Western Armies - Tiers and Units?
12 May 2014, 00:08 AM
#121
Posts: 2561
I just hope they don't mix up the performance of the TDs again. The M10 is the ambusher, long range killer and the Hellcat was the fast flanker.
12 May 2014, 00:20 AM
#122
Posts: 4928
Honestly the M10 shouldn't feature, we did use it but it was outdated and not as effective as the M18 or M36. Even the 76mm Sherman was a better tank killer than the M10.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
12 May 2014, 03:29 AM
#123
Posts: 2561
Honestly the M10 shouldn't feature, we did use it but it was outdated and not as effective as the M18 or M36. Even the 76mm Sherman was a better tank killer than the M10.The M10 actually peformed rather well and had a even late into 1944-45. Furthermore it was built in higher numbers then any AT. The M10 will be the american's non-doctrinal TD I can promise you that, but I don't think it's going to be as bad as you think it will be. It will probably get high range and penetration with a slow moving turret.
Besides the M36 would be way to powerful for non-doctrinal, it will probably be the americans 100 range unit.
12 May 2014, 05:44 AM
#124
Posts: 2184 | Subs: 2
American concept of SPG has not justified itself and the brunt of the tank battles rests on the shoulders "Sherman."
According to the book Belton Cooper «Death traps», is responsible for the evacuation and repair of tanks, only 3rd Armored Division for ten months lost in battle: 1348 medium tanks "Sherman" (more than 580% of the authorized strength of 232 tanks), of which 648 were completely destroyed. non-combat losses were approximately 600 tanks.
According to the book Belton Cooper «Death traps», is responsible for the evacuation and repair of tanks, only 3rd Armored Division for ten months lost in battle: 1348 medium tanks "Sherman" (more than 580% of the authorized strength of 232 tanks), of which 648 were completely destroyed. non-combat losses were approximately 600 tanks.
12 May 2014, 06:12 AM
#125
Posts: 1571
^
Death Traps has been debunked- trying Zaloga and Yeide's books. 3rd Armored division has an excellent combat record of winning battles and taking tens of thousands of prisoners. Their tank losses were high but that is the price of winning.
The Tank destroyer doctrine didn't work largely because Germans were not able to attack beyond company level most of the time. US TDs were designed for defense action and counterstrokes while Shermans were offensive.
Nevertheless, the TD battalions had a 3:1 claim vs. the Panzers. Even if you half that claim that is OK..In the Ardennes offensive IIRC the TDs destroyed more attacking AFV than the Shermans.
Death Traps has been debunked- trying Zaloga and Yeide's books. 3rd Armored division has an excellent combat record of winning battles and taking tens of thousands of prisoners. Their tank losses were high but that is the price of winning.
The Tank destroyer doctrine didn't work largely because Germans were not able to attack beyond company level most of the time. US TDs were designed for defense action and counterstrokes while Shermans were offensive.
Nevertheless, the TD battalions had a 3:1 claim vs. the Panzers. Even if you half that claim that is OK..In the Ardennes offensive IIRC the TDs destroyed more attacking AFV than the Shermans.
12 May 2014, 06:52 AM
#126
Posts: 4928
In all honesty I'll be a bit disappointed if the M10 features, it wasn't all that great of a vehicle imo. The gun used on the M10 was weaker than the 76mm we started putting on our Shermans and Hellcats, so why not just feature the Hellcat instead? The Jackson should probly be doctrinal and be similar to a Sherman with a Panther's gun.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
12 May 2014, 07:19 AM
#127
Posts: 2561
In all honesty I'll be a bit disappointed if the M10 features, it wasn't all that great of a vehicle imo. The gun used on the M10 was weaker than the 76mm we started putting on our Shermans and Hellcats, so why not just feature the Hellcat instead? The Jackson should probly be doctrinal and be similar to a Sherman with a Panther's gun.I think that both will be put into the faction eventually. I just think the Hellcat is far more likely to be a doctrinal call-in due to it's unusual characteristics. Relic tends to put units that were used more into the non-doctrinal tree unless they need to fill a role, and with the sherman already being a fast flanker they don't need another.
in short the M18 is far better then the M10, which is exactly why it won't be non-doctrinal.
12 May 2014, 13:50 PM
#128
Posts: 1571
The M18 from VCOH is very oddly designed and I remember that it was subject to complaints for being too far fetched.
The actual M18 vis a v the lightly armored M10 was this: It was very, very lightly armored and exceptionally fast. It was so lightly armored that I believe that German 37mm could knock it out (that means the Ostwind can take it out.). The M10 was vulnerable to German 50mm long barreled 50mm L/60 and above.
The only reasonably well armored TD was the M36 which had a max armor 108mm.
I would like to see the M36 as final tier due to the fact that the Germans will likely to have many call-in super heavy armor.
The 90mm gun was in the same class as the Tiger I's 88mm as far as penetration goes. It had, however, a better High explosive performance.
M10 would be mid tier and the M18 would be a call-in oddity (like the Puma)
The actual M18 vis a v the lightly armored M10 was this: It was very, very lightly armored and exceptionally fast. It was so lightly armored that I believe that German 37mm could knock it out (that means the Ostwind can take it out.). The M10 was vulnerable to German 50mm long barreled 50mm L/60 and above.
The only reasonably well armored TD was the M36 which had a max armor 108mm.
I would like to see the M36 as final tier due to the fact that the Germans will likely to have many call-in super heavy armor.
The 90mm gun was in the same class as the Tiger I's 88mm as far as penetration goes. It had, however, a better High explosive performance.
M10 would be mid tier and the M18 would be a call-in oddity (like the Puma)
12 May 2014, 15:05 PM
#129
Posts: 4928
Yeah the Hellcat in CoH1 was an oddity, but not because it was a Hellcat, but because how Relic designed it. They made it a very strange unit, iirc it was actually worse than the M10 but had camouflage. It was also way off scale, being larger than a Sherman when it should actually be closer to the size of the SU-76 (a pinch bigger). I'd say it was roughly 1.5x larger than the real-life version.
M18 with 2 humans on it for scale:
The M18 should be feature more along the lines of the current Ostheer Puma; a lightly armoured but very fast tank hunter, best used in hit-and-run or with a heavier tank.
As for the Jackson, it should be America's "Heavy" Tank. Rather than be a 'universal' tank like the IS-2 or Tiger I, it would be more like a Panther with less armour and health, but a powerful main gun and good mobility. The Hellcat should be standard while the Jackson would be call-in.
M18 with 2 humans on it for scale:
The M18 should be feature more along the lines of the current Ostheer Puma; a lightly armoured but very fast tank hunter, best used in hit-and-run or with a heavier tank.
As for the Jackson, it should be America's "Heavy" Tank. Rather than be a 'universal' tank like the IS-2 or Tiger I, it would be more like a Panther with less armour and health, but a powerful main gun and good mobility. The Hellcat should be standard while the Jackson would be call-in.
all you filthy hotchkiss lovers need to l2p #TeamPanzerIII
> Kriegsbeute Doctrine|Partisan Rework|British Infantry Rework|Soviet Assault Squad <
12 May 2014, 15:17 PM
#130
Posts: 1571
^
The key reason for its exceptional speed was that it was powered by an engine the same class of the M10 but the M18 TD itself had only half the weight.
With COH2 metrics, the Hellcat would be a small target like the Stug.
I would like to see view ranged enhanced (open topped).. and the striking distance of the main gun upgraded to 50.
TD battalions were set up usually with only 1 type of TD. The first TD battalions were M10, and then M18 TD battalions were added in. By autumn 1944, the M36 TD battalions were appearing.
The key reason for its exceptional speed was that it was powered by an engine the same class of the M10 but the M18 TD itself had only half the weight.
With COH2 metrics, the Hellcat would be a small target like the Stug.
I would like to see view ranged enhanced (open topped).. and the striking distance of the main gun upgraded to 50.
TD battalions were set up usually with only 1 type of TD. The first TD battalions were M10, and then M18 TD battalions were added in. By autumn 1944, the M36 TD battalions were appearing.
12 May 2014, 16:16 PM
#131
Posts: 862
The US should get some light tank love.
Tens of thousands of m3's, m5's and m24s were built and light armor units were used extensivey to scout and harass. As compared to the 300 Pumas ever made? (only 100 with the 50mm).
Note: The true recovery units in the war were with the US. One of the problems of US armor performance in Western Europe wasn't the Sherman's deficiencies, which by then had been for the most part fixed, but with untrained crews. So many damaged or destroyed Shermans were quickly returned to combat that they didn't have enough crew for them. Replacement troops were taken in "repple/depple" yards as they arrived, given a few hours of training as drivers, gunners and loaders, put together as a crew, and sent to the front.
Note: The Brits also produced over 1000 each of the Achilles (M10 with the 17 pdr) and the Comet, and for all those who hate the Kangaroo, over 1000 of them were produced.
Tens of thousands of m3's, m5's and m24s were built and light armor units were used extensivey to scout and harass. As compared to the 300 Pumas ever made? (only 100 with the 50mm).
Note: The true recovery units in the war were with the US. One of the problems of US armor performance in Western Europe wasn't the Sherman's deficiencies, which by then had been for the most part fixed, but with untrained crews. So many damaged or destroyed Shermans were quickly returned to combat that they didn't have enough crew for them. Replacement troops were taken in "repple/depple" yards as they arrived, given a few hours of training as drivers, gunners and loaders, put together as a crew, and sent to the front.
Note: The Brits also produced over 1000 each of the Achilles (M10 with the 17 pdr) and the Comet, and for all those who hate the Kangaroo, over 1000 of them were produced.
12 May 2014, 16:20 PM
#133
Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1
Relic should release some info and get the hype train rolling. Theyre horrible at marketing.
servant to the vet 5 königskübel
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
12 May 2014, 16:55 PM
#136
Posts: 8
I know that this is do not have any new information to the discussion, but I will not buy Western Armies until I have some more details about it.
Buy it today is the same thing like buying a car that you do not know it's color, size or powertrain details.
I think if they release more information about it, surely more people would be more interested.
Buy it today is the same thing like buying a car that you do not know it's color, size or powertrain details.
I think if they release more information about it, surely more people would be more interested.
12 May 2014, 17:05 PM
#137
Posts: 1162
Well from that interview, they were talking about the airborne needing to find good areas of the map to bring in reinforcements.
This presumably means they drift a lot on call in and can land over a large area, possibly being hurt if they hit trees etc.. this could add tactics for fighting for a good DZ, also area denial for Germans. It could also add a risk reward element for bringing them down in risky locations.
It also suggests to me that parachuting in is much more of a feature than in coh1, where only the elite inf dropped in and could reinforce anywhere.
Perhaps much more of the USA inf will be airdropped, and perhaps reinforcing will be in a very different way to coh airborne.
Something sounds super fishy about these new Germans, but what is anyones guess.
This presumably means they drift a lot on call in and can land over a large area, possibly being hurt if they hit trees etc.. this could add tactics for fighting for a good DZ, also area denial for Germans. It could also add a risk reward element for bringing them down in risky locations.
It also suggests to me that parachuting in is much more of a feature than in coh1, where only the elite inf dropped in and could reinforce anywhere.
Perhaps much more of the USA inf will be airdropped, and perhaps reinforcing will be in a very different way to coh airborne.
Something sounds super fishy about these new Germans, but what is anyones guess.
12 May 2014, 17:05 PM
#138
4 
Posts: 951
Relic should release some info and get the hype train rolling. Theyre horrible at marketing.
Agreed.
12 May 2014, 17:41 PM
#139
Posts: 978
Yeah the Hellcat in CoH1 was an oddity, but not because it was a Hellcat, but because how Relic designed it. They made it a very strange unit, iirc it was actually worse than the M10 but had camouflage.I agree with your argument. Yet I wouldn´t keep my hopes up any longer. What was the Panther like? A vehicle with lots of frontal armor, weak side armor and a superb gun that could take on targets at maximum combat ranges. Thus it was used to engage on range. What did we get ingame? A nascar that´s supposed to drive up SU-85s that have more range with 85mms that can punch through its front.
It was also way off scale, being larger than a Sherman when it should actually be closer to the size of the SU-76 (a pinch bigger). I'd say it was roughly 1.5x larger than the real-life version.The same thing applied to the Marder, M3 and Sdkfz. 251 Halftracks. The reason for that: In Coh1 the soldiers were giants, all about 2 meters tall. Thus the open topped vehicles had to be adjusted accordingly.
12 May 2014, 17:47 PM
#140
Posts: 2115 | Subs: 1
I agree with your argument. Yet I wouldn´t keep my hopes up any longer. What was the Panther like? A vehicle with lots of frontal armor, weak side armor and a superb gun that could take on targets at maximum combat ranges. Thus it was used to engage on range. What did we get ingame? A nascar that´s supposed to drive up SU-85s that have more range with 85mms that can punch through its front.
The same thing applied to the Marder, M3 and Sdkfz. 251 Halftracks. The reason for that: In Coh1 the soldiers were giants, all about 2 meters tall. Thus the open topped vehicles had to be adjusted accordingly.
Lets see how you'd like 60 range super mobile 240 pen panthers when playing Soviets. Really curious.
servant to the vet 5 königskübel
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
b4 and soviet FHQ enthusiast
fan of the illustrious black prince
1 user is browsing this thread:
1 guest
Livestreams
 |
|
|
95 | ||
|
|
|
|
10 | ||
 |
|
|
868 | ||
 |
|
|
48 | ||
 |
|
|
10 | ||
 |
|
|
5 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
2 | ||
|
|
|
|
1 |
Ladders Top 10
-
#Steam AliasWL%Streak
- 1.831222.789+37
- 2.35057.860+15
- 3.1110614.644+11
- 4.623225.735+1
- 5.276108.719+27
- 6.306114.729+2
- 7.919405.694+3
- 8.262137.657+3
- 9.722440.621+4
- 10.1041674.607-2
Data provided by
Relic Entertainment
Relic Entertainment
Replay highlight
VS
-
cblanco ★ -
보드카 중대
-
VonManteuffel -
Heartless Jäger
Einhoven Country
Honor it
9
Download
1236