Tiger Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Anything to add? BT-xx light tank series T-28 medium tank T-26 light tank T-40 light tank T-60 light tank T-70 light tank BA-10 light armored car BA-20 light armored car Ba-64 armored car KV-1 heavy tank KV-2 heavy support tank KV-1S heavy tank KV-85 heavy tank T-34 medium tank T-34/85 medium tank IS-2 heavy tank SU-76M assault gun SU-122 assault gun SU-152 assault gun ISU-122 assault gun ISU-152 assault gun SU-85 tank destroyer SU-100 tank destroyer M3 Lee lend-lease American tank Churchill lend-lease tank M4A2 Sherman lend-lease tank British Matilda lend-lease tank British Valentine infantry tank lend-lease M3 Stewart lend-lease [This message has been edited by Tiger (edited 01-23-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Originally posted by Tiger: Anything to add? Off the top of my head: IS-1, T-50, T-80, Tetrarch, T48, M-10, & M-18. Regards, John Waters ------------------ "We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field". Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. February 1945. [This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 01-23-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Johnson-<THC>- Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Take the T-44 off. Only a few were made, and It would unbalance it. They already have the T-34/85, the KV series and the Assault guns. And If BTS keeps the CM engine pretty much the same, then tanks can't cross rivers even when they should be frozen. Other wise looks good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakalwe Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Of course the original land-battleship: T-35 Zakalwe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 T-35 Heavy for early war action (THAT will be tough to model). Also, I will be curious about the tanks that could swim without preperation. Will they need a graphic that shows them bobbing with low free board in the water, wallowing along like pathetic ducks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andrew Hedges Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 T-35 land battleship KT-7 flying tank Each of the main T34 variants (Model 1940, Model 1941, etc.) OT-34 flame tank British tetrarch lend-lease tanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KwazyDog Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 John, the service record of the IS-1 is pretty scratchy. Do you have any references of interest for that one? Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfLord Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Muahaha! To all who think I'm solely a German tank lover...wait till I get my hands on that beautiful IS-2 (my 3rd fav tank of the war). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted January 24, 2001 Author Share Posted January 24, 2001 The IS-1 was originally armed with an 85mm gun, however the Red Army wanted a bigger gun so it was replaced by a 122mm gun and renamed the IS-2. Was the IS-1 produced in any quantities before being upgunned to the IS-2??? -Tiger ps~ Kwazydog, the Red Army Handbook 1939-1945 lists Soviet wartime tank production. The IS-1 is not included though the KV-1, KV-2, KV-1S, KV-85, IS-2, in that order. The IS-1 initially had an 85mm gun, then a 100mm gun, then the up gunned IS-2 with the 122mm gun. Did the IS-1 remain mainly a "testing & trials" tank?? There were 780 KV-1S's made in 1942, 452 in 1943, none after 1943. Only 130 KV-85's were made in 1943, none after that (total KV-85 production 130). No IS-1 production is listed. IS-2 production is 102 in 1943, 2252 in 1944, 1500 in 1945. The IS-3 production figures are not listed. Indicates production of the IS-3 began in March 1945. The IS-85 was then renamed the IS-1 and the tanks produced with the 122mm D-25T were designated IS-2 to diferentiate them by their armament. Ah-ha! that explains it Thought they tried a 100mm gun on the IS-1 I don't think it was produced except for trials. Apparently only 107 IS-1 (85) were produced between October and December 1944. The 2 produced in October were prototypes? [This message has been edited by Tiger (edited 01-23-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KwazyDog Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Not sure about the T-35 guys, it appears it saw little combat if any. Some sources say it did around Moscow, and others say no, it was only used for internal security. I also have reference of the Germans never officially recording one knocked out. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Originally posted by Tiger: The IS-1 was originally armed with an 85mm gun, however the Red Army wanted a bigger gun so it was replaced by a 122mm gun and renamed the IS-2. Was the IS-1 produced in any quantities before being upgunned to the IS-2??? -Tiger The IS-1 was never upgunned, the Soviets chose two designations to diferentiate the armament for just that purpose. We have the same problem with the KV-85,& IS-1 as both were produced in small numbers Ie, 130 KV-85 & 107 IS-85. The IS-85 was then renamed the IS-1 and the tanks produced with the 122mm D-25T were designated IS-2 to diferentiate them by their armament. Dan, as to their service records all were sent to the front & employed in Heavy Brigades and dissapeared slowly through attrition. Due to their small numbers & confusion even in Soviet sources, these tanks are very hard to track, I'll see if i can find anything when I get time. Regards, John Waters ------------------ "We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field". Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. February 1945. [This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 01-23-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mace Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Split the T34/76 into the T34/76 A/B model (1941-42) and T34/76 C model (1943+) The turrets for both differ substantially. Also, you may want to consider the SU76i, which was derived from captured PzKpfw III chassis Mace [This message has been edited by Mace (edited 01-23-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Andrew Hedges Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Can't you imagine the multiple red targeting lines from the T-35 as each of its turrets engages different targets! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Eyes Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 I don't think BTS should overlook the fun aspect of including some of these 'questionable' AFV's. Unlike the Maus, the T35 was fully functional. Including the T35 in CM2 opens the doors to more 'what if' scenarios. ------------------ It is easy to be brave from a safe distance. -Aesop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Some reading up seems in order friends, a lot of those "facts" are a bit rusty Head over to http://history.vif2.ru/ and enjoy one of the better armour sites on the net. M. [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 01-23-2001).] [This message has been edited by Mattias (edited 01-23-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Originally posted by Snake Eyes: I don't think BTS should overlook the fun aspect of including some of these 'questionable' AFV's. Unlike the Maus, the T35 was fully functional. Including the T35 in CM2 opens the doors to more 'what if' scenarios. Besides, it is a test of Kwazydog's machismo. 5 independent turrets. BTS's medical plan will be buying him valium before CM2 hits the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted January 24, 2001 Author Share Posted January 24, 2001 Intresting Mace. Will CM2 include captured enemy tanks/vehicles/equipment for use with a "rare" tag? Tiger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 One thing though. If it is the difference between one odd little tank like the T44/43 or T35 and a major cool advance in CM, like multiple mod slots for each tank (to allow camo / plain / winter / summer / old / new mods to be slid into place without being an either / or situation) then I say dump the oddball tank and go for the multiple mod slots (or whatever the neat new advance is). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KwazyDog Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Snake, its not that we are overlooking certain vehicles, but we do need to prioritise. The problem with the T-35 is that it would require significant coding to get it to function accurately and properly, which would take coding time away from more important tasks such as more detailed building representation. For a vehicle that only numbered around 50 and saw very little combat if any it would be a poor use of resources to spend weeks modelling it. Don't get me wrong, Id love to take it for a spin too, but at the moment its not one of our higher priorities Time will tell. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastables Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Originally posted by Mace: Split the T34/76 into the T34/76 A/B model (1941-42) and T34/76 C model (1943+) The turrets for both differ substantially. Also, you may want to consider the SU76i, which was derived from captured PzKpfw III chassis Mace [This message has been edited by Mace (edited 01-23-2001).] I'd prefer if the 41 and 42 were on there own and the diffrent cast and welded turret of the 41s were modeled. Another pretty please would be the 1940 version with the L11 7,62cm gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Eyes Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Originally posted by KwazyDog: Time will tell. I understand that BTS has limited resources. Nonetheless, it's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease. The Forum is the place to register your squeaks, right? ------------------ It is easy to be brave from a safe distance. -Aesop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfLord Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Just noticed this on the list...shouldn't the ISU 152 be a tank destroyer and the SU 152 be the assault gun. Are both of these being modeled or will the SU 152 just be rolled up into the tank destroyer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfLord Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Ack! reverse the letter designations above...SU=TD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KwazyDog Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Originally posted by Snake Eyes: I understand that BTS has limited resources. Nonetheless, it's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease. The Forum is the place to register your squeaks, right? Sure is snake, and we appreciate peoples opinions very much I thought it best to expand on my comment about the T-35 as Im sure its one everyone would like to take for a run, but it also unfortunately not one that is simply to put in due to its unique nature. Im not saying its off the list, but there are certinally many vehicles of more importance Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasoncawley@ameritech.net Posted January 24, 2001 Share Posted January 24, 2001 Didn't they have a number of 45mm ATs and 57mm ATs mounted on tracked chassis open topped, like the SU-76 but earlier in the war? 1941 and 1942 I am thinking about, when the 76 was their basic field gun and the AT units had 45s and 57s. These might have been ad hoc "portees", though, on any mount that came to hand - I am not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts