Tank Vidya

It will be worth it just for the salt.
See it's already started:

Haven't played this game for years and I'm not going to play this shit game ever again. CEO is a miserable liar, caught lying several times, he is probably some stinky goblin jew from Ukraine. They committed fraud and often betrayed their customers. The game is based on ridiculous grinding. No realism at all and some maps look like they are made by a 12 years old.
I think they also have added arcade maps to sim battles (?)
No balance.
No realism in sim mode.
Stupid flip flops regarding game direction.
Russian vehicles are overpowered. No separation of WW2 and post war vehicles.
Forum is heavily censored and people get banned for no reason at all.
Denial of cheaters (wall hack and aim helpers).
Low graphic option.
Markers in sim battle.
Chat ban and censorship
And much more…

The last time I saw videos of crap thunder on youtube, they have added items like teddy bears you can decorate your tank with.

Just an example of how they do money:
Added big bushes for 500GE - Removed big bushes a week later and added small bushes for 2000GE each.

Roulette scam system proven by community to be manipulated. A guy on the forum claimed he used 17000GE (probably 100$) on the roulette and never won anything (200 GE per box).
It then was exposed they limit the chance to win something to a fixed number per week. Means if 200 people won a vehicle you can spent all your money you want, you will never win anything anymore.
I myself never used roulette system though.

They were also caught doubling the price of packs one month before discount sales. They then reduced the price by 10-20% making the discount price higher than regular price. CEO then again started to lie, literally blaming it on steam and workers.

Pay to win vehicles. They release an overpowers tank so everyone is forced to buy it to dominate the battle. 3-6 months later the nerf the tank and make it useless. They then release another overpowered tank to earn even more money only to nerf it later on.

Events were broken. Pretty much the only reason I still was playing that shit game was the events on weekend. They once managed to mess up the events 5 times in row. Uninstalled.

Most worst game experience in my life tbh.
It was somewhat good on release and turned into shit withing a year. There are still idiots who play this crap anyway.

It's like you never played a F2P game.

Once you've played one there's little point in playing any other, they're all shit. F2P as a business model will only ever produce cancer.

Why live Holla Forums?

...

Don't make me spoon you. Unless you spark some autistic discussion about the Luftwaffles it will happen

Oi guv where's your spoon license you're going to the clink

I sense Finns at play here.

user soon but its exclusively PS4

So see it ported to PC next Spring?

...

WoT is p2w bullshit. Fuck everyone who plays it

good!

I want a tank game like WoT without all the F2P bullshit. Why can't anyone make one and sell it for $60?

Surely it wasn't the tank selection that makes Ground Forces so shit

I would add no Russian bias to that too since it's retarded that German tanks that historically fought and won against said Russian tanks can't even fucking penetrate their weakest armor.

Arty can get crazy strong when you do everything right, and you still get fugged

The problem about "historical" issues is that tank deathmatch games aren't representitive of an actual battlefield's line of site, communications and pockets of anti-tank infantry, artillery barrages/aircraft and minefields, nor impassable terrain and the part where throwing a track means being immobile for an hour or more that requires the crew to actually exit the tank meaning small arms danger.

Plus the bit where most tanks don't survive more than one penetrating hit.

Well the problem with Russian bias is that every tank that isn't Russian is shit because everyone just uses the Russian tanks because anyone who doesn't is at a disadvantage.

To be fair Germans won due to superior tactics and training, their tanks weren't all that good.

Also, I'd rather they drop the pretense of realism and just focus on balancing out the different factions so they're fun to play. I could give less of a shit about historical accuracy in a game with such an unrealistic premise.

I also forgot to add no scout tank bullshit because it's so fun to be a clay pigeon for assholes in tanks five tiers higher than yours.

I only play "meta" light tanks that have a cannon that is good enough to kill shit. There's no fucking point in playing a tank that can only do damage to an engine deck from above and behind at the perfect angle.

Why play lights when medium tanks exist?
or
or
there is no other answer, light tanks shouldn't exist in WoT

The Russians heard you for some reason it's console only though for time being

Actually German Tanks did fuckall to Russian Tanks all thing considered. Their AT Guns and Artillery are what did the fuckton of damage. Kind of like how Germans Tanks late war got their shit severely pushed in by infantry

Pretty much this. German Tanks won despite of what they were like, they were never really impressive specs wise. It's when you climb inside them you see the appeal, i.e. you can actually see out of the Tank and not blind as a bat say like the Russian Tanks were, plus the radio was their most important piece of equipment. Allowed them to coordinate artillery fire, call for airstrikes, ask for an 88 to get moved up, ask for infantry support etc when there was shit they couldn't deal with.
Also any Tank game without shit like AT Guns and Infantry about may as well be renamed TD's online. Instantly makes 95% of all vehicles and Tanks obsolete and favours unfairly those that may have been great against fighting other Tanks but in a real battle would be slaughtered easily by AT Guns or Infantry.

Better Chinese cartoons than pay to win trash.

I would have never played light tanks if the tank I actually wanted wasn't fucking locked behind them. It's so fun grinding out a tank you want when you can't score any points because you're the scout tank faggot enjoy not playing the game.

And unoptimized webm for those who don't like JewTube links.

>(((girl power)))
I don't understand.

Because in the show tank battles are a woman's sport.

Well what the fuck do the men do?

Problem with Light Tank mentality is that the Russians have poisoned the well so much that when people see the word "Light" they automatically assume Scout. The vast majority of Light Tanks ever made have never been Scouts. They are either Infantry Support, Skirmishers or Calvary Tanks i.e. raiders. Armoured Cars are often what have constituted as scout vehicles and World of Tanks can't into wheeled vehicles so it will never have important vehicles like the Greyhound, Puma, AEC Holy fuck the Britbong Armoured Cars are ridiculous, some of them are tougher and carry more firepower than most Tanks appearing.

Masturbate furiously.

Tank Company v Tank Company engagements did happen with infantry/AT guns as a nearby setpiece and artillery/air mostly uncoordinated. But it was the exception rather than the rule.

It would be interesting to see a MOBA style gamemode with infantry that came in off map and formed hasty battle lines zoned by the tank's antipersonel capabilities, give a reason to use HE rounds besides popping artillery one round faster.

If you drove a maus towards enemy infantry you might get a round of HE into a few guys, but they might run up on the side and toss a jerry can and light you on fire. Still a lot of problems because you don't want it to prevent a light tank from flanking a superheavy.

build the tanks, fight the real wars and do everything useful like in real life.

Considering what the women do I can only assume men knife fight for fun or wrestle bears or something. They don't really talk about it in the show but the society that you get to see seems extremely militarized as every girl's school is on a goddamn air craft carrier.

So, IFVs basically.

WoT had the Mk. 1 game mode where everyone drove wheeled armored cars that turned and maneuvered like cars and not tanks. They absolutely have done it already.

You really don't watch anime at all, do you?
It's indulgent for the sake of it, the show is written by a guy who likes military history and thinks girls are cute. The writers come up with a dumb setting and plot to support this and the show gets made. There is even a team of girls who always quote generals and generally act fashy.

That sounds awfully expensive. Where do they get the capital to fund all of this?

They stopped foreign and nationalized the independent Federal Reserves.

...

Do you see any Jews in the show?

US Armoured Cars weren't the only ones that appeared during WW2

There was once a thread that came out with a few autistic theories. One was that they were part of the Golden Triangle and they use the aircraft carriers to grow and refine illegal drugs at an industrial scale in international waters out of the way of the authorities so they can't do shit about it.

Not really, no. I like LotGH and the old Berserk, but that's the extent of my anime experience.

I'm guessing they're a private military contractor started by an eccentric billionaire and own an enormous amount of treasury bonds.

Well I think they are going to show off Mother Base in the new series.

Well the air craft carriers are basically self contained cities so I assume they have some sort of businesses on them. They definitely have farms on them so maybe they have some sort of agriculture based economy to pay for it.

They might as well only make the 3-4 OP armored cars as premium only and still give them a tier higher than what they should be.

Well there is certainly a lot of post-war stuff that can be added as well. Like literally from the 50's. I need to sort out my Tonks folder someday

I see. A self-sufficient resourced-based economy. Plus, since it is an aircraft carrier, they can always adjust their latitude ensuring their crops don't die. Is there any government structure outside the respective academies?

You don't really see it in the show because it's more about cute girls fighting each other with tanks.

I'm sure it is, but what is the how here? I imagine there has to be some international governing body to manage things. I don't think any government would allow rogue warships and tanks sail even in international waters.

The aircraft carriers are just giant cities. I don't see how they could be made into war machines again. The tanks themselves fire some kind of round that doesn't penetrate any of the other tank's armor but causes a flag to go up, showing that the other tank has been defeated. Basically these things would not pose any threat to an actual military power.

Why wouldn't there be any security measures on a piece of hardware as expensive as an aircraft carrier? There must be some anti-air defenses, torpedoes, and small arms.

I have no problem with wheeled vehicles added to tank games. My only point is adding them doesn't fix any problems that already exist in the game. Doesn't add any problems either aside from the potential for power creep.

And WoT has already demonstrated wheeled vehicles.

...

Panhard EBR was actually a (revolutionary) pre-war design. First one (P201) is from 1939 and had a 37mm. There was only a couple of prototypes made by the battle of France, factory was sabotage to prevent German uses, plans and prototypes shipped to Algiers.
Second one (P212) from 1951 was a slightly scaled up version with a 75mm (then a 90mm in 1964).

I've said it before and I will say it again. Do not ever talk about anything related to WWII ever again in your entirety of your lives. You are absolutely braindead and you don't know jackshit about German armor or any other Nation's tanks in general.

dear lord that trailer is terrible
I hope the game's good at least

It's true, I didn't.
You can't blame it all on the F2P factor though.

The post-war circlejerking is close to coming full circle. I mean first it was 'No, no we didn't suffer many losses, what are you talkin about, Murrica!' then we had thirty years of 'The German tanks were eldritch machines created through Nazi space magic, that's why our losses were so high' now we're at the 'Hitler singlehandedly designed every german tank so they were absolutely terrible, those crazy krauts amirite guise?'.

t.Wehraboo

Surprising you don't get much on about it since most fags would rather circlejerk about the AMX-13.

Pretty much. Truth is inbetween but there is a lot to say that German equipment wasn't actually nearly as good as everyone claims it was. Kikewood and Le Histoire Channel have really spun a web of lies that completely overexaggerates the quality of their equipment and downplays how skillful the Germans actually were. Cause we all know it was all about the quality of their gear goyim, Germans are just cowardly animals in clothing goy who could only kill 6gorillion fairly if they were in camps oy vey!

They hired some randos to market it and they had no idea.

I just cant get over how much WT devs hate my fav tank type, I mean why would they be at the same / worse BR than their equally protected medium tank counterparts which have the luxury of a turret? You basicly lose a turret and gain 0-0.3 br more giving you shittier matches.
Shit just makes no sense.

No idea either but then again their BR system is as cancerous as a room full of Hues so what do you expect? Stugs are really underappreciated

Yeah see anime is an industry, not a medium of art. I mean it technically is a medium of art, but most anime shows start with "Demographic X of men aged 17 to 25 likes Thing A and Thing B a lot. Writers, combine these things and make something happen." If you want anime that actually has artistic value you generally need to look for auteurs like the guy who did Samurai Champloo. Berserk is also a good example, same guy writing the thing for decades.

Germany might have defeated Russia if they just cranked out stugs instead of ever trying to make tigers, ever

Truly you are autistic.

They're not that great for attacking though, not having a turret and having to turn after coming behind a bend to fire is really terrible if you're fighting in cramped spaces like forest, towns or area with a lot of elevation differences.

Yeah but their production efficiency was the highest of all the German main line armor. Which was something Germany lacked in most of their standard issue equipment.

It wouldn't change anything, it would only cause 50 times as many casualties on the Germans and they would have even less veteran crews left alive by the end of the war. Germany's choices on weapon production didn't cost them the war. America cost them the war. America saved Russia, America landed on Normandy and America funded everything.
Without America they didn't stand half a chance. Imagine the Normandy landings without the USA. It would be a massive failure with no survivors. Imagine the Eastern Front without the massive and continuous backing from the United States. It would all fall apart within weeks and Germany would roflstomp the entirety of the Soviet land.

Making more Stugs and Panzers wouldn't change anything. Keeping America out of the war however would. But (((they))) wanted a slaughter and no amount of peace offerings from Hitler would ever keep the United States from joining the war.

If you can actually point out which German Tanks that were better than Allied counterparts without resorting to the 6gorillion Tigers meme I am all ears frankly. Little hint, I have yet to see a single user do this as when they try this challenge they fuck up spectacularly.

If the Germans frankly got Medium Tank production sorted and streamlined, then didn't fuck up their logistics so much they could have stood in better stance against well everyone.

...

It's not bullshit. There are an immesaurable number of accounts talking in detail about how more than half of every panther and tiger 'destroyed' was due to it breaking down before it go to the battlefield.
No wonder people call you a wehraboo, you just scream denial in the face of facts.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

Alright, let's start with the reliability of the T-34 and how Germany responded to the threat early in the war.

Panzer III with the longer 50mm and the extra armor was superior to the T-34 1941/42. The extra armor negated the performance of the F-34 gun at long ranges.
Despite its theoretical inferiority, the PzIII was able to fight against the T-34.
What it lacked in armor and firepower it made up by having a better internal layout, better reliability and optics, a commander’s cupola and radio in every vehicle. Its main advantage versus the T-34 was its superior reliability.
The majority of Soviet vehicles in 1941 were lost due to equipment malfunction. The same reliability problems continued during the period 1942-44. The evacuation and relocation of industrial facilities combined with the loss of skilled workers could only lead to the fall of reliability.

In 1941 T-34 tanks often had to carry a spare transmission strapped on the back to counter equipment failures. In 1942 the situation worsened since many vehicles could only cover small distances before breaking down. In the summer of 1942 things got so desperate that the following Stalin order was issued to units:

"Our armored forces and their units frequently suffer greater losses through mechanical breakdowns than they do in battle. For example, at Stalingrad Front in six days twelve of our tank brigades lost 326 out of their 400 tanks. Of those about 260 owed to mechanical problems. Many of the tanks were abandoned on the battlefield. Similar instances can be observed on other fronts. Since such a high incidence of mechanical defects is implausible, the Supreme Headquarters sees in it covert sabotage and wrecking by certain elements in the tank crews who try to exploit small mechanical troubles to avoid battle."

"Henceforth, every tank leaving the battlefield for alleged mechanical reasons was to be gone over by technicians, and if sabotage was suspected, the crews were to be put into tank punishment companies or "degraded to the infantry" and put into infantry punishment companies."

The situation continued to be problematic even in 1943-44.
There were constant problems with the gearbox and the engine filters. The Aberdeen evaluators noted:

The same problems were identified in a T-34/85 built in 1945. The US study ‘Engineering analysis of the Russian T34/85 tank’ noted (13):

The same study says in page 451 about the transmission:

iirc once they added "light" tanks up to tier 10 in WoT a few patches ago, they took away the scout matchmaking mechanic, so "light" tanks only get plus-or-minus 2 tiers of spread like every other vehicle in the game (other than the premium tanks with preferential matchmaking, which get plus-or-minus 1 tier spread), rather than the old 3

guess that's what drinking a bottle of vodka every day during pregnancy does to you

You do know what a T-34 is, right? It's that tank that the russians built over 50,000 of. You know, without American help.

It was one of the compounding factors. While Americans stayed with the M4 despite all the obvious deficiencies the Germans kept coming up with newer tank designs, some of which served no practical purpose for their current situation. The Tiger was a breakthrough tank meant for offensive operations, they had little use for it when all the resources spent making it could have been invested in making more Panzer 4s.

An asinine claim as they come. Germany had already lost the war in 1942, with Stalingrad being the final nail in the coffin.

The doctrine of strategic bombing was a complete failure that didn't do all that much to stop German wartime production. This moronic claim that Germany lost because of the US is hilarious, when the vast, vast majority of their losses was in the East.

Hell, in the opening months of Barbarossa, despite the Red Army being in disarray, the Germans lost more troops and vehicles than in all previous campaigns combined. They were not equipped for a prolonged campaign and the assumption under which they operated is that the Soviet Union would quickly crumble, allowing for another quick victory. They gambled on this because their army and industry were not ready for a prolonged war of attrition, and especially not with Russia that could drown them in men and tanks.

Wrong
Let's talk about the Panther tank. The Panther is often castigated because it had a low serviceability rate, especially when it was first introduced in 1943. For example:

1). ‘Panther Vs T-34: Ukraine 1943’, p33 says:
2). ‘Panther vs Sherman: Battle of the Bulge 1944’, p10 says:
35%-37% is embarrassingly low. Right? Or is it?

What was the general serviceability rate for all the German tanks in the East in the same time period? According to ‘Panzertruppen vol2’, p110 the German rates peaked in June ’43 at 89% and then collapsed. The average for the second half of 1943 was 44%.
Not much difference between 44% and 35% is there? Did the other German tanks also suffer from mechanical problems or were there other factors at play?

Of course there were other factors: The low rates were mainly caused by the heavy fighting and lack of maintenance and not by "unreliability"

The T-34 was the most unreliable tank ever produced throughout the entirety of the war. Read
and see pic related for more information.

I never said the T-34 was reliable.

It doesn't matter how shit the T-34 was because Russia had 50,000 of them. That's equal to all the tanks Germany produced during World War 2, and they had a shitload more heavy tanks to throw at the Germans.

So what if a shitload of them broke down? Russians still had more tanks than the Germans during any given engagement. We can sit here and debate the hows and the whys, but Germany lost the war due to some serious miscalculations on their part and that's a fact.

This guy gets it

I'm half-German and raised in the U.S. I know and both sides of my history are painful.

Really childish reply. And completely baseless too.
They produced 57,224 of them and they lost 44,900 of them. Just a bit under 45,000 lost. The kill ratio between Russian and Germans was huge. It didn't matter how many tanks the Russians could make. Their tanks wasn't what beat the Germans.
Germany had all the means necessary to deal with the Soviet numbers. Like I said above however, America was already in the game and Germany had to fight the world's strongest superpower on the west while dealing with the Bolsheviks in the East.

Were America not to fight in this war, Russia would never even have the slightest chance of winning. That is a fact.

The only painful part of your German side is losing the war to the bankers.

Which didn't come till Mid 42 to 43 by which time Soviets upgraded their models slightly and generally fixing there shit. Also it was also facing the M4 Sherman which rofl'stomped them in North Africa. Not to mention it was still struggling with the Matilida II, Valetines and the Crusader Tanks just kept up with it till they eclipsed it with the 6pdr model. Same could be said with the Panzer IV's till they got upgraded but even then they were always at a disadvantage in terms of protection or either firepower compared to the Allied Tanks they were encountering.
You've pretty much highlighted the key point what everyone has been saying about German Tanks. They were not good stat wise, being inferiour in Armour and Firepower on average compared their contemporary Allied Counterpart that they faced at the time but made up for it with actually having a functional layout which was more important as well at least till later in the war relatively good reliability.
Rest is water on the gravy. Kudos for using the Panzer III vs T-34 argument and not trying to compare the Tiger I to a Sherman cause you would get slaughtered there as an user later in my post is about to be.

Honestly why the fuck do you get so fucking defensive in the face of these facts that anons are saying when you are downright agreeing with what they say here? If you don't want to get called a Wehraboo don't be retarded here.

M4 was a hell of a good Tank. You'd have to be retarded to say otherwise or buying into some serious bullshit. Compared to the vast majority of what the Germans could throw at it, it was only beaten by the Panther and Tiger Tanks, and even then in most engagements it actually won, slaughtering the Panther in the Bulge with the uparmoured versions giggling like schoolgirls as everything the Germans could throw at them simply pinged off. Even regular versions with the 75mm's could generally knock out a Panzer IV before the Panzer IV could knock out it.
Which each time it was used as such resulted in nothing short of but unmitigated disaster for the Germans. Even early war when they could go on the offensive this was especially the case. As it stands it was better used as a mobile pillbox in defensive operations. Hell it even lost to the Churchill in a Tank engagement which should be everything there needs to know about it.

Yep. I have read that German military intelligence underestimated Russia's military capacity by over 100 divisions at the start of the war. They estimated that the Russians had something like 80 divisions and capacity to raise 50 more in war time, they actually had well over 100 and capacity to raise like over 100 more. Of course lend-lease did not help either. Germany's biggest problem was strategic intelligence, which makes sense because it was quite literally them against the rest of the world and Japan and Italy weren't being that helpful.

No, that's precisely what matters when it comes to tanks. T34 was good enough and russians could produce more of them than germans could produce effective counter measures to those.

And if you don't have effective counter measures to tanks, infantry just dies or keeps falling back until they die.

Americans were bit retarded when it came to arming M4.

< Actual snownigger here.
Cease those bullshit talks. We all know tanks and machinery and light manufacturing and grain and gunpowder and steel and good engineers and … were not the best sides of "the best socialist regime in the world", but T32 is just an icon for the brainwashed mass to pray. Like when communists realised that "free love" doesn't work they implemented and institutionalized a government marriage institute, they realized people won't fight for CheCka so they instead resorted to "Alexander Nevsky" meme, they realized people need a religion and communism isn't a one to die for, so they come up with this "Victory Day" bullshit. I swear to God every single year there are more "found, dead, missed" russian soldiers, so it's even worse than holohaux, those figures grow bigger from around 6 millions to 27 and counting! How could someone miss such figures, Josya?
Like AK which is actually reliable because it's easy to break apart and build from shit'n'sticks because it was made by asian monkeys for asian and african monkeys to operate with (for the glory of the "great permanent revolution").

Now back to the topic: GUYS! GUYS! TRY RED ORCHESTRA! REAL INFANTRY AND TANK AND CALLING ARTILLERY AND AIRPLANE RECON AND JAPS AND RACIAL SLURS AND AUTHENTIC VOICES AND EVEN HISTORICALLY ACCURATE MAPS! - even though it is dead now thanks to tripwire's newest creation "vietnam".

I thought it had been dead for a long time to be honest. Played it back when it was a UT mod though. Man was I bad to start with.

Finally an user who isn't a massive double-digit retard when it comes to History.
Let's see:
By summer ’42 the Panzer III made up 51% of German tank strength. It had already received the longer 50mm by then and the Soviet T-34s were still mostly 1941/1942 models that the Pz.III could fight against with decent results. As for the Soviets fixing the T-34s, that never happened throughout the whole war. Not once did their T-34s got decent. They always lacked reliability and were really uncomfortable inside. Though the T-34/85 had a somewhat bigger turret.
They were excellent stat wise. Early in the war the Germans had indeed trouble with dealing with the heavily armored Allied tanks. But they quickly came up with solutions such as the longer 50mm, extra armor, longer 75mm for the Pz.IV and the Tiger.
If we want to discuss about terrible stat-wise tanks, then one only needs to look at the entirety of the Soviet armor.

Also:

From mid 1942 the PzIV was equipped with the longer 75mm gun KwK 40 that could destroy the T-34 from 1.000m. The basic armor was also increased to 50mm (from 30mm) plus 30mm bolted on and in 1943 80mm standard (for the front hull).
The upgraded PzIV was superior to the T-34 in internal layout, firepower, turret basket, optics, commander’s cupola, radio in every vehicle and its frontal hull armor could withstand the F-34 rounds. A Soviet study in 1943 admitted that the Pz IV was superior to their tank, assigning it a combat value of 1.27 to the T-34’s 1.16 (with the Pz III being the base 1.0).

The T-34/85 that appeared in mid 1944 was a harder opponent due to its new gun but the PzIV still had an edge in the ‘soft’ factors mentioned above. Moreover the heavier 85mm rounds limited the number that could be carried to 56 compared to the Pz IV’s standard load out of 87. The 85 mm rounds were not stored in a safe manner since 16 of the 56 rounds were in the turret This allowed the loader to use them quickly but it had the downside that a penetration of the turret led to the explosion of the shells and loss of the tank.

So what I am trying to say here is that not only were the Germans able to counter the Soviet tanks early in the war, their tanks continued to be superior till the end. Star wise the Germans had the advantage.

Despite me showing you the production and losses of the Soviet T-34, you continue to claim that the number superiotity of the Soviets was important. Look at these numbers one more time. From the 57,224 T-34s made throughout the entirety of the war, just under 45,000 of them got destroyed.

Red Orchestra 1 was dead a long time ago, no shit. Red Orchestra 2 is less of a playable game, yet manages to gather some playerbase specifically on my local - snownigger's - servers. Also there is uprising of chinks with their servers and shittalk. I remember times when i managed to play together with japs banging at 150+ ping; weird thing japs were actually proud of their perverted cartoons which were used as a propaganda tool against oncoming american soldiers.

are you talking about in the game or in WW2?

There's a lot of debate on that point, and they could be forgiven for having the mentality of "Well the 75mm can deal with all German Tonks we've faced, and we kind of want to keep that HE power cause we will likely see more AT Guns and Infantry since all they got is shifted East right guize?" Come late 44 they actually have a good majority of their Shermans armed with the 76. The real answer to the point was that they were not really retarded with arming it, they were retarded with how they deployed it. Attaching say an M36 or a couple of 76 Shermans per platoon would have solved a lot of issues.
Funny enough Germans late war suffered more for having not that effective counter measures to infantry.

Tonk night when?
We could do another weekend of it or just host randomly if we get enough fags together

Again you raise good points but it is water under the bridge.
My only criticism is that you are overly fixiated on the T-34, kind of ignoring the Brits and the US, hell even the French early war. As you say T-34 did get "manageable" by mid 42 and by 43 but once you are in 44 you've got the IS-2 to deal with even with the addition of newer heavier German Tanks. Now that thing was a nasty brute even performance figures leave much to be desired. It was in the same weight class as a Panther think it was lighter actually with more protection and firepower. Which actually makes me wonder, how the hell were German Tanks so heavy yet poorly armoured for their weight?

Sometimes the only thing more dangerous than a question is the answer.

Uh, yeah? So are 99.99% of the games in existence?
99% of games that claim realism have serious errors realism-wise, it's nothing special.

I think you faggots are missing the point here. The point of the game is to be fun. Is this game fun to play or is it not? I'm pretty sure plays miles better than most of its competition.

Shame Tokyo Warfare isn't cracked yet

Well it fails at that too because having a Russian tank penetrate your front armor like it's cardboard isn't any fun.

Why don't you get a russian tank then you quadruple nigger?

That's no fucking fun user I sure love having to play meta bullshit because everything else is garbage what a fun fucking game.

Gee I guess you could apply the same logic to call every RPG in existence an utter shit game.

But RPG's have never been good user :^)

Wasn't your argument if the game is fun it doesn't matter? Well the game isn't fun because you have to grind for weeks to get the tank you want only to find out you should have been using one specific tank that you now have to grind for weeks to get. That's not fun in any sense moron.

Oh so you're a perfectionist type of vidya faggot. You must absolutely have the best shit in existence because otherwise you're not happy. Even if you could stay in low tiers where shit's much more fun, you absolutely must get that level 10000000 item because otherwise you can't seem to win
and even then you'd be facing faggots with level 10000000 items and you still wouldn't be winning shit.

Face it, you just suck at the game and you blame it on the fact that the game has grind and builds in it, like any other fucking RPG.

they were spouting propaganda about how great jap's drawn porn is and how greatly it affected american soldier's mental health. I presume they take credit for the modern basement dwellers. This guy could talk about it for hours! Japs, you name it.

i play only my trusty Red Orchestra 2 as a squad commander.Laugh at me i don't care. I always get top score :)
ANGRIFF!

Oh so you're an illiterate faggot who couldn't read the part where everyone in the game uses bullshit meta tanks that can penetrate the front armor of anything that isn't a bullshit meta tank. Also low tiers aren't fun at all since most of them are in scout match making so enjoy fighting people you can't even hurt.

I played it a couple of years ago, I mained an anti-aircraft cannon. It can't survive one shot to the center of mass from any other vehicle but when it attacks it tears ass all over the battlefield. Every single attack from an enemy had 90% chance to end the match for me, and yet there I was, soaring at the top of the scoreboards, driving this one fragile as all fuck vehicle from start to finish.

In other words, you don't count on your armor to balk a few of enemy shells. The trick is not to get hit in the first place.

Saying german tanks werent that good when the king tiger, stug 3, and pz-4, exist means your probably retarded.

All of these had poor reliability and were a bitch to maintain and repair. Also they cost a ton of money and some of them had to steal soviet design elements because the german design sucked.

I do agree. I was saying that despite the flaws it did have the Americans preferred to stick with it, much like the Russians did with the T-34, than to constantly upgrade and fuck over their logistics by requiring massive quantities of varying spare parts for a dozen vehicles.

Another issue with Germans was that they had at least 10 different types of trucks in their inventory, from all the nations they had conquered, and that added even more strain on their logistics network.

By the end of the war upgraded Shermans could penetrate Tigers at any engagement range.

It's not a bad tank, it was just a case of too many cooks in the kitchen eventually straying far off from the original design and uparmoring it to the point the engine and suspension couldn't take it anymore. And then they went a step farther and used the same engine for the King Tiger.

That and the war with the Finish undersold Russian military capabilities. By the end of WW2 the Russians were doing what the German had done on a much, much grander scale because Stalin had relented and let the military do their job without fear of getting executed.

The biggest meme out of the whole debacle is people laying all the blame on Hitler, when the generals were equally, if not more, responsible for fostering a fantasy vision of a crumbling Russian army that would be quickly defeated.

this
look i like german tanks but saying they were ever the best tanks around is factually wrong

Because they were a bit tall and had a bit of dead weight/height thanks to frontal transmissions (and thus hull-length final drives to account for) raising the overall height of the hull to keep the fighting compartment sanely sized, and further had sanely sized fighting compartments in height & width to begin with. This makes it a bit harder to fit as thick an armor plate without increasing weight due to increased surface area, but is vastly preferable to having a blind deathtrap with nominally very thick armor that won't matter due to maneuver and death by flanking, logistics or inability to actually acquire targets and affect the battlefield because the crew cannot operate properly due to being trapped in a sardine can with ammo box flooring. The IS-2 in particular is a laughable vehicle; it mounts a gigantic turreted 122mm field gun, which must return to a neutral position like a battleship turret and stand completely stock still to reload. It's more of an assault gun than anything, which they already had the ISU-122 for anyways. Now, it served adequately in this role, mind, but this is less due to anything about the IS-2 as an effective fire platform and AFV, and more due to the fact that the Axis macrowar got severely fucked up on multiple operational levels due to a number of factors, allowing the Soviets to bumble their way towards Berlin with operational success (and nearly falling to pieces on the way, hanging on by a logistical & manpower shoestring at wars' end) in exchange for inhuman loss of lives & materiel.

Assuming you're on about War Thunder, no, not really. Burgers & bongs spam paper-armor huge-gun tank destroyers that mince everything they see through the midtiers and more importantly can zip into a perfect overwatch camping position before you're out of your spawn, effectively leaving them no disadvantages in spite of protests of 'but you can pen us with anything, what does it matter if we do the same but better ))))' while also spamming impenetrable Jumbos with more than serviceable guns to let them faceroll if you don't get a sneaky flanker on the job, while Soviets spam T-34s and a handful of KVs in every tier they exist in with ahistorical performance values and unsimulated weaknesses that keep them from getting their shitters smashed in for trying to wage a war of maneuver in a thin-tracked spastic-shell-fuzed blind deathtrap & get to travel at road speeds (near impossible to reach ON ROAD because of the unassisted transmission) on the roughest terrain, and the Germans & Japanese make do with workhorse tanks simulated as historical or worse while often having to suffer through a wasting death by laser-accurate CAS worse than the most overclaiming of Allied pilots could dream of after blowing out the first wave of wally or commie shitters expecting to camp in their oh-so-hidden position or hold W+M1 and win and paying for it, then spitefully hopping into planes. Also, all of the aforementioned Allied teams get to matchmake with each other on all maps with no historical ratio maintained (and non-lendlease vehicles allowed, and Soviet vehicles in the West & Africa) meaning they get to cover all their weaknesses.

This is also the best and least miserable tier I've seen even though all you get are Panzer IVs & StuGs to play with, since before that it's tinker tanks, and after that you get fed to faggot clubbers in downtiered Centurions in your '43 tank. Or par-tier Centurions, because they get to arrive ahead of schedule because reasons, just like how the T-34-85 gets to be par tier with the tanks it's chronologically meant and built to counter in spite of arriving in 1944 except infinitely worse because while the T-34-85 sucks cock and dies if you sneeze at its hull the Centurion is a brick at the front with a laser gun, excused because it's a little less maneuverable than the Panther. 'Matchmaking is qualitatively based, comrade. ))))))))))'

Principle and good taste. Soviet tanks a shit in near all respects. And they should be a shit ingame, but aren't thanks to every advantage in chronologically fudged matchmaking or falsified simulation being lent their way to satisfy the Russkie market of commieboo shits, allowing them to come above or stand par with vehicles that walked all over them. Have you been paying any attention to this market?

The King Tiger was a completely impractical, resource-wasting hunk of shit.

did someone say tonk night?

i'm a WoT guy but the fanbase is pure cancer and retardation. I need tank friends

This WOULD be a valid argument, were it not for the fact that the meta being contrived in this direction totally fucks the Axis, who actually have (what should be) shell-proof armor that serves only to weigh them down under 90% of circumstances due to Allied undertiering, complete failure to simulate shell shatter & glitchy fusing, and almost all maps taking place at knife fighting range where the Allies effectively aren't disadvantaged. And at the same time, early tier KVs and late tier Churchill get to be invincible diamond-angled shitters while Germans eat shit from historically rare turret shots to anything and everything they have and ahistorically accurate SABOT rounds straight through the Panther glacis.

You're insane. The StuG 3 was a workhorse that you could put through anything and have it come out kicking due to being a man-height pocket gun, the Panzer IV was equally reliable outside of the later variants nosing a bit at the front due to increased weight, both were cheap as dirt, and the King Tiger- unreliable not necessarily due to its design, but primarily because the logistics to support it were shot- didn't 'steal' a single Soviet design element beside the two plate sloped upper-lower glacis arrangement that they cribbed during the Soviet gigantism scare, more useful from a production rationalization standpoint than anything, as the Germans had already rejected it in favor of the flat plate arrangement due to its following the natural contour of a seated driver, thus avoiding wasted space & weight, and poor experiences with angled plates on their tankettes in the Spanish Civil War. It's rather obvious you're just here to bait, now.

It wasn't quite a fantasy vision considering how close they came, but yes. If you want to blame anyone in particular, look further beyond Junker general officers to Wilhelm Canaris & the Abwehr. They were even more traitorous, more incompetent, and in addition to being shit spies, actively sabotaged prewar diplomatic efforts, in particular resulting in Spain's refusal to join the Axis and thus the total failure to seize Gibraltar & partially close the Med.

I like how the 'completely superior' French tanks you snidely make example of happened to be overengineered cast hull one-man turreted artisanal claptraps that couldn't shoot or maneuver their way out of a barn regardless of French doctrinal inferiority. Save the one incident of the B1 marching into an ambush and plinking its way out thanks to the German undergunning problem letting it eat over a hundred hits, which everyone trumpets without concern for the hundred hits it could respond to with only the speed of a doping sloth. All they had going for them was nice slopey-dope armor, which was far more trouble than it was worth for sheer expense. Illiteracy as to the true weakness of the Panther with the 'still loses' remark, which is the fact that it was a underengineeredly rushed piece that was refused sufficient amendment resulting in miserable reliability 'til '44, is also expectedly trite. Nevermind the delusion of it being 'inspired' by the T-34 in anything other than glacis arrangement & spirit. You'd have to look to the VK 30 (D) for that.

Everything you said is a meme except for the cost other than that everything else you said is retarded especially stealing the designs. The reliability issue is half true on the tiger series with the transmissioms which were solved later.

I never said they were the best you retard, there wasnt a "best" tank, what i replied to was that german tanks werent even that good

I think I've just pointed out the retardation of this argument, no?
Yeah and they were so cheap even piss poor soviet nation could produce them in overwhelming quantities and zerg rush the fuck out of technologically superior enemy. Better technology alone ain't worth a shit. And besides, how would you even emulate two to three times numerical advantage of soviets in an equal player count teams?

The only thing that needs decided is what game we could all play. Does Armored Fist work?

wew

I'd never heard of it before, but a brief glimpse tells me it's from 1999. How would we play that?

I think what'd be more important is setting up a discord server or something, just something small and simple so we can communicate easily.

Probably over goyim ranger like anons do for other Novalogic games.
Discord is eh, I am not a big fan. Would have thrown my burner account into mail field but Board Kike got rid of that.
It's just a suggestion at this stage. Could fuck around more and look for other Tank games. There's bound to be something fun out there that's multiplayer and pirateable

Hello this is the best WW2 tank thank you

>But (((they))) wanted a slaughter and no amount of peace offerings from Hitler would ever keep the United States from joining the war.

Helps when you don't declare war on the USA as well.

It's a tank simulator. War Thunder explicitly professes to be one, and not an arcade game outside of the arcade mode, which is supposed to be 'arcade' only relative to the simulator baseline in that it has aim assistance and exaggerated vehicle maneuverability. It fails to simulate tanks properly. It also fails to be fun or balanced, being a skinner box that trolls the player into either desperate cash shop abuse or into being fodder for the cash shop abusers. It is not just a valid argument, it is the keenest and most relevant one as to why the game is shit.

Incorrect on all counts. Just to use the T-34 as an example, a large amount of poorly distributed steel armoring, hellish and obsolete Christie suspension, all-aluminum engine, suicidal sledgehammer operated transmission, cast turret & field gun armament do not a cheap tank make materially, nevermind the concept of 'cheap' in a command economy. Evaluation by the Americans showed that it would be as expensive as the Sherman while inferior in most all respects, even with the best possible standards for the vehicle sent for evaluation with maintenance by a Soviet engineer. Heavier vehicles become even worse in all of these aspects of inefficiency. The large number manufactured were a result of TOOLING, the type and amount of industrial machinery available & dedicated industrial resources towards them, not cheapness.

The vast majority of Soviet AFVs, T-34s in particular, were destroyed. Lost irrecoverably. They were complete shit outside of the extremely specific circumstances of WW2, in which Japan never manages to get its shit together and doesn't receive technical lend-lease from Europe until late in thanks to getting tangled up with China when the Anti-Comintern Pact fails to keep them from going at it and thus can't provide more than a mediocre showing at Khalkin Ghol while having little political will to intercept liberty ships through the Siberian route, German arms procurement lags and fails to radicalize itself when it can afford to in addition to the slow move to total war footing resulting in the early war gun-armor gap and the ability for the KV-1 & T-34 to act as crucial little operational & tactical speedbumps that butterfly things on the macrolevel, Germany's European allies end up armed poorly due to aforementioned industrial teethings and said allies own lack of capacity, and the US manages to go full bore grey war with massive lend-lease & destroyers for bases until Japan hands them a publically justifiable casus belli through the desperation attack on Pearl Harbor under crippling embargo. Modify the circumstances any number of ways and the Soviets will suffer yet further, the postwar borders will land further East, and with enough butterflies, the Wallies get to eat crow as the Soviets get spectacularly dismantled per the original 'kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will collapse' mindset.

It's worth a shitload. Individually higher quality vehicles achieving nearly 3-to-1 K:D ratios is insane. Actually proceeding on in a total war where you suffer a 1-to-3 K:D ratio is even moreso. The vaunted 'unreliability' of 'overengineered' German vehicles resulted from UNDERENGINEERING due to production rushes and providence, resulting in the Panther receiving an underpowered transmission & suicidal final drive (the T-34 was even worse than the Panther in this regard for the entire war, as noted) the Tiger I receiving only the short 88mm gun instead of a long 88mm gun due to a 10cm too small turret ring, and the King Tiger existing in the first place due to the slightly heavier and preexistent Lowe project (which could've been constructed with a bigger, meaner engine amongst other things with the extra wiggle room) being terminated in favor of Porsche's VK 100.01 drafts that eventually ended in the Maus, constructed to bridge a phantom gap against the equivalent Soviet superheavies that ended up canceled & scrapped in the panicked retreat of Barbarossa, to prevent another KV-1 style gap from forming. Amongst other bits & bobs.

Straight two to three times numerical advantage of the Soviet team on some maps; two to three times more respawn points on others. Depends on which is balanced where and how, since the former would represent a shock assault, and the latter the suicidal reconnaissance-in-force strategy the Soviets were keen on. At the same time, enforce horrendous vision maluses & gunsights on Soviet tank players and historical communication problems, with only some players being able to send messages and others only to receive them or perhaps not even that, along with other wonderful things like the IS-2's hideous reloading process. It is a ragtag lemming rush of half-coordinated shit-eating grunts.

In exchange, Germans have rather well coordinated support abilities ala call-in artillery and normal vision & historical stats for gun handling and so on instead of the current heavily nerfed arrangement, but are stretched rather thin in how often they can use the former, while Soviets have large-scale shock artillery barrages of questionable accuracy but good supply. Variant matchmaking can also be thrown in of early Barbarossa tanks fighting their current uptiers in large numbers in an inverted matchup, of 1:1 ratios of more qualitatively equal vehicles, and alternate history matchups. However one does it, balance should be largely historical, and should be largely asymmetric. The current arrangement of nonsensical infantryless urban & hillock knifefights and catering to T-34aboos and flavor-of-the-month Centurion players is shit, and far worse than the brief stint of Tiger II spam that was supposedly so intolerable. Never even got to see this sinful period for which Axis players are now perpetually punished.

I appreciate these posts

The US was already at war, just not formally. The declaration of war against the US held the possibility of playing to Germany's advantage if everything went well, but it obviously didn't.

hello quickybaby

good taste

You're god tier user. I wish I had your patience.
Here are some somewhat rare pictures ss a token of my appreciation.

I really love the Comet. Nice to see a British tank that is actually aesthetically pleasing for once.

"The Sturmtiger would cause balance issues and won't be included in WT"
"Also we're giving this Soviet rocket launching tank to select people :^)"

Forgot my images like a retard.

You do know that there was american help to set up factories in the Soviet Union pre-war? You do also know that by the end of the war over 60% of soviet raw materials came directly from the US, right?

It's a tossup whether in hindsight you should blame the Americans or the Italians. If Mussolini hadn't been too adventurous Or if he hadn't been handicapped by the same thing all Italian generals have been through the last thousand years or so, namely having to lead Italians and been able to properly support Case Blue Moscow would have fallen in 41', and with all of European Russia liberated the Bolsheviks would have been reduced to squatting in the Urals.

But user, basement dwellers existed for years before anime was brought to the west. Unless you want to blame the nips for Star Trek or American comic books, which is what your average basement dweller of yore would obsess over.

As far as the World Wars go, the problem is the inverse. The Italian military had absolute dogshit old guard officers; think the most traitorous reactionary dickhead Junkers and their outhouse coup plotting, and only the most traitorous ones, except nowhere near as competent. Even under these circumstances and certainly when led by German officers in the puppet Italian Social State, Italian forces acquitted themselves very well. The problem with Italy is that in spite of the vigorous, triumphal appearance of the March on Rome, Mussolini essentially acquired a government of compromise. He was appointed by the king, and operated in a one-party state that nonetheless retained a large number of former socioeconomic trappings. The transition to corporatism was slow and ineffectual. The conviction to lose amongst defeatists was immense. So on and so on.

Italian industry was immodern and unable to expand without either external help or a serious kick in the ass ala a large-scale reorganization. Italian arms procurement was even laggier and even stodgier than the worst parts of the Heerswaffenamt, resulting in oiler-cycled guns that jammed up in North Africa (though their low small arms quality is exaggerated sometimes due to how sheerly fucking bad the Breda 30 is; production quality was good with lots of skilled milling, engineering varied, but nothing was good or cheap enough) and too little too late tank development that left a slew of immodern light tanks & tankettes for North Africa and no time to catch up with proper cruiser & medium tanks, plus worst of all their early planes being built with old style wooden construction to withstand G forces the pilots themselves could never survive, such that they were heavy, ungainly, and underpowered, none emphasizing this more than the Breda Ba. 88 Lince; derived from a world speed record breaking prototype, with advanced design elements well ahead of its time, an aggressive profile, and more, it had all the makings for a perfect early war heavy fighter-bomber. The problem is that once the production models were rolling out, which were cheaper and ungainlier than the prototypes that weren't shackled by this schizoid old style construction- which Italy couldn't afford to produce en masse without some butterflies thanks to lacking nickel & chrome for engine alloys- and once said models were loaded down with guns & bombs, they couldn't fucking fly properly. Nothing worked as it was rated to and theoretically should have, the engines were weak, the wing loading was high, the whole frame was too heavy. Once they added sand filters for North Africa, they couldn't fly at all, and had to be used as decoy targets at airfields. The Social Republic tried to fix them, testing three with a modified two meter longer wingspan for the Luftwaffe as a ground attack craft, but this never went much of anywhere. Other gaffes abound, like the failure to select a semi-automatic rifle for mass production in spite of coming very close in the prewar, and the whole mess of cancelling transition to the new 7.35mm cartridge intended to replace the obsolete 6.5mm Carcano.

If you ask me, to fix Italy, have Mussolini take power by force and kick out all the outmoded relics as needed, with the King having even less nominal power than he did OTL. A civil war with an awkward coalition of right-left elements trying and failing to placate the syndicalists & socialists while suppressing the fascists as some suggested leading to open warfare between the military, the Fascist Party, and the futurist-leaning syndicalists against the left-syndicalists & communists is my ill-educated guess at a good formula. How wide-reaching the effects of this would be on things other than Italy becoming a more competent military-industrial apparatus I don't know, maybe Mussolini'd be more gung-ho about protecting Dolfuss and the Austrian state if we don't add some more butterflies down the line, or maybe he'd be more inclined to get friendly with Germany earlier and send Dolfuss down shit creek in spite of ideological differences after France & the UK clamp down even harder on this more revolutionary state than they did in OTL over the Ethiopian misadventure, which resulted in a complete embargo on rare metals from these powers, resulting in a slew of problems. They only briefly got around this through the Turks, but then Britain bought two years of exclusive access to their chrome production in 1938, totally fucking Italy over. They didn't even need the chrome, so whether it was a strategic maneuver against Italy or pure providence I don't know. If Italy is even less happy with the League or a total outsider to them early, maybe they can get into German orbit quicker, which plants them where they can suck up the rest of Finnish rare metal production that Germany isn't using, and avoid horrible quality problems. Close German-Italian military-industrial cooperation from an early stage through this divergence would also be a massive aid to unfucking immodern Italian industry so that they aren't using whacky high-quality low-effectiveness milled goofguns.

It wasn't so much a failure as it was a necessity. Italy simply lacked the industrial power and resources to make a switch in time so they pragmatically chose to stick with what they had least they get saddled with a logistical problem on their hands.

I think the primary reason Italy did so poorly in the war is because a career in the military was not viewed as a prestigious occupation like in Germany, so the Italian military got stuck with the most incompetent and retarded sons of the nobility and the rich, the kind that have neither the intelligence nor the bravery to lead men. As for the rank and file their heart wasn't in the fight since they really saw no real purpose in the war. Mussolini failed to galvanize them and instill in them a sense of purpose, unlike what Hitler or Stalin did with their troops (though with the Russian it was more an outpouring of sheer stubborn tenacity than anything Stalin did).

I honestly appreciate the analysis. I confess I'm not nearly as well versed in the political situation and rise to power of the Italian Fascists as I am the NSDAP.

I would say for both the Italians and the Japanese, while you can debate about the 6.5x52 and the 6.5x50 all day long they were effective enough for small arms and wartime is not when you want to be caught changing your mainstay caliber. The changeover should have stopped as soon as the bullets started flying.

...

And that children is how we went into Vietnam with a modified 1930's era battle rifle.

Of course not.

But they went in with a number of 7.35mm cartridge using weapons anyways. Had they continued transition, the logistical problem would remain unabated for a time, but at least they would've had more well-supplied modern cartridge guns than well-supplied immodern cartridge guns, and eventually done away with the problem. Italy is really just a strange riddle, as they weren't technically inept, but simply couldn't pull off Kraut space magic tier use of limited materials and didn't cut enough fat in the right places in procurement. They were even just short of the cutting edge of jet development with the Caproni Campini N.1, which- although a motorjet and not a turbojet, and had notable hurdles to get over like the pilot baking with the canopy closed and a low efficiency of fuel to thrust- might've resulted in a very interesting aircraft along the lines of an earlier Mikoyan-Gurevich I-250 if it got more and quicker development eventually leading to a descendant hybrid design with both propeller & motorjet exhaust.

A plausible explanation to the sheer deficiency of the reactionary officer base, probably one attested to by history, though I probably shouldn't leap to it as fact without some more reading. A problem that could be alleviated in the early Social State divergence (though probably not under that name) through meritocratic purging & reorganization alongisde rearmament. Not Stalin-style firing lineups, mind, rather discharges, returns to the academy and folding over into the general army of incompetents while bringing competent lower officers and younger graduates upstairs to replace them. Nearly as militarily messy to get interrupted in the middle of compared to the Soviet reorganization, but with a positive overall effect on the army once finished and not taking so long that it's likely to be interrupted in the first place. Lots of vigorous young blood to spill and be blooded, instead of lots of old men of admitted but questionable experience getting young men to die for not much at all.

More than this, it's a sheer outpouring of pent-up psychoses of men and women ruined by a totally stifling, soul-crushing communist dictatorship, followed by wartime fucking them up further and getting them Stockholm'd to shit anywhere that the occupation doesn't go cleanly enough for the Axis to be openly welcomed as liberators.

I just know a thing or two. Namely, that anything that went wrong for other members of the Axis in terms of internal troubles and disloyalty went twice as badly for Italy, with the addition of everybody being really milquetoast about it.

It rather did, but in the middle of things. Hence, why they ought to have simply gone on with the change and not cancelled the semi-automatic rifle selection, right on the cusp of bearing fruit. Transition to a war economy makes the notion of 'expense' meaningless, and since the tooling will be screwy either way, may as well go full steam ahead and transition the old cartridge guns to the reserve over time.

The Sherman was probably the best as-deployed design, overall, as far as good grunt medium tanks go. The Panzer IV falls narrowly behind it, while the T-34 sucked cock. The MAN Panther was the most ahead of its time, but was miserably shackled by engineering expediencies that simply weren't affordable for a fast pocket heavy/proto-MBT designed with 1943 technology thanks to the 'we can smoothly transition to mass production!' meme that resulted in its unrealistic and rushed selection over the VK 30 (D). The Tiger did its job as a heavy breakthrough vehicle in addition to a lovely defensive tank-to-tank fighter, its only great weakness being poor ability for independent exploitation of its own breakthroughs due to short range and having a gun a bit too small for its size even if it was ultimately more than serviceable. The Panzer III was more or less better than the Panzer IV in all respects save that its turret ring was too small to mount large high-velocity guns.

I still firmly maintain the best vehicle you could theoretically contrive out of the T-34/Sherman/Panzer III-IV tech & cost range would be a Panzer III with widened top superstructure & turret ring to pull double duty in the III & IV's original roles, a better engine & strengthened front suspension, some brand of KwK 42 and a sloped glacis plate to serve as a kind of midget Panther in the 35ish- to maybe 40ish ton range.

Also going into early Korea with little more than Stuarts & Chaffees before we could get the more modern stuff in there.

And here on display is the WoT/War Thunder mouth breather that thinks anti tank performance is the only quality that matters. I'm sure you enjoy day dreaming of 500 Shermans charging 50 Teutonic Knight Tigers, when the reality is Sherman crews would simply call in an airstrike, artillery or tank destroyer support and then continue on wrecking German infantry with their HE rounds who don't have any armor of their own even at the divisional level.

Which has proved to be an excellent design that returned to mainline service in Iraq and Afghanistan.

implicit russian culture

...

I thought the Panzer was a better tank but they just had way more Shermans.

It just kept getting better after the Comet.

Now you're just deploying canards of the opposite extreme.

WW2-era CAS is universally infamous for overreporting kills to excess. Getting a credible hit on an AFV with bomb or rocket is far harder than mouseaim plus lacking dispersion might inform you, and unless you're striking the top armor of an AFV in the steepest dive at the flattest angle or getting the engine deck at a somewhat less steep one (or lighting off a leaky Panther deck) you're not going to do shit with wingboard 20mm cannons. The main thing CAS actually did to the Germans in the timeframe you're thinking of is make moving by daylight complete hell to impossible, and more importantly harass the shit out of supply lines. Direct destruction of AFVs was not the order of the day.

Good in various cases for ersatz AT work, but not the end-all be-all you seem to think it is. You need multiple direct hits in the right places and by the right guns at the right angles to produce the right kind of spalling, shattering or turret-displacing effect. Otherwise, it's just going to put some fatigue on the armor and make the tank ring like a church bell.

I should not need to remind you that American officers' notion of separated corps of non-universally AT capable medium infantry support tanks (a fair few people were NOT happy during and after the war that the Pershing took as long as it did to get into service, forcing the Sherman to soldier on and suffer unnecessary casualties) and paper armored tracked TDs with 'speed as armor' acting as attack spoilers was absolutely laughable, and outside the few good anecdotes (in the particular circumstances you've described, with the Germans in poorly condition and force concentration where they can be absurdly flanked in the first place rather than the spoiling forces getting minced by supporting guns & armor the moment they cross the horizon line) in practice just resulted in either pain, or no one following the doctrine, either because it's fucking stupid compared to the tank destroyers acting on their own & camouflaging themselves for ambush or not necessary in the first place as they rove around as infantry support vehicles.

'An excellent design' that had innumerable problems. I'll spare you too much paraphrasing and just link a good article & summarize.

looserounds.com/2015/01/30/the-m14-not-much-for-fighting-a-case-against-the-m14-legend/

It's not cheap, it's not reliable, it had bad quality control, was unexactingly engineered, couldn't be accurized worth a shit but was still attemptedly accurized because of army ordnance momentum to the agony of everyone issued one as a DMR, and just kind of sucked dick compared to the Garand in every way other than having a detachable magazine. M14 is a meme.

don't make me cum, user

It was pressed into service as a semi-DMR because foot patrols desperately needed something with better range than M193 and was resoundly hated by everyone who used the damn thing. But hey if you're going to seriously defend a rifle that requires re-zeroing after a field strip I won't be the one to stop you.

Actually, the American concept of TDs did work, in the sense that if you're trading a TD for a German tank the US came out on top. Problem is that it was unnecessary clutter that relied far too much on being at the right place, at the right time to do any good. It was far easier to make a tank that could deal with both hard and soft targets than shuffle TDs around to where you think the German tanks might be.

That being said we have TDs today too, in the form of attack helicopters and some Stryker variants, so the concept did not die and proved to be successful when the emphasis was put on strategic mobility.

Post tank waifus.

Based on what? British training flights? Fact is, German tank crews were so terrified of CAS they abandoned their tanks half the time. They wouldn't have been shitting their collective pants at the mere hint of a CAS flight if CAS aircraft consistently missed most of the time.

I'm not talking about 1v1 direct fire. Get your head out of broom closet chokepoint WoT/ War Thunder maps. A full battery barrage on an emplaced armored formation would thoroughly disrupt them

Based on what? British training flights? Fact is, German tank crews were so terrified of CAS they abandoned their tanks half the time. They wouldn't have been shitting their collective pants at the mere hint of a CAS flight if CAS aircraft consistently missed most of the time.

I'm not talking about 1v1 direct fire. Get your head out of broom closet chokepoint WoT/ War Thunder maps. A full battery barrage on an emplaced armored formation would thoroughly disrupt them

The grim concept of a 'trade' of equivalent manpower and somewhat less materiel than the enemy lost is not one that can ever be accepted, save under conditions where such a sacrifice is actually and entirely necessary lest one face obliteration. And in such cases, it must be an open decree, undertaken by the fanatically loyal and willing to die. Not a bunch of poor yankees in an overgunned shoebox. You can't use paper TDs in an offensive capacity except under conditions where there effectively is no defense, which is quite a situational one.

Precisely my point. It's more often going to result in a 'trade' as described above, at best, or worse in just getting blown to pieces. Or otherwise, in the use of the tank destroyer as a shed-sized AT gun attached to its prime mover. The Germans did that better or at least cheaper anyways with their AT halftracks and the ill-fated RSO/PaK 40, a dead simple combination of an actual prime mover with its AT gun on a flatbed, which though a bit troubled by high profile and ergonomic troubles in the initial versions- they were not well liked, but amended versions were conceived with a lower, wider profile & center of gravity and capability mount a PaK 43- would've been very helpful for reducing equipment losses in the East had the entire project not been lost in the fucking mail.

And I quote, 'despite the decision to have Steyr shift its entire production line into RSO/PaK 40, no specific order reached industry, and only the approximately 60 pre-production vehicles were ever manufactured.' The Heer was asked how many they wanted, the Heer responded 'ALL OF IT,' to which Steyr replied with their finger off the transmission button, 'Okay, how much of 'all of it' do you want initially?' And then crickets. And then sweeping cancellation of tracked Steyr vehicles while other similar Waffentrager projects flounder. Had it been conceived of earlier and amended at the time it was originally conceived, it might've reaped a mighty toll doing what a paper TD does best; being a glorified towed gun with shoot & scoot capability and ability to immediately displace for greener pastures in a fighting retreat.

These are both rather different from the concept of the paper TD, which essentially rolls around like a tank division and tries to engage in pseudo Schwerpunkt-style concentrated counterattacks against other armor. These others are air cavalry, which is both fast and surgical and destructive enough to justify its fragility, and the latter is an overgunned IFV meant to provide support to infantry while being technically capable of punching at tanks. To do so is is POSSIBLE, but not necessarily wise. Likewise, spoiling flanking attacks with paper armor vehicles aren't always impractical, as demonstrated in the Gulf War & Iraq War when Bradleys scooted up on Iraqi tanks and blapped the shit out of them.

But to undertake this in the fashion of a strategic reserve of non-armor acting as counterattacking armor, rather than in highly overgunned non-armor exploiting a gap non-armor can survive exploiting- which is what the Americans were actually doing when they succeeded in flanking so and so Panther brigade in the armor anemic western front, more ideal waters than the doctrine called for or saw as necessary- is patently unwise. Remove the German tank shortage, and in other ways lean out the order of battle & remove ability for situational & operational impunity of American movement, and suddenly running riot with Hellcats is a substantially less realistic proposition in the face of horrid casualties.

...

The argument in favor of the strategic bombing has shifted to all the long 88s and men it kept away from the frontlines and the attrition inflicted on the Luftwaffe rather than its intended goal of damage to German industry.

The Soviet method of tracking losses greatly inflates that number. Any tank that was unable to fight for whatever reason was counted as "lost". A T-34 that ate its transmission didn't have a spare immediately available was "lost". There were T-34s that were recorded as lost multiple times and then drove into Berlin.

Meanwhile both the US and Germany used the M1 Abrams method. Sure it got penetrated, sure the ammo cooked off, sure the crew had to be swept out with a broom and everything except the hull is toast, but we're gonna send it back to the factory to be rebuilt so it's not a loss. Theseus' Tank.

It makes it hard to compare tanks directly. Fortunately it doesn't really matter for conversations like this, because tanks were a long way from the #1 killer of other tanks. I can't find the numbers since Google changed their algorithm to display nothing but recent news, but if I remember right it went antitank guns at #1 with almost 40%, then artillery, infantry, aircraft, and antitank mines, then tanks with around 3%, then antitank rifles coming in last with like 1.5%. I don't remember if these were just US numbers or global.

The 75mm M61 APCBC was capable of dealing with everything the Sherman faced by 1943, it just wasn't issued because Leslie McNair was a firm believer in the retarded tank-destroyer concept. The Soviets issued it and its good performance produced part of the disparity between the American view on the M4 (death trap) and the Soviet view (equal to the T-34 but nicer and more reliable).

Italian also wasn't a unified language at the time. There were a handful of major dialects descended from the old city-states and common words often meant three or four different things. This gave birth to the old rumor that Italian soldiers were so uncoordinated that they had difficulty telling left apart from right, when really "left" and "right" just didn't have universal names.

That's untrue. Attached picture is a Panzer 4 struck by a 250lb bomb (explosive filler ~67lb, compared to ~80lb for a 5.5" medium field gun). Direct application of large amounts of HE is a very effective way of killing tanks even today, most of the M1s lost in Iraq were lost to daisy-chained IEDs made out of artillery shells.

I have to say, calling a 140mm gun-howitzer a 'medium gun' is a very misleading naming convention on the part of the British. But pardon me, I should amend that statement, which was very short compared to the rest. You need multiple direct hits by a par-caliber gun to what the tank is armed with and relatively armored against, or else by an above-par caliber gun, to produce the right affect. Frontally, a 75mm low-velocity gun is going to need to ding a late Panzer IV a good couple times (except maybe in that glass jawed turret, which isn't so stiff a contender) before the situation might become critical. A Tiger is likely to be able to weather 105mm shells to a similar degree. Nominally, the Tiger 2 might resist 122-152mm shells to some degree, but depending on what Soviet reports you'll believe and whether you fall into the camp of German armor quality decreasing due to production rushes or not decreasing resulting in lower AFV production (the answer is likely both in different runs & lines) it would suffer cracking, and thus can't be called invincible. Similar results are likely for similar equivalent vehicles in other nations' inventories. This is still a rather high shell diameter & filler for not a great deal of AP effect due to the differences between high & low velocity guns and the dynamics of solid shot or APHE penetrator shells versus pure HE shells. The same with bombs, for that matter.

A further clarification; the original statement the user made was that a Sherman, with omnipresent and ever-accurate support apparatuses, a fallacious exaggeration, would just 'call in artillery' on whatever they saw and couldn't penetrate. The problem here and the point I attempted to communicate, rather feebly to my regret, is that getting a large number of HE shells indirectly on top of a target like an AFV is no easier than getting a good bomb sling or CAS rocket attack in is. It happens, but it is not the norm, though perhaps moreso than tank-to-tank losses are on a statistical level simply because there are a lot more tubes than there are armored tubes on tracks. So I am rather not trying to say that HE cannot do anything to an AFV without a very large disparity between armor thickness & shell diameter with good, direct hits, but rather that without a decent disparity and a direct hit or repeated ones if it's not a terribly large shell compared to the armor, there isn't much artillery can do to a shrapnel-proof box. And the problem is getting direct hits with an indirect barrage. I apologize for having been insufficiently clear.

Interesting point on the Italian language issue, by the by. I had no idea there were still large enough dialectic gaps to actually cause tactical & operational miscommunications by the '30s & '40s. Perhaps a good element of an early-divergent Italy scenario would be Mussolini, amongst his other more radical acts compared to OTL, sets a crew of linguists to throwing together a state pseudo-dialect for use by its institutions & the military to prevent these communication hiccups, selecting or creating universal words for universal concepts? It's not likely to do much about the sheer number of dialects nor intended to, nor is it likely to be one of his more popular ideas- ala his conception of a more spartanly virtuous base diet for Italians in the future, this in a country of gourmands- but it's feasible to destroy military miscommunication alongside a 20s-through-30s restructure, right?

It's like you don't even know how to have fun.

There are dozens if not hundreds of older simulators with better gameplay, physics, damage modelling, etc. Why not play those?

The same shit applies to the aircraft in War Shitter, user.

Examples, please? IL-2 runs like shit on my toaster, though

Don't make me break out the pasta

Fuuuuug nvm

The amount of autistic Tank discussion on this thread makes me wonder if I should resurrect /tanks/

Perhaps you could nominate it for the Attention Hungry Games over at /sudo/

Now there's an idea.

I would have preferred if they didn't nerf the shit out of HESH rounds to save their precious Tier 5 premium cash grabs

>< Actual snownigger here.
Evidently.