Announcing the Churchill Mk.IV Tank, StuG III Ausf.G Mobile Assault Gun and IAR-80/81 Pre-Orders!

[Frinik22]

I personally would rather have more Kursk/Prokhorovka related campaigns like Operation Kutuzov or the aftermath, the August 1943 battles on the Mius front than a career mode.  So we could have new models like the SU-85 and Panzer IV Ausf. G introduced into the game. Unfortunately the KV 85 would not arrive until September 1943.  

[Yogiflight]

4 hours ago, Frinik22 said:

So we could have new models like the SU-85 and Panzer IV Ausf. G introduced into the game.

What about the Panzer IV Ausf. G of 'Clash at Prokhorovka'?

[Frinik22]

 

22 minutes ago, Yogiflight said:

What about the Panzer IV Ausf. G of 'Clash at Prokhorovka'?

Sorry I meant Ausf. H with the schürzen and the Kwk40 L48 gun (although the late variant of the G had it too.)

Edited December 7, 2021 by Frinik22

[JG27_Steini]

9 hours ago, Frinik22 said:

 

Sorry I meant Ausf. H with the schürzen and the Kwk40 L48 gun (although the late variant of the G had it too.)

 

Was the H variant available at Kursk?

[Yogiflight]

10 hours ago, Frinik22 said:

 

Sorry I meant Ausf. H with the schürzen and the Kwk40 L48 gun (although the late variant of the G had it too.)

The Ausf. G we have in game has both, Schürzen and the L48 (and the default 80mm hull armor, which the G also didn't have from the beginning), so no need for an Ausf. H.

The only noticeable differences, from what I know, would be different wheels, especially some of them pure steel wheels, without rubber.

[Yogiflight]

4 hours ago, JG27_Steini said:

 

Was the H variant available at Kursk?

The Panzer IV Ausf. H might have been, as its production, according to Wikipedia started in spring '42. The SU-85 was definitely not, as its production started in august '43. If it would have been at the Battle of Kursk, I am quite sure the Devs would have implemented it instead of the SU-152, which was mainly an artillery vehicle.

[GeorgeCostanza]

On 12/7/2021 at 1:02 AM, [KG]Destaex said:

Is a career mode coming? Has it been announced?

 

Yah, I guess not.  I forgot about the new mission generator.  That would be a solid addition to TC as well.

[moustache]

with an AI overhaul, that would be awesome ...

[JG27_Steini]

A man can dream ?

[Frinik22]

5 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

The Panzer IV Ausf. H might have been, as its production, according to Wikipedia started in spring '42. The SU-85 was definitely not, as its production started in august '43. If it would have been at the Battle of Kursk, I am quite sure the Devs would have implemented it instead of the SU-152, which was mainly an artillery vehicle.

I know that the SU-85 was not at Kursk which is why I mentioned in my post its introduction as part of an expansion of the Kursk/Prokhorovka campaign/battle into the August 1943 battles on the Mius front. The Zveroboy (Beastslayer), despite its fierce nickname, was not a tank destroyer. It carried only 18 shells and the reload time for each was 40 seconds. But it was a solid trench and fortification buster.

 

Re the Ausf. G didn't realise it was the late variant with the L48 gun. May be have the early variant with the L43 then ? Or have the |G variant without schuerzen and L 43 and the H variant with schuerzen and the L48?. It seems to me that the G variant did not have any camo painted? Only the original grau colour?

Edited December 8, 2021 by Frinik22

[Surrexen]

Preordered both tanks. Jagdpanther next please ?

 

Merry Christmas!

[Spinnetti]

Ok, in your opinion which is the most interesting variant of the Stug and why? In honor of adding to the game (I pre-ordered), I'm designing and scratch building the Stug in 1/12th scale for R/C but haven't settled on the variant yet and other than wanting the longer barrel vs the short barrel I have no real preference. I'll start in the next week or so as I finish up the last details on my Hetzer which is built and running, but some of the details not done yet, and not yet painted (It took me 5hrs just to design/make  the Notek light yesterday!)

Edited December 28, 2021 by Spinnetti

[chrisarmyknife]

Glad to hear Tank crew is getting some love this year , and the fact both of these tanks saw use in the western front makes me wonder if this is maybe a sneaky tease for a 2nd tank crew? A man can dream

Edited January 5, 2022 by chrisarmyknife

[Tomi_099]

On 1/5/2022 at 7:21 AM, chrisarmyknife said:

Glad to hear Tank crew is getting some love this year , and the fact both of these tanks saw use in the western front makes me wonder if this is maybe a sneaky tease for a 2nd tank crew? A man can dream

 

 

.... A MAN CAN DREAM 

 

 

[ShampooX]

Tommi I'd be totally happy if TC just incorporated some of the darker Panzer skins so the pilots on multiplayer servers can't pick us out outside of the render zone like bright yellow pin heads against a 1-D background.  If TC did nothing else except fix the render zone or give us darker Panzer skins (of which you and several others have great ones), TC would be a much better game.  So little, for so much!

[lackylucki]

12 hours ago, Tomi_099 said:

 

 

.... A MAN CAN DREAM 

 

 

 

Hello Tomi I found a photo in my collection with snow chains.

I've been looking for a long time!

Edited January 30, 2022 by lackylucki

[JV44HeinzBar]

S!,

I believe there's a few pics out there also of Sherman's using grousers.

 

HB

[Yankee_One]

I am hesitating to buy one of these atm.

 

Dont know if we will get a TC2 in the future or more work on TC again.

 

If this happens, thats a good sign and i will buy both of them.

 

 

Edited July 10, 2022 by Yankee_One

[moustache]

50 minutes ago, Yankee_One said:

Dont know if we will get a TC2 in the future or more work on TC again.

news of a TC 2 or a career mode... on the other hand, one day (but when, we don't know...), we should have more quick missions offered (Marshall mode if I remember correctly ...) ... that's all I've seen in the dev logs. if anyone has more info...

 

but one thing that I think gives faith in the future (or I hope so, but I trust them...), is that the arrival of these two new armored vehicles will surely revive modders for skins and missions/campaign...

Edited July 10, 2022 by moustache

[352ndOscar]

I resisted as long as I could but eventually joined the StuG life too……

[moustache]

[352ndOscar]

3 hours ago, Eeafanas said:

I advise you to buy Churchill to support the development of the tank direction)

Personally, I bought all the ground equipment in the game.

@moustache

 

I’ve said this before, but I’ll say it again.  I have little or no use for a ultra-slow and under-gunner armored vehicle.  I quote:

 

“The tank’s top speed was around 24 km/h (15 mph), but Soviet tests claimed that a Churchill Mark III reached 28 km/h (17 mph). “
“The main armament of the Churchill Mark IV was the Ordnance Quick-Firing (QF) 6-pounder gun of 57mm caliber. “

 

To quote again: “It’s a hunk of junk!”  At it’s very best it’s an infantry support vehicle.  Might as well put the Mark I out there from WW1 - I’d be just as good.  It would have been better to use the chassis as a tank recovery vehicle and leave it at that. The Brits had far better vehicles.

 

I’ll support game development as best as I can, but with all the possible candidates out there for a add-on tank, this one would have been my last pick - and I’m being generous.

 

[moustache]

24 minutes ago, Eeafanas said:

which means that it can penetrate the guaranteed frontal armor of a tiger from 800-1000 meters.

Mmmmh, I can't find any info that says that the QF pounder 6 is able to pierce 100mm of armor at 800m, it says more on the contrary that you have to be below 500m...

and in addition, because of the date of kursk, the most powerful shells are not yet present...

let's add to that the mondre efficiency of an AP shell compared to the APHE in post penetration...

[352ndOscar]

54 minutes ago, Eeafanas said:

The speed may not be that high, but judging by the screenshots, it has a long-barreled 6-pounder gun, which means that it can penetrate the guaranteed frontal armor of a tiger from 800-1000 meters.  This is already a good argument from the Soviet / allied side.

What?  Wait!  So your telling me a 57mm round from Churchill MkIV is going to be able to do what a 75mm round from - well hell, any other tank - can do.  Prove it!  I give you one shot.  You better make it count ‘cause after that your pushing up daisies.

[CountZero]

dont worry maybe it will have NA 75mm gun modification, so you can use it on maps that dont exist in game  ?

 

[MajorMagee]

If they're going to try to sell us Infantry Support Armored Vehicles, then they should provide us with working Infantry to go along with it.

[moustache]

4 hours ago, Eeafanas said:

 

Un projectile de sous-calibre, qui je pense sera encore ajouté pour que Churchill puisse également être utilisé sur le front ouest.

 

 

 

but therefore, this shell does not correspond to the date of the battle of kursk (in 43) if they came out in 44...

since the developer seems (for the moment, if we hope for a different period (which I do part...) for later...) want to stay "historical"...

so we shouldn't see them in game, the churchill won't represent a bigger threat than a t-34 or a KV for German heavy tanks...

[moustache]

10 hours ago, MajorMagee said:

If they're going to try to sell us Infantry Support Armored Vehicles, then they should provide us with working Infantry to go along with it.

in one of the last development blog, they announced the arrival of infantry with the normandy map ( it's the blog n°319...) ...
good after, apparently you shouldn't get too carried away, jason compare it to a multi-turret tank in its operation, with a limited "AI"... moreover, they only showed american models, no german or Russian... so no idea if TC will benefit from it, and if so, in how many years...

Edited July 15, 2022 by moustache

[moustache]

find a simulation which shows that it is possible for 57mm with an AP shell to pierce the frontal plate at 102mm from the tiger, at around 700m (he modified 2/3 things in his simulation, but he explains it in the description ...):

 

 

 

https://www.forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=238721&start=75

 

https://imgur.com/Oyy1r7s

 

afterwards, we always stay on the AP shell, which fragments little in post penetration...

[moustache]

someone has confirmation that it will indeed be a churchill armed with a 6pd long, because the performance of the short format...

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/gb/a22_churchill_tank.php

[LachenKrieg]

I'm not too familiar with the Churchill design, but after a brief google I think the vehicle being modeled for Tank Crew would have to be the Mk IV version of the gun. Look for specs on the QF 6-pounder L/50 barrel. My understanding is that this is the only gun the Churchill Mk IV was fielded with.

[Spinnetti]

Aren't we about due for the collector Tanks? I need My Stug, assuming the ballistics aren't all messed up.

[LachenKrieg]

Yeah I have the Sd. Kfz. 10/5 Flak, the Stug III, the Chruchill, FC I & II, BON, and a long list of collector planes waiting on fixes to TC. I think due is an understatement, but it does get the point across all the same.

[Lofte]

On 7/15/2022 at 12:52 PM, moustache said:

shows that it is possible for 57mm with an AP shell to pierce the frontal plate at 102mm from the tiger, at around 700m

I'm afraid - only at 450 m, 90 deg and 830 m/s...

 

[moustache]

so he is armed with Mk III or Mk IV? because even the Mk IV seems asthmatic... in any case it seems complicated to face the German tanks (even the Pz IV has its chances at more than 1km...

 

https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/gb/a22_churchill_tank.php#:~:text=in running condition.-,6pdr Main Gun penetration figures,would have been 80% success at 30 degrees’ angle of attack.,-A22F Churchill Mark

[LachenKrieg]

What they have listed on their web site is the Churchill Mk IV, so I believe that tank was fielded with the long barrel L/50 with muzzle break. I think it was the Mk V, which is just the tank version of the Mk IV 6-pounder.

[moustache]

@Eeafanas, yes, you said that the churchill could pierce the tiger...but since then, no information / source that would corroborate this, on the contrary, the barrel, even along the churchill seems to be struggling against the German armor (at least the heaviest ..)... but maybe you have new information?

[JV44HeinzBar]

S!,

Something I came across a couple of years ago. I don't know how accurate the generated graph is in comparing what we have in TC, but it does give one an idea of the ballistics vs various tanks.

 

http://www.wwiiequipment.com/pencalc/

 

HB

 

Turret:

Hull:

Edited August 15, 2022 by JV44HeinzBar

[moustache]

it's nice, but a little weird: is there an error in the color legend? and even a more general error?

I find it hard to understand: for example, between 1.2km and 1.1km, on the flank, the shell penetrates, but between 1.1km and 700m, it will break, to penetrate again below 700m... ( I tried with other guns and tanks, and this configuration sometimes happens...)

13 hours ago, JV44HeinzBar said:

 

[Peasant]

Early Churchill variants are not a good match against Tigers and Panthers. They are just about a fair match against late Pz.IVs and Stug IIIs upgraded with 80mm of frontal armour and long 75mm guns.

 

The 75mm L/48 german gun can reliably perforate 89mm/30° at up to 600m and at 0° up to 1300m.

 

The 6pdr L/50 gun firing plain AP is able to perforate 80mm of armour at 25° angle (not at 30°, because this shell just shatters under those conditions) up to 900m and at 0° up to 1100m. I dont think the more advanced APCBC shell was available for this tank in early/mid 1943 on soviet front, but it's close enough so that devs can add it anyway if they feel like Churchill struggles against german tanks.

 

Edit: Interestingly enough, the earlier models of these german tanks had frontal armour only 50mm thick, but it was face hardened. As a result their resistance against this gun did not differ that much: 50mm/30° up to 800m and 50mm/0° up to 1200m.

Edited August 20, 2022 by Peasant