Tank destroyers

[teufl]

OK IM not a platinum or gold or silver member, but here goes, we need tank destroyers in this game.  The russians and germans really had alot of variety and actually specialized in this field.  A SU85 would probably be the best all around(since we do not have a t 34/85) in this game at present time.  A su 100 or 122 would be a perk vehicle and would make the firefly obsolete.  Also a jagdpanther or (heaven forbid) jagdtiger would make it the gv of choice and also perk.  So we have the cz 38, a 75mm open turret vehicle, or is my memory wrong and too lazy to look it up a 75 mm panzer III?  (jagdpanzer?)  Opinions welcome but usually not tolerated(S)

[Cthulhu]

Throw in the Su-152 and I'm all for it.

[SmokinLoon]

We dont need the "best" TD of WWII in order for it to find a place in AH.  I also agree we need a TD to help keep the tanks in check, but the M10, M18, or Marder III would all do just fine with a few bit of help from the programmers and this is what I mean by that: allow the gunner full zoom-able view of the battlefield from over the top of the open turret, but keep that view seperate from the actual zoom-able gun view with the distance markers.  Allow the TD little if any HE rounds so it effectness vs anything but a gv is minimal.

The open turreted TD would be sitting ducks for aircraft to pounce on.  The triangle "checks-n-balances" of the gv game would be complete.  Right now, nothing dominates a tank except air power or another tank.  If that pesky T34 or Tiger keeps escaping the airstrikes... send in the 50mph M18 and watch for a flank shot kill. 

[teufl]

Thank you for your response, and I agree with most you said.  I do not mean best as in best vehicle, but maybe best for game.  Marder III had the 76 mm?  I do believe a td would be a great spawn camper(like we need more) and I also agree a low HE load would make it what it is,  a vehicle only for 1 purpose, kill tanks.  I believe the firefly is pretty much that right now, as its HE rounds pretty much suck.  M 18 Hellcat would probably be used like the m8 is now, harrassement and to save VH bases with VH disabled.  I also agree that an open turret arrangement would not be very viable in the attack capabilities of most of the aeroplanes available in AH.  But as the low profile might be of some significance and the sloped armout of most russian TD s would make them pretty unkillable, until the AH modelers have there way with them<S>.

[442w30]

I think the TDs that had no turret would be harder to use correctly than most people think.  On the offense especially.  Imagine never being able to turn the engine off because if you do and the enemy is not within a 30 degree arc of your centerline, even less on some TDs, you have to start up and turn to aim.  A turretted TD like the US gear would be different of course but then people would complain that it is just another American piece of equipment. 

[DPQ5]

well personally i would like some american tds, such as the m10 or the m18

[uberslet]

We dont need the "best" TD of WWII in order for it to find a place in AH.  I also agree we need a TD to help keep the tanks in check, but the M10, M18, or Marder III would all do just fine with a few bit of help from the programmers and this is what I mean by that: allow the gunner full zoom-able view of the battlefield from over the top of the open turret, but keep that view seperate from the actual zoom-able gun view with the distance markers.  Allow the TD little if any HE rounds so it effectness vs anything but a gv is minimal.

The open turreted TD would be sitting ducks for aircraft to pounce on.  The triangle "checks-n-balances" of the gv game would be complete.  Right now, nothing dominates a tank except air power or another tank.  If that pesky T34 or Tiger keeps escaping the airstrikes... send in the 50mph M18 and watch for a flank shot kill. 

was thinkin same thing  thank you for doin all the typing for me smokin 

[Noir]

taking a gunner would make sence in a TD

[Hitman20]

Didn't you have to aim by moveing the tank head-on with the target?

[Denniss]

Marder III had the 76 mm?

Only the initial Marder II (Sd.Kfz. 132) and Marder III (Sd.Kfz. 139) used captured soviet 76mm guns (probably rebored to 75mm). Later Marder II (Sd.Kfz. 131) and Marder III (Sd.Kfz. 138) use the german 75mm PaK 40. All of them except the Marder III Ausf. M (Sd.Kfz. 138) were open to the rear and open-topped, the latter was only open-topped.

SU-85 or long-barreled StuG III would be a nice addition, both were produced in large numbers and killed lots of enemy tanks.

[Noir]

Didn't you have to aim by moveing the tank head-on with the target?

thats the point of having a gunner....and vox, except that the gunner will command the tank.

[uberslet]

thats the point of having a gunner....and vox, except that the gunner will command the tank.

then what would you do? drive it?

[theNewB]

Best TDs would be:

Jagdpanzer IV with 7.5cm StuK 42- Replacement of the StuG III fully enclosed,low profile, good armour, think top speed was around 20MPH.

Hetzer (Jagdpanzer 38T) - again fully enclosed, low profile, and good armour speed was in the 20MPH range again.

M18 Hellcat - for reasons stated above, superb speed, good gun, low profile.

and to give the brits something decent would be the Archer but its a rear facing gun and the same as the fireflys. Only problem is i dont think it was fully enclosed.

Just my picks anyway. They wouldnt be super powerful but they would preform good and add new GVs ive wanted in for a long time.

[angelsandair]

Bring in the M-10. 

[teufl]

Archer would definately be a poece of work to deploy....hmmm backwards are you sure it isnt french?