Re: M26 Pershing
 

There is more than one way to skin a cat. History shows for the western allies airpower & artillery compensated for their lack of armoured capability. So if we look at BotB what mostly stopped the germans was artillery, with infantry and some tanks. The artillery could be anything up to 155mm which when fired into the base on the map would be quite devastating, certainly adequate compensation for inadequate tanks. Where an Air element is used against the Axis, they would get the balancing AA vehicle.

It seems obvious to me if they were to include the M26 then the likely hood of their being various Axis tanks cabable of countering it. Nashorn, King Tiger, JagdTiger, Tiger well all the "animals" as the Soviets called them.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

That is very cool.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I think the Pershing would be a very welcome candidate. So what if it wasn't as widely produced as it's opponent. Again we just need to switch a bit of realism for balance. Offcourse we can put in more Shermans and stuff, but everyone would just join the Axis team to camp for a TigerII. Meanwhile, a lucky close to the KT spawner, is picking of the Shermans one by one, as on public servers theres rarely any teamplay (attacking in waves for example). That's how I see it.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Wow...it's on the internet it must be how it is. So, you have no opinion other than what you read on that page? You haven't thought about it? You just parrot what they say?

I would submit to you that there's more than one viewpoint and you'd be better informed with multiple sources and real-world experience. There's a difference between someone TELLING you how the system works (with an obvious agenda and clueless to other factors) and someone USING the equipment that is the end result of that supply chain. The earlier method will only get you so far before you run into someone with the later and knows your full of it.

This isn't an argument. You know about as much about G2mil as you do about the M16. You believe what you want. I'm telling you that to have such a staunch opinion that you share as God's own truth based on the editorializing of a website is not the best method of validating ideas.

Moving on....

I know the M26 had low numbers in WWII...and I know that FH is a realism mod. But I think if there was ONE vehicle that saw actual COMBAT it should be a viable candidate for the game. M-26, Jumbo, Calliope! There weren't many, but they were there. Same thing goes for allied and axis...there are already Me262's...and isn't there a model of the Go229 on the FH homepage? Come on...it had one powered flight. But I don't mind it being there...

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Old :o

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Vehicle spawn times can fix all my friends.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I don't see why everyone is looking for a US tank to counter the King Tiger, Tiger I, and the Panther? There wasn't one that we could use in the mod ans still call it a realism mod.

Use Airpower! That's what they used! And in Maps like Battle of the Bulge use Stationary AT-Guns and defensive fortifications.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

This thread is about the Pershing and if it was deployed on a front against the King Tiger.
Please get it back on topic.


Thanks.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Which it wasn't! End of discussion!

Re: M26 Pershing
 

It's the evil glamour of the Beast :D

Re: M26 Pershing
 

The simple fact of the matter can be summed up in as many words....


The allies did not have an assault class heavy tank the entire war. Get over it for gods sake!!


Tigers, King Tigers, etc etc, were destroyed "by committee" that is, not by out gunning them, not by better thicker armor, but by shear numbers.

There were ~ 1354 Tigers produced in the war!!!

Do you have a clue how many Shermans were produced during the war including all versions???!!!!!

MORE THAN 44,000!!!!!! is it any surprise the Tiger's kill ratio was 5 to 1? no.

It is a small wonder that the United States produced 52% of the TOTAL number of ALL combat vehicles of ALL nations during the war. Arsenal of democracy they called it.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

The US Army decided not to use stationary A/T guns and instead went to gun motor carriages mounting anti tank guns. That means M-10 and M-36, which are in game.

But the 76mm gun in game on the M10 is a joke against the Tiger. And the 90mm gun on the M36 cant even penetrate the side armor of a Tiger I in one shot at 20m. At that rate what the hell good is it against a Tiger II?

Lets give the Germans 37mm A/T guns which are totally worthless against T-34's and KV-1's, and give you Pz 38t's and Pz III's with the same 37mm gun, and take away the Germans Panzerfausts and when you people start screaming bloody murder because your equipment is shit we'll just smile and say "Fuck you, use your stationary a/t guns and defensive fortifications."

Re: M26 Pershing
 

lol just give them a german AT rifle and a panzer 2. i think theyll see why the people who paly the allies against the germans want balance

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Remember guys the game we are playing here attempts to portray realism as much as you can. Now there are just somethings that limit this from happening on the scale that we all would like, for example why cant i drive my 30-70 tank over a tree? or why cant i fly my plane above 1000ft? u cant dig trenches u cant blow up buildings, alot of basic realism things that would make this game interesting simply cannot be achieved because of anothe EA games "brilliant" creation. You really do much for the balance issues in this game as far as changing spawn points and etc as described already above by some of the board members.
My biggest complaint is the constant vehicle stealing by other team members, and i think that most of us would agree that you would not be able to hop into another countries tank and drive it flawlessly without ever having to be trained for it. People all want balance and say oh my equipment is terrible its not fair etc etc etc. And its true the american equipment gun for gun tank for tank etc etc for the most part is inferior to just about everything the germans had, and yes the only way they really won was because of numbers. And we really cant balance on the scale that the allied players want or the scale the axis players want. Personally i play axis only and i think that some of the german equipment is still underpowered, but i can also understand the allied point of view, because i know that a sherman isnt gonna do shit to my tank nor is a bazooka round. So i can understand.

The FH team is building this mod they way they think it should be done, this is their idea and thus their creation, let them do what they want with it. Some people would still complain even if you replaced all the shermans with pershings, then they would so oh the guns underpowered and the tiger doesnt blow up when i shoot it once its not fair. People are always going to bitch and moan, In my opinion this is still the BEST mod out there closer to realism than other mod has ever come and i thank the FH team for all their work.
And on a final note remember that the Germans for almost 2 years fought T34s and Kv1 heavys with nothing more than PzIII's Pak36/38s and they still achieved many victories, through this experience the germans learned to make better tanks/ tank and anti-tank guns. What allowed them their victory throughout all this despite being outnumbered in almost every battle with their combat experience their combat doctrine and the quality of the german soldier. In my opinion there was no better soldier than that of the german soldier in the second world war.
The germans learned from their mistakes quickly on the eastern front and from this they learned to make equipment that was very effective and by 44 they had a huge array of well tested and worthy equipment at their disposal. Where as the americans learned at a much slower rate hench the huge losses in tanks in the european campaign. If you really look at it you notice that the US has really not had the technological edge it has now for very long, only since the 80s has really revamped its military and become the true power it is today.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Seriously! I liked that rant.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I can't wait till early war maps in Poland,France and Russia were Germans will have troubles against superior tanks. We can expect an influx of topics after 0.6 saying "Germans need panzerfaust in Poland" "Germans not uber enough" "Germans need a Tiger in France"

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Anlushac11 the answer is still Arty n Air.

Doesn't matter which way you throw down, the answer is still in the history. 1940 France or 1941/2 Russia they used Stukas and 88's.


Yeah, I played WWIIOnline as well.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

You know...I don't know about any King Tiger v. Pershing battles...but I haven't looked that hard. I DO KNOW that there was at least one Jagdtiger versus Super Pershing battle...and the Super Pershing won. You know how? US gunners learned to aim for the tracks. Irwin blew off the Jagdtigers drive sprocket and the crew bailed. Did the same to a Tiger, too. You loose mobility in a tank, you bail...there are MANY ways to knock a tank out...killing it is just one.

M26's came up against TIGERs. If anything it's a Tiger counter-part, not a King Tiger counterpart...but then again, air support and artillery weren't hard to find.

If you add the King Tiger, then it would be balanced by adding M4's with 76mm guns, Calliope's, Jumbo's, and Pershings. The ratio was 14 SHERMANS per Panzer. 40 per Tiger. So, and abundance of types and numbers would reflect reality....and help with balance.

Speaking of reality...another "let's talk about" thread just came to mind.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

EXACTLY MY FRIGGIN POINT!

Germans had the 88. A tank gun that can kill any tank gun in the game. Any doubts on whether a 88 can take out a T-34 or KV-1 in 1941?

Now cripple the performance of the 88 so that it takes 6 or more shots to the front, 3 shots in the side and 6 shots to the tail of a KV-1 to kill it and you will start to understand what I mean.

As I have said a hundred times, now 101 times, I dont expect a T-34/76 to kill a Tiger in one shot or a Sherman 75mm to kill a Tiger in 1 shot.

But the tanks that should be able to kill a Tiger I or Panther have been neutered to the point of not being a serious threat to a Tiger. Being a Sherman based vehicle the M36 and Firefly have to kill a Tiger in 1 shot because they probably wont get a second since anything in the game since anything German in the game with a cannon can kill a Sherman.


@Tiger Teufel:

"And on a final note remember that the Germans for almost 2 years fought T34s and Kv1 heavys with nothing more than PzIII's Pak36/38s and they still achieved many victories, through this experience the germans learned to make better tanks/ tank and anti-tank guns"

I assume you mean Pz35t, and Pz38t?

And do remember that whenever the Germans had too many problems with Russian tanks they always brought up the 88 which was the master of all Allied armor even toward the end of the war. The 88 usually had final say in who controlled the battlefield.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Yeah...I hope German armor is tweaked in .6...the Panzer IV H is another example of adamantium used in German tanks.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I like the idea of the tanks randomly blowing up to simulate breakdowns.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

That's good. I'd prefer the opportunity to get out...but that's just me. I think there'd be a lot of King Tiger whiners if that was the case though....:D

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Pz IV originally had 50mm of front armor. And it was Grant and Sherman chow. Germans added a 30mm armor strip to front hull to reinforce it and this made it impenetrable by Sherman's 75mm gun at long and medium range. But if it exposes its side or tail its dogmeat. Thats how it is in the game and thats how it should be. One shot to front of a PzIV doesnt kill it but it does severely damage it. Using the T/d formula the A/T penetrator is not larger in diamater than the the target armor. Step two: It does not posess enough velocity to overcome the difference so it does not penetrate. 76mm A/T round is not larger in diamater BUT it does have the velocity so it should defeat the PzIV's front armor.

T/d is the thickness of the armor divided by the diamater of the projectile trying to penetrate the armor. Assuming the armor plate is vertical, If the penetrator is larger in diamater than the thickness of the armor it strikes then the round should penetrate the armor. If the two are equal then there has to be enough velocity to shift the balance in favor of the penetrator. If the diamater of the penetrator is less than the armor it is striking then the penetrator has to rely on energy imparted from velocity to make up the difference.

This is not a mathmatical textbook theory, it is called a tankers rule of thumb.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I don't have a problem with the front of the PzIV and I agree with your assessment..it's the PzIVH with it's uber side armor that is, in my opinion, a bit much.

But, this is a known bug...or at least it was. :D

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Yes the PzIVH had a bug that made it supposedly as tough as the Tiger. The skirts add some armor but not that much and its mostly for protection from Bazookas anyways.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

You are correct. I was thinking bazooka but yes it would work on any shaped charge/hollow charge warhead.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

i still need few pics of the lower hull (without tracks and wheels, to see the gear) before i can start the pershing

Re: M26 Pershing
 

They were only like 5mm wheren't they? (We should add the Russian counterpart: bed matresses ;) )

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Like this?

http://ipmslondon.tripod.com//sitebu...msprocket3.jpg

http://ipmslondon.tripod.com/armourr...cles/id25.html

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Lots of pics

http://ipmslondon.tripod.com/armourr...cles/id14.html

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/chwise309/per3.jpg

http://www.ferreamole.it/images/pers...an/M26_194.jpg


They could always include lots of these ubertanks namely the Hetzer;

http://www.wwiivehicles.com/images/g.../hetzer_07.jpg

Re: M26 Pershing
 

:) http://www.missing-lynx.com/gallery/...5_awilder1.jpg http://www.missing-lynx.com/gallery/...5_awilder2.jpghttp://www.missing-lynx.com/gallery/...5_awilder5.jpg

Re: M26 Pershing
 

maybe you can just make the kt what it was irl? a huge immobile heavy armored killermonster? as you can read everywhere it's engine had too few power for this monster. is there no chance to implement this ingame?

btw: i ever had the oppinion NOT to include the tiger II atm, because balancing is too important. i mean there are LOTS of other (more important) tanks not implemented yet. but everybody was screaming for the "cool" tiger II and it was modelled and skinned :/ now there is the problem of balancing vs. realism. pershing may be fine but just for VERY late maps. there were just 200 pershings in europe after february 1945. only ONE was destroyed - not by a tiger II but by a nashorn. at least you can read this at panzerlexikon.de.

i really hope for more early war-scenarios. since the release of fh everbody is focussing on the (very) late war :(

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I saw a video on the history channel of a Pershing destroying a Panzer IV (I think that's what it was) Showed the guys jumping out of the panzer onto the ground, then the pershing shot the tank again and it killed all the nazi crew around the tank. THe thing burned for 3 days.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

If a map has a King Tiger, then the allies should have air superiority (like it really was).

If the map happens to be BOTB then the allies should have to fall back to their defensive positions and destroy them with AT-Guns and Bazookas, when the King Tigers are destroyed they then use their Jeeps and APC's to rush the german lines before more KT's spawn!

Just like it really happened (or as close as we can make it in a single map).

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I'm sorry to digress here, but that picture of the close-up shot of "Sprockets" made me think of that old Mike Myers SNL routine. "Would you like to touch my monkey? Now is the time on Sprockets when we dance."

Re: M26 Pershing
 

You are talking about the Panther killed in front of the Cathedral in Cologne. It was destroyed by a M-26 Pershing commanded IIRC by Sgt Emery.The Pershing gunner switched the gun stabilization on and was lining up a shot as the Pershing charged the Panther. The Panther thought the Pershing was going to have to stop to fire and was caught by suprise when the Pershing fired on it while still moving. The first shot hit the gun mantlet AND DID NOT PENETRATE but ricocheted down and penetrated the turret base and amputated the gunners legs killing him alsmot instantly. The second set the Panther abalze and it burned for 3 days,

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Didn't you already say that :P

Anyways thanks for some of the info, I didn't know that the shell bounced dow and ambutated the gunners leg. Ouch :uhoh:

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I agree, dont include tanks in battles that they werent in. If the allies dont have a tank against the KT etc, then give them a spawnpoint where tanks cant access... like thick forest etc.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I agree, while I would love to see the M-26 versus a Tiger, Panther or Tiger II, I also want a fair amount of realism.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Armour Values:

Pershing:

Hull Front: 102mm
Turret Front: 102mm
Hull Side: 76mm
Turret Side: 76mm

King Tiger:

Hull Front: 150mm
Turret Front: 180mm
Hull Side: 80mm
Turret Side: 80mm

Cannon Values: (Both using APCBC rounds)

Pershing:

~100mm @ 2000m

King Tiger:

~130mm @ 2500m

I'm still betting my money on the King Tiger with it's slightly thicker armour, better optics and superior 88mm

Re: M26 Pershing
 

but i heard from sources here that the KT used crappier steel then previous panzers.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

That quote is referring to the comparison of the King Tiger's armour to that of the Tiger I which had phenominal armour unlike anything else during the war. The Brindel index rating was the perfect mix of hard facing and flexability, Thus it was costly and time consuming.

The King Tiger's armour although not up to snuff to previous german standards was quite compareable to other allied tanks.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

It would be a lame-ass thing indeed to add the Pershing without any maps in the game that the Pershing could be in. It is similar to the Me 262 being in the Bocage map.....


Bleeeecchhhhhhh!

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I consider the Pershing equal to the Tiger I or Panther. The only tank I think that compares to the Tiger II ausf B is the IS-III.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I kinda agree. if you see a penetration of the Tiger I or early Panther armor it looks like the penetrator punched a hole and the edges look kinda melted.

On many of the Tiger II penetrations the armor has shattered or cracked. But I have to wonder, if you increase the thickness of the plate doesnt it become stiffer and more rigid? meaning that the plate is less likely to flex?

Re: M26 Pershing
 

if you were to add the perishing what mpas would you place it on. there are no maps the would fit in with its timeline. unless the team has something up thier sleeves for .6 :naughty:

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Aachen and Cologne, 1945 for starters.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

Right, in we need new maps to showcase this weapon in other words....

Re: M26 Pershing
 

I could see them maybe not doing Cologne, but with or without the M-26 Pershing I would be suprised if no one did Aachen.

Re: M26 Pershing
 

If you're referring to the Russian trials then you should take them with a grain of salt. After being pounded with every field and AT-Gun imaginable for a few days the armour tended to get a little weak.

In the field, I doubt that you're gonna see a 50mm do anything to a King Tiger other than piss it off!

Please reveal your sources as to the inferiority of the King Tiger Armour in respects to allied armour quality.

p.s. Don't quote battlefield.ru since many of it's facts are questionable and others have been refuted.