Login

russian armor

Western Armies - Tiers and Units?

PAGES (8)down
Hux
11 May 2014, 12:01 PM
#101
avatar of Hux
Patrion 14

Posts: 505

I wonder if PIV / Panther might mirror the KV1 / KV 8 / T34/85 call-in role the soviets have in the current game.

Given the prevalence of these vehicles on the Western Front, it would be a neat way of keeping them in the game without mirroring the Ostheer too closely.


+1
11 May 2014, 12:03 PM
#102
avatar of Cardboard Tank

Posts: 978

I´m against a Super Pershing. This thing is totally not characteristic for the Western Allied army which relied on Medium tanks vs infantry and special tank hunters vs tanks.

Better add a Jackson and Hellcat. One with a potent gun and one being the fastest tracked vehicle of the war. One for head on combat and one for flanking.

Adding a unit which barely saw combat would just destroy the feeling of the faction for me. I´m already sceptical about the Sturmtiger but the Super Pershing is just to ridiculous. Half of the games would end up with Germans losing because of inferior armor? No thanks. It wasn´t like that.
11 May 2014, 12:09 PM
#103
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17891 | Subs: 8

Its not like pershing was a heavy tank.

It was bigger med with more powerful gun, not american version of tiger or even a panther.
11 May 2014, 12:12 PM
#104
avatar of Kronosaur0s

Posts: 1701

Pershing not heavy tank? Lol?
11 May 2014, 12:17 PM
#105
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

Half of the games would end up with Germans losing because of inferior armor? No thanks. It wasn´t like that.


Im not quite sure I understood it right...
177mm frontal armor on Super Pershing is too much but 180mm and 250mm on Tiger II and Jagdtiger is alright?
11 May 2014, 12:30 PM
#106
avatar of Von Kluge
Patrion 14

Posts: 3548 | Subs: 2

How about we get back on topic lads? This started out as a great assumptions thread, lets keep it like that :)

For those who want to discuss armour,create a thread and go loco there :D
11 May 2014, 12:40 PM
#107
avatar of Affe

Posts: 578

Half of the games would end up with Germans losing because of inferior armor? No thanks. It wasn´t like that.

Germans still have the Jagdtiger with 250mm armor and 128mm Pak 44.Relic could also give them the "Sturer Emil" tank destroyer.

The super Pershing was a very improvised tank.The Crew of that Thing just found a few steelplates which they mounted on the front of that Thing.To give the 102mm front armor more armor.
But i m pretty sure that Jagdtiger would handdle this american Monster tank.

Jagdtiger had no Problems against the normal Pershings:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/M26_Pershing
Nach den Kämpfen um Köln wurde der M26 unter den US-Soldaten in kurzer Zeit zur Legende, allerdings wurden auch einige Pershings von deutschen Panzern und Jagdpanzern zerstört. Neben dem zuvor erwähnten Tiger, der im Februar 1945 einen M26 außer Gefecht setzte, gelang es einem Panzerjäger Nashorn der schweren Panzerjäger-Abteilung 93 am 6. März 1945 bei Remagen südlich von Köln in einem Hinterhalt, einen M26 der 3. US-Panzerdivision auf eine Kampfentfernung von etwas über 250 Metern abzuschießen. Ein Pershing fiel einem Königstiger zum Opfer und mit einiger Sicherheit wurde ein weiterer M26, der nachweislich im Raum Iserlohn völlig zerstört wurde (Frontpanzerung glatt durchschlagen und ausgebrannt), aus größerer Entfernung von einem schweren Jagdpanzer Jagdtiger abgeschossen.

It s only in german Wikipedia about the Pershing but it says that a Pershings front armour was easily penetratet and destroyed by a Jagdtiger from a very big distance at the City Iserlohn in 1945.

I m pretty sure the Jagdtigers 128mm gun could handle also a super Pershing.While even the super Pershing would have a hard time against the 250mm armor of the jagdtiger.

11 May 2014, 12:46 PM
#108
avatar of Cardboard Tank

Posts: 978



Im not quite sure I understood it right...
177mm frontal armor on Super Pershing is too much but 180mm and 250mm on Tiger II and Jagdtiger is alright?
You don´t get the point:

- 492 King Tigers
- 6000 Panthers
- 1350 Tigers

- 2 Super Pershing of which one saw combat
- 20 Pershings

Guess which faction should have the characteristic heavy tanks. The point is that >25 vehicles shouldn´t totally form a faction in Coh2. Honestly I already think the Sturmtiger is too much for the game. But for a faction that didn´t rely on heavy tanks (USA) that´s even more ridiculous.
11 May 2014, 13:00 PM
#109
avatar of Australian Magic

Posts: 4630 | Subs: 2

You don´t get the point:

- 492 King Tigers
- 6000 Panthers
- 1350 Tigers

- 2 Super Pershing of which one saw combat
- 20 Pershings

Guess which faction should have the characteristic heavy tanks. The point is that >25 vehicles shouldn´t totally form a faction in Coh2. Honestly I already think the Sturmtiger is too much for the game. But for a faction that didn´t rely on heavy tanks (USA) that´s even more ridiculous.


I get your point but it's all about balance. I can't imagine any medium tanks vs Jagdtiger.
For this you need super pershing. That's called balance.
11 May 2014, 13:16 PM
#110
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17891 | Subs: 8

Pershing not heavy tank? Lol?


You'd had any clue you'd knew it was classified as heavy tank for american standards, but quickly was reclassified as medium tank.
11 May 2014, 13:17 PM
#111
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17891 | Subs: 8

You don´t get the point:

- 492 King Tigers
- 6000 Panthers
- 1350 Tigers

- 2 Super Pershing of which one saw combat
- 20 Pershings

Guess which faction should have the characteristic heavy tanks. The point is that >25 vehicles shouldn´t totally form a faction in Coh2. Honestly I already think the Sturmtiger is too much for the game. But for a faction that didn´t rely on heavy tanks (USA) that´s even more ridiculous.


40 ostwinds were made.
Stock unit for wehr and ost.

How many Sturmtigers ever saw combat? And we're getting that as well.
There were THREE instances were tigers were converted for bergetigers, stock unit for PE.

Your point is moot.

11 May 2014, 14:24 PM
#112
avatar of coh2player

Posts: 1571

I would like to see Super pershing and Pershing as a call-in from a commander. The Super pershing would be like the Tiger Ace and have similar penalties.

As for USA final tier, i would like to see M36 90mms. These should be reasonably affordable and I hope that the price point is higher than the SU-85 but lower than the Panther.
11 May 2014, 18:39 PM
#113
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

Ok but I still don't get why you don't want to see some equal units to Tiger II/Jagdtiger? Why US have to manage with them with units that have only 100mm armor (Jagdtiger 250mm)?
If Germans can have such a beasts why US cannot?


Because as others have said, the Americans weren't like the Germans or the Soviets, they didn't rely on tanks and bigger tanks to fight other tanks, they relied on light tanks for scouting, medium tanks for infantry support, and tank destroyers for tank fighting.


Pershing not heavy tank? Lol?


Well technically he's not wrong. After WW2 the Pershing was reclassified as a Medium Tank.


As for my assumption (as to not disrespect Von Kluge), the Americans are going to rely on Tank Destroyers. They will function like the current Puma, light and fast, only they'll mount much more powerful weaponry. What they lack in health and armour, they'll make up for in speed and penetration, and possibly damage, like a Half-Track with a 76mm Tank Gun.

And hopefully no M10. People complain about the SU-85 being in CoH2, but at least the SU-85 was still effective at what it did when it was used. The M10 was obsolete by the time we entered the war, the M18 and M36 were the best TD's we had.
11 May 2014, 19:01 PM
#114
avatar of Zupadupadude

Posts: 618



Because as others have said, the Americans weren't like the Germans or the Soviets, they didn't rely on tanks and bigger tanks to fight other tanks, they relied on light tanks for scouting, medium tanks for infantry support, and tank destroyers for tank fighting.




Well technically he's not wrong. After WW2 the Pershing was reclassified as a Medium Tank.


As for my assumption (as to not disrespect Von Kluge), the Americans are going to rely on Tank Destroyers. They will function like the current Puma, light and fast, only they'll mount much more powerful weaponry. What they lack in health and armour, they'll make up for in speed and penetration, and possibly damage, like a Half-Track with a 76mm Tank Gun.

And hopefully no M10. People complain about the SU-85 being in CoH2, but at least the SU-85 was still effective at what it did when it was used. The M10 was obsolete by the time we entered the war, the M18 and M36 were the best TD's we had.


It gets worse, the M10's turret was hand-crancked, so imagine a tank destroyer that isn't particulary good at destroying the heavier German tanks that also can't even turn its turret fast enough.
11 May 2014, 20:57 PM
#115
avatar of coh2player

Posts: 1571

US tank destroyer battalions (M10, M18, M36) in the ETO claimed a 3:1 kill ratio against the Panzers (Yeide, The tank killers)
11 May 2014, 21:16 PM
#116
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

And there was only one Super Pershing that achieved a 1:2 kill ratio.

I don't see why you play the realism card on Tank Destroyers while advocating the Super Pershing, of which there was one, be added.

PS: I know there was 2, but the second never saw Combat. You also mentioned the Maus and IS-3 never saw combat. Therefor the second SP, having never seen combat, does not count.
11 May 2014, 21:24 PM
#117
avatar of Katitof

Posts: 17891 | Subs: 8

IS-3 fought japs after Berlin was conquered.
11 May 2014, 21:33 PM
#118
avatar of Death's Head

Posts: 440

jump backJump back to quoted post10 May 2014, 23:17 PMKatitof


Well, if we consider the fact that MG42 WAS left out when PE came in... as well as long barreled P4, as well as PaK AT guns as well as... ect ect.

Thing is, you can't have many similarities and keep the unique feel, so I wouldn't be surprised if OKW suddenly forgot to give MG42s to their infantry or even use P4 and StuGs at all.


Panzerschreks, Panthers, K98s, STG 44s, 8.8cm Flak guns were all cross-faction equipment in CoH1. The MG42 wasn't added because PE players were to be encouraged to keep their army mobile and fast as that was the main design focus for that faction. It had nothing to do with PE being "unique" from Wehr equipment.
11 May 2014, 21:35 PM
#119
avatar of Mr. Someguy

Posts: 4928

jump backJump back to quoted post11 May 2014, 21:24 PMKatitof
IS-3 fought japs after Berlin was conquered.


But we're not talking about them right now, we're talking about the Germans vs Americans and Russians.
11 May 2014, 22:09 PM
#120
avatar of coh2player

Posts: 1571

I'm not interested in the SP so-called argument. There's room to put it in if they want to.

The M10 was not obsolete against most of the German armor (~75 % give or take). They had problems against Tigers/Panthers but most AFV were not these.

They could, in COH, do a spin on the VCOH tank destroyer. They can give them all view bonuses (being open topped) and have an attack range 50.
PAGES (8)down
1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest

Livestreams

unknown 60
Korea, Republic Of 20
South Africa 1

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • U.S. Forces flag cblanco ★
  • The British Forces flag 보드카 중대
  • Oberkommando West flag VonManteuffel
  • Ostheer flag Heartless Jäger
uploaded by XXxxHeartlessxxXX

Board Info

658 users are online: 1 member and 657 guests
NorthWeapon
5 posts in the last 24h
39 posts in the last week
131 posts in the last month
Registered members: 45080
Welcome our newest member, isabelle7
Most online: 2043 users on 29 Oct 2023, 01:04 AM