they are more than a speed bump for German, Russian, British or American armored fighting vehicles.
I wouldn't mind seeing some added, but it would likely be good to start with the absolute best they fielded.
I agree :old:
-
I wonder how Italian and Japanese tanks would do if ranged against one another?
I doubt they are more than a speed bump for German, Russian, British or American armored fighting vehicles.
I wouldn't mind seeing some added, but it would likely be good to start with the absolute best they fielded.
If the early American and Germans were added, they would be almost as bad as the early Japanese and Italians. The Matilda, Pz35, B1 & H35 would be some of the best early tanks. The Brit and the French have heavy armor that many of the older tanks would struggle to pen.
The M3 Grant/lee would be only have the 37mm that would fire AP.
-
Looks like the Type 3 Chi-Nu would have been fairly competitive with the Carro Armato P 40. The Japanese even built more of them than the Italians did of P 40, however the Japanese also reserved them for the defense of the home islands so they didn't technically see combat. Given they were in service in 1944 and would hardly be imbalancing that might be something that could reasonably be waived.
The Type 4 Chi-To would have been pretty parable with an M4, but they only completed two production models of those and it obviously never saw service.
If the early American and Germans were added, they would be almost as bad as the early Japanese and Italians. The Matilda, Pz35, B1 & H35 would be some of the best early tanks. The Brit and the French have heavy armor that many of the older tanks would struggle to pen.
The M3 Grant/lee would be only have the 37mm that would fire AP.
Both the Carro Armato P 40 and the Type 3 Chi-Nu had 75mm guns. Mediocre 75mm guns, but still 75mm guns. Either would be effective against Panzer IIIs or Grants.
-
(http://www.bhmpics.com/wallpapers/u_s__medium_tank_m3_lee-852x480.jpg)
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3481/3973750152_3c6a3c46d7_z.jpg)
(http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/be/19/c9/be19c90d70b49d3ec8af4c7ea79ce09f.jpg)
-
See all of these would be great for the early war area and may even draw a bigger crowd than 2 or 3 players at a time in there. That is my intent. I would love to take part in some early war action with all of these machines. and even some early and pre war Soviet tanks too like:
The T-24
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/32/T-24_tank.jpg/640px-T-24_tank.jpg)
the T-28
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/T28_005.gif)
the T-25
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7e/P68l.jpg/640px-P68l.jpg)
this one would be fun for you and a few friends! Everyone grab a position and off we go!
and, of course, the speedy little BT family of tanks including the 2,5,7 & 7M.
(http://noxem.cba.pl/noxem/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/24.jpg)
I'd be using that little hot rod quite a bit in the early and mid war .... heck I'd use it in the late war too! :rock
-
lol most of them look like pratice targets for the M8.
-
For these tanks to work in the MA, you would have to spreed the eny out to 0-200. FT-17s would be 200 eny and Tiger 2 would be 2 eny. So if by some miracle you took out a T2 with a FT-17 you would earn buckets of perks, but the super easy target for the Tiger would be worth .02.
Its the only way I could see these 1917-1939 designed tanks getting used at all in the MA. unlike a Biplane that could still hurt a P-51 if the Pony was silly enough to try to turn with it, a FT-17 has no chance of killing a heavy late war tank.
Both the Carro Armato P 40 and the Type 3 Chi-Nu had 75mm guns. Mediocre 75mm guns, but still 75mm guns. Either would be effective against Panzer IIIs or Grants.
Yeah Japan started to mount decent tank weapons a little late but they were getting better.
-
lol most of them look like pratice targets for the M8.
The BT-7 could handle an M8 with little problem.
And I am not asking for these in the late war main. I want them for the early and mid war.
-
And I am not asking for these in the late war main. I want them for the early and mid war.
Apart from the fact that there is almost no-one in ether of those areas, the Difference between late WW1-1935 designs and true early war tanks like the Matilda/T-34 & PzIV would be like taking a M8 and fighting a Jagpanther at 4000 yards. Without a perk spreed it would not matter what area you were in.
-
In case of the EW vehicles, it would pretty much be a case of whoever hits first wins.
That being said, the USSR is automatically at a pretty sever disadvantage. Their 45mm gun is also pretty underwhelming; the German 37mm does about as well, and the US 37mm beats both pretty damn significantly.
However, the M8 is so weakly armored that either will kill it pretty much instantly.
-
Any idea how the Japanese Type 1 47mm tank gun compared to the Russian, German, American and British offerings around that size?
Would the Type 1 Chi-He (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_1_Chi-He) be competitive with those other light tanks?
-
It wouldn't do too badly. Better than the BT's, T-26, early Panzer III's, and the Italian light tanks. But it would be worse than the M3 and later marks of the Panzer III.
I'd say a III G would be about equal, but a J2 would be better by a fairly significant degree. An L would beat the crap out of any EW light tank, some mediums, and most MW light tanks
-
Any idea how the Japanese Type 1 47mm tank gun compared to the Russian, German, American and British offerings around that size?
Would the Type 1 Chi-He (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_1_Chi-He) be competitive with those other light tanks?
The Type1 was developed by the Japanese based on their experience against the Soviets during the Battles of Khalkhin Gol. In terms of performance, it wasn't as good as the Allied counterparts but it was still used to good effect against Sherman tanks during the island campaigns.
ack-ack
-
The BT-7 could handle an M8 with little problem.
And I am not asking for these in the late war main. I want them for the early and mid war.
even a m8 kills a tigerII now and then
-
even a m8 kills a tigerII now and then
I know. I've done it before. But we are talking about two vehicles comparably equipped and similar in size and speed. It becomes a battle of whose situational awareness is keener at the point of contact; seeing as how both vehicles have a lower profile and are far more maneuverable than a Tiger.
-
The Type1 was developed by the Japanese based on their experience against the Soviets during the Battles of Khalkhin Gol. In terms of performance, it wasn't as good as the Allied counterparts but it was still used to good effect against Sherman tanks during the island campaigns.
ack-ack
It was hardly used in combat at all, most of them were kept in Japan for defense of the main land and really didnt fare well against M4s when and "if" they did run into them. http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=500
Theres a good reason not to model Jap or Italian tanks. They were all ga-ga. I understand and appreciate the wishes of those who would like to see how these early war systems would clash, and for sure understand wanting "all" the nations who actually fought to be included. But I cant remember the last time I saw a decent crowd in the EWA.
-
Yeah, AKAK, I question that as well. Do you have a source?
And to be clear, its not that I think you're lying, but just that the Type 1 is highly inferior to the M4, and the Japanese weren't known for their skill with armor.
-
It was hardly used in combat at all, most of them were kept in Japan for defense of the main land and really didnt fare well against M4s when and "if" they did run into them. http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=500
Theres a good reason not to model Jap or Italian tanks. They were all ga-ga. I understand and appreciate the wishes of those who would like to see how these early war systems would clash, and for sure understand wanting "all" the nations who actually fought to be included. But I cant remember the last time I saw a decent crowd in the EWA.
Yeah, AKAK, I question that as well. Do you have a source?
And to be clear, its not that I think you're lying, but just that the Type 1 is highly inferior to the M4, and the Japanese weren't known for their skill with armor.
The lack of reading comprehension of some in this thread is mind boggling.
I bolded the section of Karnak's question so you could get someone to read it to you slowly so you can understand.
Any idea how the Japanese Type 1 47mm tank gun compared to the Russian, German, American and British offerings around that size?
Would the Type 1 Chi-He (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_1_Chi-He) be competitive with those other light tanks?
I was talking about the Type 1 47mm anti-tank gun in answering Karnak's question about it.
ack-ack
-
Yup, the Type 1 47mm anti-tank gun definately saw combat, just not really in the Type 1 Chi-He. I did read Ack-Ack's response to be directed at the cannon, not the tank.
-
The thing about AH vehicles is that they are starting out with all the late war world-beaters. So just about any tank that is added from now on is going to be hangar decoration.
-
The thing about AH vehicles is that they are starting out with all the late war world-beaters. So just about any tank that is added from now on is going to be hangar decoration.
Which is why I think a unique ENY spreed for the GVs would help this. A Pz-35 would not have much hope in the current game if it was 40eny when a T-34-76 is also 40 eny.
-
The lack of reading comprehension of some in this thread is mind boggling.
I bolded the section of Karnak's question so you could get someone to read it to you slowly so you can understand.
I was talking about the Type 1 47mm anti-tank gun in answering Karnak's question about it.
ack-ack
My mistake, sorry AKAK.
To answer your question then, Karnak, rather poorly. The Type 1 was maybe a bit better than the Soviet 45mm 53-K (four times as common as the more powerful, but still poor, M-42), but inferior to the German 50mm L/42 tank gun, British 2Lber, US M3 37mm, greatly inferior to the German Pak 38 50mm, 50mm L/60 tank gun, and British 6lbr/US M1 57mm.
-
Any idea how the Japanese Type 1 47mm tank gun compared to the Russian, German, American and British offerings around that size?
Would the Type 1 Chi-He (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_1_Chi-He) be competitive with those other light tanks?
The Type 1 fired two types of shell: Type 1 APHE (Armour piercing high-explosive) and Type 1 HE (High explosive).
Type 1 APHE shell
The APHE shell weighed 3.37 pounds and used a Mark 2 base fuse, the complete round weighing 6.1 pounds. It had a small explosive charge of 0.04 pounds consisting of RDX phlegmatized with 10% Paraffin. The round also had a tracer.
Armour penetration of Type 1 APHE shell
Range Penetration at 0° Penetration at 30°
500 yards 2.75 inches 2 inches
1,500 yards 1.6 inches 1.2 inches
Type 1 HE shell
The HE shell weighed 3.08 pounds and used the Type 88 instantaneous or short delay fuse with a complete round weighing 5.4 pounds. It contained 0.2 pounds of explosive, consisting of a small block of picric acid and a larger block of TNT.
-
So basically 70mm at 500m and 0 degrees of deflection.
-
The lack of reading comprehension of some in this thread is mind boggling.
I bolded the section of Karnak's question so you could get someone to read it to you slowly so you can understand.
I was talking about the Type 1 47mm anti-tank gun in answering Karnak's question about it.
ack-ack
Nice try Ack, why is it just impossible for you to admit your wrong? Or at least that you misqouted or just screwed up as we all do from time to time? I'd have let you off with that cause it aint no big deal any way. Lets go back in history.
Any idea how the Japanese Type 1 47mm tank gun compared to the Russian, German, American and British offerings around that size?
Would the Type 1 Chi-He be competitive with those other light tanks?
The original post that you replied to. What part of "Japanese Type 1 tank gun" and "Any idea how the Japanese Type 1 47mm tank gun compared to" did you have trouble understanding?
The Type1 was developed by the Japanese based on their experience against the Soviets during the Battles of Khalkhin Gol. In terms of performance, it wasn't as good as the Allied counterparts but it was still used to good effect against Sherman tanks during the island campaigns.
ack-ack
THE reply post. at no time in either post was the 47mm ATG mentioned, "which would what? Go well with all the other pushable ATG guns we have in the game?" :headscratch: We were talking about tanks, you know we were talking about tanks, everyone that read the post knows we were talking about tanks. And this is just Lame. This isnt an ATG thread.
Look if it makes you feel better I didnt even know ANY type 1 tanks were ever used in combat. And tho it cant be said with certainty its suspected a few were at Leyte. With anyone else I would have just let this go but since you make a living checking every dot and comma, and are so often insulting and condescending, even still when your obviously wrong and "F"'ed up The lack of reading comprehension of some in this thread is mind boggling.
:lol You just cant help yourself can you?
Well...if anyone makes an anti tank gun thread I'll be the first to say this is the first mobile one I want in the game. Maybe we can get the drunken para's to push it. :rofl
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/800px-Japanese_Type_1_Anti-Tank_gun_zps540858f1.jpg)
-
Whoa, hang on a sec.
Karnak asked 2 questions.
Q1: Any idea how the Japanese Type 1 47mm tank gun compared to the Russian, German, American and British offerings around that size?
Q2: Would the Type 1 Chi-He be competitive with those other light tanks?
Tank-Ace replied to the second question. Then Ack-Ack answered the first question.
The Type1 was developed by the Japanese based on their experience against the Soviets during the Battles of Khalkhin Gol. In terms of performance, it wasn't as good as the Allied counterparts but it was still used to good effect against Sherman tanks during the island campaigns.
ack-ack
The Type 1 Ack-Ack was talking about was the 47mm, as he quotes the Battles of Khalkhin Gol. It was these battles that prompted the design of the 47mm after the Type 94 37 mm Anti-Tank Gun proved ineffective verses the Bt-2/7 and T-46s fielded by the Russians at that time.
Your First reply to Ack-Ack after this post is as follows.
It was hardly used in combat at all, most of them were kept in Japan for defense of the main land and really didnt fare well against M4s when and "if" they did run into them. http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=500
Theres a good reason not to model Jap or Italian tanks. They were all ga-ga. I understand and appreciate the wishes of those who would like to see how these early war systems would clash, and for sure understand wanting "all" the nations who actually fought to be included. But I cant remember the last time I saw a decent crowd in the EWA.
You have seen the Type 1 and confused the Type 1 47mm that ack-ack was talking about with the Type 1 Chi-He. What you stated was true for the Chi-he but you were replying to a post about a gun, not a tank.
Tank-Ace followed on from your post without seeing the jump you made.
-
Rich,
The Type 1 47mm gun is both the tank gun and the anti-tank gun. It is the same gun. I think you owe Ack-Ack an apology.
-
Rich,
The Type 1 47mm gun is both the tank gun and the anti-tank gun. It is the same gun. I think you owe Ack-Ack an apology.
I know it is and I dont "owe" anybody nothing. Now either get back on track with the thread or I'll just leave it. Nobody was talking about ATGs or even mentioned them and thats the end of it.
Its a good thread so enough of this.
-
I know it is and I dont "owe" anybody nothing. Now either get back on track with the thread or I'll just leave it. Nobody was talking about ATGs or even mentioned them and thats the end of it.
Any idea how the Japanese Type 1 47mm tank gun compared to the Russian, German, American and British offerings around that size?
Would the Type 1 Chi-He (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_1_Chi-He) be competitive with those other light tanks?
Since reading comprehension isn't your strong point, again, I bolded the part where Karnak asked about the Type 1 47mm AT gun which was also the main gun on the Type 97 Chi-Ha Shinhoto tank.
It is obvious that Karnak was asking about the Type 1 47mm gun.
Its a good thread so enough of this.
It was until you went off the handle.
ack-ack
-
Wow. I actually started a good thread for once. :O
I understand that my requests will be outclassed in the late war arena. I still want them or at least some of them for the early and mid. Maybe if there was an actual variety of early war machines available, the early arena won't be so perpetually deserted. Having it and no one using it is a self-defeating purpose for Hi-Tech. Everyone on here is all "I want, I wish, I must have ...." for the later war machines which, as an aggregate, are extremely well represented in the game. I think there needs to be an increase in early war armor to attract ground-pounders like me who want to tank it up with these classic pre and early war vehicles. This, in turn, may draw some of you flyboys into the early arena to get some riveted kills. I know I'd be in there if these tanks and tankettes were available.
Cuz an arena unused is a useless arena. :old: