« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: So we get a Sherman..  (Read 994 times)

Offline macleod01

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2735
      • http://www.71sqn.co.uk
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #15 on: March 22, 2007, 12:35:17 PM »
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiight. So WHY do we need to perk the Sherman if th etiger could whip its lousy ass?
Logged
seeds have been laid...but they arent trees we're growing. we're growing organic grenades!- 321BAR
I'd have a better chance in running into a Dodo Bird in the middle of rush hour, walking down the I-5 with two hookers in tow before I see a useful post from glock89- Ack-Ack

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: Re: Re: Re: So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #16 on: March 22, 2007, 12:35:35 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by macleod01
And the Tiger could punch through a Shermans frontal armour at...?


Note i said "The trick will be getting that close.".

Quite sure it that 88 can plink em from much farther out.


Bronk
Logged
See Rule #4

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #17 on: March 22, 2007, 12:37:37 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by macleod01
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. So WHY do we need to perk the Sherman if th etiger could whip its lousy ass?


I never said it should.

It's a great way to keep lazy campers on their toes.
It's Eny should be close to the panzer . IMHO however.

Bronk
Logged
See Rule #4

Offline macleod01

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2735
      • http://www.71sqn.co.uk
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #18 on: March 22, 2007, 01:35:17 PM »
wasnt aimed at you Bronk. Grunherz is asking if it is perked, but if its not as good as the tiger, whats the point!
Logged
seeds have been laid...but they arent trees we're growing. we're growing organic grenades!- 321BAR
I'd have a better chance in running into a Dodo Bird in the middle of rush hour, walking down the I-5 with two hookers in tow before I see a useful post from glock89- Ack-Ack

Offline JB35

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 548
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #19 on: March 22, 2007, 01:36:29 PM »
The Sherman was fast compared to the Tiger, it could get around it quick , as the Tiger had to start up and pivot to help get its slow moving turret to turn towards the oncoming Sherman.

Sure the Sherman had little frontal armor , and the Tank Crews started naming them " Zippo " cause all it took was 1 strike and it was ablase.

Its going to be interesting to se how this works out with the Sherman, over all it will be a good addition but I feel it will be an easy death trap, and the guys in the PnZr and Tigger will have a field day with this thing.
Logged

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #20 on: March 22, 2007, 01:36:52 PM »
Rgr, was just trying to clarify.



Bronk
Logged
See Rule #4

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #21 on: March 22, 2007, 01:39:22 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by macleod01
wasnt aimed at you Bronk. Grunherz is asking if it is perked, but if its not as good as the tiger, whats the point!

Same as having the F4U-1C and Me262 both perked.  One is cheaper.

Note: This is not an endorsement of perking the Firefly.
Logged
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #22 on: March 22, 2007, 01:43:53 PM »
However, once the inevitable "bugs" / newness are worked out.

If the firefly becomes the spit XVI/La7 of the gv world.
IE almost perk performance without the price.

I'd say that lowering of the tigers perk cost wold be in order.

Bronk
Logged
See Rule #4

Offline Warspawn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 647
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #23 on: March 22, 2007, 02:17:43 PM »
I bet Fireflies will be targets of choice for Hurri IID's and Yak 9T's.  Even the much underused M-8 can bust it up if it gets close enough and goes for flanking or rear shots.

Expect the upgunned Sherman (weren't they called Ronson's, not zippo's?  The motto was "lights first time, every time" for their lighter if I recall correctly) to be quite powerful offensively; however, I don't see it landing any big kill streaks since it will take hits like a 12-yr old girl.
Logged
Purple haze all in my brain
Lately things just don't seem the same
Actin' funny, but I don't know why

'Scuse me while I kiss the sky                 
                                                 --J. Hendrix

Offline quintv

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 188
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #24 on: March 22, 2007, 02:22:40 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Warspawn
I bet Fireflies will be targets of choice for Hurri IID's and Yak 9T's.  Even the much underused M-8 can bust it up if it gets close enough and goes for flanking or rear shots.

Expect the upgunned Sherman (weren't they called Ronson's, not zippo's?  The motto was "lights first time, every time" for their lighter if I recall correctly) to be quite powerful offensively; however, I don't see it landing any big kill streaks since it will take hits like a 12-yr old girl.


No more or less than the Pz.IV Ausf H or T-34/76(43).
« Last Edit: March 22, 2007, 02:25:08 PM by quintv »
Logged

Offline Warspawn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 647
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #25 on: March 22, 2007, 02:31:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by quintv
No more or less than the Pz.IV Ausf H or T-34/76(43).


You're comparing Sherman armor to a Panzer IV-H or the T-34?

Everything I've read pointed towards the Sherman's defensive armor to be virtually useless against most of the dedicated anti-armor weapons of the time.  Even the Pak36(t) 47mm anti-tank gun would penetrate and light 'em up.  I'll go look up some of the details in a bit...

*edit* the Sherman had 2" front armor, while the Panzer had 80mm hull (over 3 inches).  50% more armor on the hull seems like a significant advantage to me.  This is before comparing the actual 'type' of steel used and the hull slope.  I'm sure there are plenty more folks here with better resources to check the assumption you're making that the Sherman had equivalent armor to the T-34 and PZ-IVH.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2007, 02:52:37 PM by Warspawn »
Logged
Purple haze all in my brain
Lately things just don't seem the same
Actin' funny, but I don't know why

'Scuse me while I kiss the sky                 
                                                 --J. Hendrix

Offline quintv

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 188
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #26 on: March 22, 2007, 04:11:47 PM »
I would welcome those people to weigh in and enlighten you. There are a good amount of factors here that you seem to not even know off. But this is a battle I don't feel the need to fight, I'm sure HTC will do its best in modeling (within reason, this isn't a Tank sim and I don't expect it the GVs to be treated with that much attention).

The Pak.36 is a 3.7cm weapon.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2007, 04:15:36 PM by quintv »
Logged

Offline Warspawn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 647
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #27 on: March 22, 2007, 04:44:55 PM »
Yep, mistype.  Meant the 37mm, not 47mm, lol...although there was a 47mm Pak 35/36 (ö)...

And yeah, I'd love to hear the reasons that a Sherman had better armor protection than a PZ-IVH or the T-34.  Type of steel, hardness (homogenous, rolled, ect...even different types of welding methods and plate overlap), slope, ect...even the areas of protection would be important.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2007, 04:49:21 PM by Warspawn »
Logged
Purple haze all in my brain
Lately things just don't seem the same
Actin' funny, but I don't know why

'Scuse me while I kiss the sky                 
                                                 --J. Hendrix

Offline Willfly

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 115
Re: Re: So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #28 on: March 22, 2007, 07:16:43 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by macleod01
may be wrong here, but isnt it a 75mm gun on the Sherman, and a 88mm on the Tiger? Doesnt that make the Tiger more powerful?


Well, the Sherman had plenty of variants and this "Sherman Firefly" was one of them, its armed with a 17 Pounder that is very capable of destroying a Tiger or (Not in AH) a Panther
Logged

Offline cpxxx

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2707
So we get a Sherman..
« Reply #29 on: March 22, 2007, 07:39:33 PM »
Well the Sherman 'Firefly' could take out a Tiger but only if the Tiger doesn't see him first. The Tiger will outrange the Firefly easily and the Sherman will burn with one hit.

It will be very interesting to see how it's used on AH. In my experience 'at the front':aok  Whenever a Tiger is about it is usually mobbed by a flock of Panzer IV's or T34's. With the Sherman in play, I think there will almost certainly be an echo of historical reality. With a Tiger on the prowl, everyone will up a Sherman. The Tiger will kill most of them but it only takes one to get through!

I think the Sherman will be perked eventually. With that big gun, capable of killing everything up and including a Tiger. Why would you up in anything else except a Tiger?
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
« previous next »