Sequoia Posted January 26, 2020 Share Posted January 26, 2020 Well I don't think the Pershing was too little too late as the Allies won the war. Just as more Panthers would have been better than the King Tiger, lots and lots of the reliable Shermans was an excellent strategy. Tank vs Tank duels was only a small part of what Tanks were used for. Even vs the Panther the Sherman the had the advantage of at least being more likely to get there when you needed it. I think people underestimate how much maintenance has to be performed on heavy tracked vehicles. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted January 26, 2020 Share Posted January 26, 2020 Sarge, I'm pretty sure the JSIII never saw action against the Germans. Still Steve has hinted at possibly including things like it however. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted January 26, 2020 Share Posted January 26, 2020 2 minutes ago, Sequoia said: I'm pretty sure the JSIII never saw action against the Germans. It didn't, hence the 'Pretty Much' part of the comment.....But damn wouldn't be cool if it had! "Not so tough now, eh Mr Kingtiger?" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougPhresh Posted January 26, 2020 Share Posted January 26, 2020 I had really thought the tide had turned on the hardware obsession that used to plague wargaming. For all of the StG-44s, King Tigers, Jets and camouflage, the Germans lost the war. The Germans themselves accomplished more with the lowly Kar98k, Panzer 38(t), Bf 109E and feldgrau than they ever did with any amount of wonderweapons. The Red Army that flew the flag over the Reichstag or the Allies that smashed German army after army evidentially had good enough equipment to win the war. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wadepm Posted January 26, 2020 Share Posted January 26, 2020 14 minutes ago, DougPhresh said: I had really thought the tide had turned on the hardware obsession that used to plague wargaming. It would appear not. Is it why BF are focusing on late war instead of starting at the beginning? Maybe. To me it would have been so much more interesting to do the games chronologically so we could experience for our selves the immense changes that occurred in equipment. As well as understand that part of the war that never changed... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted January 26, 2020 Share Posted January 26, 2020 20 minutes ago, DougPhresh said: For all of the StG-44s, King Tigers, Jets and camouflage, the Germans lost the war. The Germans themselves accomplished more with the lowly Kar98k, Panzer 38(t), Bf 109E and feldgrau than they ever did with any amount of wonderweapons. If it were a toss-up between 'Feldgrau/Panzergrau' & IS-3s, I'd take the early war every time.....But then a small part of me would begin to hanker for Dicker Max, Sturer Emil, KV-220 & the SU-100Y to become available, regardless of their actual rarity. PS - The inclusion of the PZ.II Luchs in ALL of the WWII titles always amuses me, it was only ever intended to be an interim type and only one hundred were made.....IIRC only 4th & 9th Pz. Divisions had a full complement in their recon battalions. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougPhresh Posted January 26, 2020 Share Posted January 26, 2020 20 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: PS - The inclusion of the PZ.II Luchs in ALL of the WWII titles always amuses me, it was only ever intended to be an interim type and only one hundred were made.....IIRC only 4th & 9th Pz. Divisions had a full complement in their recon battalions. The Americans only encountered Tigers 3 times in North West Europe, yet they are in the base game of CMBN and only 11 Elefants were present throughout the Italian campaign yet we have those too in CMFI. To their credit @Battlefront.com have started to round out the OOB and TOE of the less glamorous units. CMFI with RTV is truly comprehensive, exempting of course anything to do with the Italians - The Italians before the armistice are not up to par with the other forces across CM titles, the RSI and Co-Belligerents are totally absent as are the partisans. Still, each title has improved the depth of the TO&E in leaps and bounds. The improvements in one title make it over to the others in packs and modules, which I appreciate. I might wish existing campaigns and scenarios got touch-ups to factor in on-map Flak, or flamethrowers, or whatever else is new, but overall I can see a sharpening attention to detail. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltungswaffe Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 I live for the day we get a pack with lots of what if's, like, oh I don't know, ...E series Panzers. In the meantime, a little cold water for M-26 fans. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 That is a great video. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markus544 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 Is it not true that the Soviet arms industry usually cranks out poorly put together weapons of war. The idea being that it's going out to fight and get smoked at some point, so make'm cheap make'm durable and let's roll.. Forward for our Motherland. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aragorn2002 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said: That is a great video. Sure is. 'They never go back to the source..' Damned right they don't. American army only met Tiger I tanks three times between D-Day and VE-Day.... Sherman almost had as much frontal armor as the Tiger.... Shermans were NO deathtraps... Edited January 27, 2020 by Aragorn2002 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ts4EVER Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 5 hours ago, markus544 said: Is it not true that the Soviet arms industry usually cranks out poorly put together weapons of war. The idea being that it's going out to fight and get smoked at some point, so make'm cheap make'm durable and let's roll.. Forward for our Motherland. Absolutely not true. If anything they made rock solid, reliable stuff without bells and whistles. Like the AK, which a child can use in his sand pit and still shoot someone with. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warts 'n' all Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 Hopefully the year ahead will see an end to a certain someone calling Steve and Charles "Motherf*ckers" on youtube. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wadepm Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 Wha? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kohlenklau Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 Samuel L. Jackson plays CM...? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 19 hours ago, Ts4EVER said: Absolutely not true. If anything they made rock solid, reliable stuff without bells and whistles. Like the AK, which a child can use in his sand pit and still shoot someone with. +1 Was watching the "World of Tanks" TV series in Netflix and it made the point that the Soviets realized that their tanks would not last more than 2-3 months at best on the battlefield. So, no point building them to last longer. No point sanding down welds etc. The Germans' Achilles heel was their desire for beautifully engineered machines that would last a lifetime. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Attilaforfun Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 T34s are still being fired up on youtube. Panthers couldn't make it 100 miles w/o mechanical issues. You may want to think about that last sentence. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danfrodo Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 I have read that a big part of the panthers issues were due to meddling from hitler. The vehicle was designed to be ~35 tons. Hitler demanded more frontal armor, which makes total sense unless you realize the increase in stress on the drive train of ~1/3, up to 45 tons. More armor is always better. Unless the tank needs to move. The transmission was not designed for that load; better steel could handle more stress but better steel needed resources that were in short supply. So the transmissions failed terribly all through 1943. Soviets chose to up-gun the T34 to the T34-85 w/o a significant increase in hull armor. Not because they were stupid (well, outside of Stalin) but because that's what the drive train could handle. And to make a difference in battle the tank had to drive to the battle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 27 minutes ago, Attilaforfun said: T34s are still being fired up on youtube. Panthers couldn't make it 100 miles w/o mechanical issues. You may want to think about that last sentence. The point of the TV program was that the German machines were beautifully over-engineered for equipment that had a short life. Building more cheaper units was successful for the Soviets. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Attilaforfun Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 I hear ya. I just watched some Russians pull a T34 out of a swamp. Cleaned it up and got it running. Maybe the video was here. I was really impressed. On the flip side I've got a 73 Steyr Pinzgauer (Austrian not German engineering...former Swiss Army) that fires up and tears up the WY countryside every Spring. Zero maint. Not bad for a nearly 50 year old German(ic) military vehicle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 Re: 73 Steyr Pinzgauer I like those types of vehicles. Would be great in the deserts on the UT-AZ border where I spend a lot of time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Attilaforfun Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 They are fun but slow on the highway. And way way way too cold to drive in the WY winter when it'd be the most useful! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 No heaters???!! I guess we need the Norwegian versions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 I recall reading during Winter' 44 frostbite was much more common among US tank crew than infantry. Inf could snuggle into a nice warm foxhole to keep warm while tankers basically sat in a refrigerator. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 (edited) Hmm. Let's say I have my doubts. It's not hard to put a basic heater in a vehicle, and on cold nights you're supposed to run your engine once in a while anyway to keep it warm and the radio batteries charged.. P.S. Besides most of a tank crew's time is spent outside the tank. Edited January 28, 2020 by Sequoia P.S. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.