and the best tank of CM?

[CombinedArms]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Monte99:

I'm with you. Couldn't believe no one mentioned the Stuart earlier. For the money, it's best tank in the game...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK--we've really run the gamut now! We've seen the Panther as best tank (expensive but excellent overall--though not unkillable if attacked thru an avenue of weakness) vs. Stuart (cheap and vulnerable but with strengths that can lead to victory given numbers & right tactics.)

So this leads back to a question: given that CM assigns costs to armor as a function of "combat value," are all tanks (or other AFVs) in CM functionally equivalent--i.e. of equal value given the relative cost? Or are some tanks overpriced and others real bargains, given their actual fighting ability?

Let's phrase it another way: which Axis tank is the best bargain? Which the worst bargain? Which Axis TD? SPG?

Which Allied/American tank is the best bargain? Which the worst bargain? Which American TD? SPG?

Which British tank (not available to Americans) is the best & worst bargain? TDs? SPGs?

Is it a matter of personal style--some like Ubertanks; others like cheap, fast, rattletraps? Or are their real differences in value? You make the call....

[ 04-18-2001: Message edited by: CombinedArms ]

[MrSpkr]

I don't know that all tanks are equal - there are some real dogs out there (think Hetzer, for example). However, every tank appears to have some purpose and is of some value if used appropriately (except for maybe the Hetzer!).

In a straight on armor v. armor match, I'll take on a 1000 point German ubertank force with about ten stuarts - I'll outnumber them by at least 2-1 (particularly if the German player takes Elite or Crack crews - mine are usually regular or green) and have decent odds of beating the snot out of them as long as I properly approach the targets.

If infantry is involved, nothing says loving like a Priest. BA-ROOOOOOOMM!

The best bang for the buck among Axis tanks is probably the Mk IV J. Decent armor, decent gun, decent speed, decent price.

Best Axis TD - bang for buck its a StuG III.

Best Axis SPG - dunno - don't use them much. I guess I would have to go with the Wespe, though. Great at range, smaller than the Hummel (IIRC - I am at work so don't have the docs in front of me).

The worst AFV for the Axis, IMHO, is the Tiger. Great Armor, Great Gun, incredibly slow speed, high profile, weak sides and ssss-llll-oooo-www turret rotation. Good if the terrain is flat and open, but how often does THAT happen?!?

For the Americans - I love the Stuart - great speed, enough armor to resist mgs, gun capable of penetrating most if not all german side armor at close distances, and cheap.

For Allied TD's, the Jackson or Pershing are the best, but are way expensive and of limited availability. I prefer an M-10 - just watch out for mortar fire.

For Allied SPG's - the Priest has my money. Great anti-infantry gun, decent speed (okay, it drives like a cow, but who is going to move it in close range anyway?), enough armor to protect from pesky MG's and occasional 20mm (though a Wirbelwind will eat its lunch if it gets a good burst of shots off).

British and Canadian - who plays the British or Canadians? Just Kidding -- that was for you, Michael Dorosh.

I rarely choose these nationalities because their armor chooices are mor limited. However, I do like the crocodile (anything with a 75mm and a FT is cool), and the Cromwell, umm, VII? I also like the Stuart V (no big surprise).

I think it all comes down to playing style. My life is busy enough (school, 4 kids, full-time job) that I don't want to be patient - I wanna get in and kill something! Therefore, I value speed over armor in most situations. I also take a lot of HT mounted guns - the German 75mm and 20mm in HT's are two of my faves!

Okay, now that I've rambled enough about my choices, let's everyone pile on and tell me how wrong I am!

MrSpkr

P.S> I really miss the spell checker!

[Kingfish]

IMO, the H39 rocks! A fast and lethal killing machine they are, and great gas mileage to boot.

I once had a H39 take out a pine tree with three shots (first two were richochets) from 30 meters away. Damn tree didn't know what hit him.

[Warmaker]

Okay, here I go:

Axis

-Best overall tank: Panthers-reasons stated earlier

-Worst overall tank: I was about to say the PzKpfw IV but the Hotchkiss and Lynx does come to mind.

-Best TD-Jagdpanzer IV/late-Small silhouette, excellent tank killing gun, excellent slope. Have yet to lose one frontally. Put one in a hull down position and it can hold off an area by itself. The Panzer IV/70 is an improved version of the JgPz IV but 40 points more.

-Worst TD-Marder II/III-too flimsy and can't hide well(big silhouettes). Only use if desperate for guns and don't expect them to last much longer than regular ATGs.

-Best SPG-StugIIIG/late-The StuH42 does provide better support but in case any surprising armor does show up, the StuGIIIG can take on all comers.

-Worst SPG-Wespe/Hummel-Open topped and flimsy superstructures. A .50 cal can do wonders on this.

-I want to mention the Tiger IE since it can kill tanks easily and attack infantry effectively. It has good armor to boot. All this allows it to do a multiple set of roles and costs a few points cheaper than a Panther.

Again, I tend towards quality over quantity. I'd pay the points to have my Big Cats to be able to shrug off rounds and have the capability to kill anything, even the *snicker* M26 Pershings. I really hate having panzers that can be destroyed as easily as the Sherman/soda can.

[Guy w/gun]

Ok, since unit rarity isn't modeled in price and because factors that are out of CMs scope are modeled (cross-country), I'd have to say the Tiger IE.

A regular Tiger costs less than some regular Shermans. It's Tank killing ability is unquestionable and it's anti-infantry ability is very good too. It has thick, albeit non-sloped, armor. It has better side armor than a Panther, so it won't get knocked out when the allies start throwing rocks at it !

While it is slow, cumbersome, very heavy, and has the slowest turret transverse in the game, it accels at over watch. Just keep that big SOB back away from the front lines and pop him over hills to catch enemy tanks trying to flank.

I think thats were the Tiger truly accels. Far back where its transverse doesn't matter and were most allied guns have a hard time hitting it due to range, accuracy, and power.

Its too bad I've started limiting myself from using them along with infantry due to historical reasons .

[ 04-19-2001: Message edited by: Guy w/gun ]

[Guy w/gun]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>-Worst overall tank: I was about to say the PzKpfw IV<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you serious? :eek: The Mk IV is my second pick! It rocks!

[ 04-19-2001: Message edited by: Guy w/gun ]

[Schwarze]

Panzer IVJ, Same armor as a StuGIIIG but better overall terrian and can get less bogged...

[jwxspoon]

For British - I'll take the Firefly every time. I've only been burned once by dueling a pair of Fireflies with just about anything.

For German - I'll take the Tiger, Panther of Stug IIIG

For American - I like the jumbo Sherman, the Stuart, and the M36

[Warmaker]

Sorry about my bad mention of the Pzkfwp IV. It has an outstanding gun, no doubt about it, and good mobility. However, armor is the failure. While the hull is barely acceptable (not sloped well, i.e. Panther) to top it off even the front turret armor is a mere 50mm(roughly). I've lost a many PzKpfw IVs to Stuarts... while in a hull-down position and taking a direct front turret penetration. Instant German soda can on fire.

IMO in the armor department the Germans have nothing to contribute to a quantity vs. quantity type of match. There's always going to be a ton of Stuarts and other cheap Shermans running around, you can't help that. You can't get into a qty vs. qty match on even terms with the Allies because of the low cost nature of their AFVs. The cheapest, decently "effective" TANK (not SPG/TD/etc., their tend to be too limited in roles & capability) is the aforementioned PzKpfw IV, which dies much too easily. For roughly 145 precious points for a veteran one, I'd rather invest more in a veteran Tiger IE at roughly 222 points or 240 points for a Panther.

If you're not expecting much of an Allied armor threat, then I guess a Mark IV is a great, cheap choice. But if any significant armor slugging match is expected, esp. w/ 76mm/17 pdrs are concerned then the PzKpfw IV is best suited to maybe a supporting/escort role at most. I'm not saying the Tigers/Panthers are invincible against these weapons, but they tend to survive much longer and the Allied players have to try harder to attempting to skin your Big Cats.

Besides, it's funny to watch Allied armor pop smoke upon arrival of a Big Cat into the sandbox for play.

[ 04-19-2001: Message edited by: Warmaker ]

[BloodyBucket]

Most effective anti-tank vehicle in the game is, without a doubt, the One That My Opponent Is Using At The Moment .

[Abteilung]

The numerical superiority gained by purchasing less costy afv's does not seem to me the appropriate response for the topic. Thats just dogs against a bull.

The best tank overall for CM is the 17 pdr. armed Sherman Firefly.

In reality the debates still rage today over what was the best tank fielded.

[Warmaker]

I have a healthy respect for the Fireflies. If one shows it's face up, you can usually bet it gets targetted immediately upon identification. That's the only British tank that I have any bit of fear of. The only drawback of course is that it's based on the Sherman, meaning thin armor. Also, if I have an infantry-heavy kampfgruppe, the Fireflies don't mean much as a threat since they usually have less HE rounds and no .50 cals.

[Cybeq]

Best tank vs. tank in the game when taking price into consideration is the Stuart. Cheap price will allow you to outnumber enemy armor. High ROF will allow you to get more shots per turn. High speed will allow you to outflank / outmanuever. The 37mm gun will penetrate all "normal" tanks from behind or side at typical CM ranges. Armor is impervious to small arms. Given that in CMBO most armor can be defeated by most guns at most ranges typically experienced you encounter a phenomenon in which logic dictates speed and numbers over armor / gun superiority. In this environment the Stuart is king. I won't even mention the three machine guns used to hose the infantry since the original question concerned only armor vs. armor. Stuarts rule!!! You can accept this fact or be destroyed by it.

[Warmaker]

There's quite an easy, cheap, and effective fix for Stuarts on the defense though... 50mm ATGs. For a mere 44 points w/ veteran status and with Tungsten, and a high ROF, Stuarts crumple like wet paper bags.

Oh, and Tigers do laugh when 37mm rounds tickle their "soft" sides.

[ 04-22-2001: Message edited by: Warmaker ]

[Sirocco]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MrSpkr:

every tank appears to have some purpose and is of some value if used appropriately (except for maybe the Hetzer!).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

:eek:

The Hetzer is a fine ambush weapon with a good gun and acutely sloped frontal armour making it ideal for defence.

If I had to make a choice for favourite tank, I'd probably choose the Churchill VIII, too, because of it's heavy armour and punch against armoured and soft targets. I like the Hetzer on the defence as the Germans because of it's low cost and it's strength in good ambush positions.

[MrSpkr]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sirocco:

:eek:

The Hetzer is a fine ambush weapon with a good gun and acutely sloped frontal armour making it ideal for defence.

I like the Hetzer on the defence as the Germans because of it's low cost and it's strength in good ambush positions.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, I now am forced to concede this after a PBEM game in which a Hetzer tagged my TD from distance while moving (nice shot Leeo.

I now think Hetzers are mostly worthless, not entirely worthless.

MrSpkr

[Stacheldraht]

I have to agree on the utility of the Hetzer. The relatively low ammo count (both for the main gun and remote flexible MG) and slow ROF are more than offset by the highly sloped front armor, tiny sillhouette (6' 10.7" high), and low, low price

As with any turretless AFV's, protect their flanks (weak side armor and slow to rotate) and use them in groups. A few Hetzers working in concert can ruin an Allied player's day.

[ 04-23-2001: Message edited by: Stacheldraht ]

[Stacheldraht]

This one isn't exactly a tank in the traditional sense, and I certainly wouldn't call it the best in CM, but it's extremely useful: the Ostwind. Mediocre armor and speed plus an open top don't say much in its favor. But, its 37mm gun can not only take on fighter-bombers, but more importantly it can easily waste any light armor or vehicles and can get side or rear penetrations (no jokes, please) against many medium or even heavy tanks. The high rate of fire can at least give you immobilizations or gun hits. That ROF plus an absolutely huge ammo store means you can easily take on lots of infantry and suppress them well, raze buildings in one or two turns, not to mention sustain constant firing for twenty turns or so. Very versatile and fun

[thor]

For the axis, I like Tigers, tho I tend to prefer more and cheaper than fewer and larger. I have to concur that the Stug III and the Hetzer are pretty good tank destroyers.

For the allies, there are a lot of tanks I haven't played much with, but I did like the Chaffee because of its speed and FAST turret rotation. I had a Chaffee run circles around some Panthers and take two out.

[Major Belles]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BloodyBucket:

Most effective anti-tank vehicle in the game is, without a doubt, the One That My Opponent Is Using At The Moment .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My feelings exactly!!!!

The Major

[Yaba]

Well, I guess I may as well chuck in my two bits worth... I agree with the above statements that it totally depends on what you are using the tank for so I am just going to mention some of my favourites:

British: Churchill VIII -- this ugly tank can shrug off most anything that gets shot at it's front. Very good for a frontal assault when you expect immediate contact or are trying to flesh out some defences. It's hollow point shells can crack through most German armour even at a distance. Devistating on infantry and buildings! Very cheap for a big tank as well with a fast turret to boot. The one SERIOUS drawback is the lack of hollow point shells. There is a good chance that in a quick battle you will end up with only a couple of shells -- sometime none (happened to me). Another thing to be aware of is that it is terribly slow!

American: Stuart -- this little guy can hardly be called a tank in comparison with the Churchill. But what it lacks in power it makes up for in speed. If used correctly a few of these tanks in the right conditions can cause fits for a German Commader by exposing flanks and drawing fire away from the real tank killers.

German: Panther (Late) -- Hard to argue with the quality of this beast. It seems to blend the best of speed, armour and weaponry. The only weakness of these tanks is the cost.

Yaba

[cpurkiser]

Gosh, I read the whole thread and now I am as confused as ever as what to buy .

STUIII, Hertzer, PzKIV, Jadpanzer IV or V, Tiger I, Panthers. I guess Marder II/III are out, and nobody has nominated the Elephant yet.

How about no tanks? Just buy things like Recoiless rifes and maybe a 75MM antitank gun. Any disadvantage to that in a village scenario?

[CombinedArms]

Query for the Stuart fans: What's a Stuart got that a Greyhound doesn't have? Obviously, both are fast, cheap, with thin armor and 37mm guns. But beyond that I haven't really closely compared them. Is there a tangible reason why Stuarts keep getting mentioned with no mention of Greyhounds, or is it simply a matter of this being a thread about tanks, not recon vehicles? Are Stuarts cheaper? I admit I haven't really looked.

[Warmaker]

Stuarts, being tanks, are closed topped. A big factor in particular if it is receiving fire from higher elevation. Just one reason.

[Yaba]

To jump to the defence of the Greyhound... I once took out a Panther at 220 meters with a side shot. Hmmmmm... the only thing that I think that make a big difference with the Stuart is the armour all around. Don't get too crazy with it -- the armour is thin! But at least it covers the whole vehicle...

Yaba