chuckdyke Posted March 7, 2021 Share Posted March 7, 2021 3 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said: Utopian games can be great. Same as non-historical or fictional scenarios. I will have a look at CW and try out a Demo first. I meant Combat Mission is 'Utopian' compared to tabletop wargaming. The people here seem to underestimate the L7 105 mm NATO gun. At least till 1972 it could take on anything the Soviets could throw at it. The Sagger ATGM outranged the M60 and Centurions by 1 km and their armor had become obsolete. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anonymous_Jonze Posted March 7, 2021 Share Posted March 7, 2021 (edited) 54 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said: Ahum...I'm 57, my friend. I may sound wise for my years, but I'm still fit as a chap of 37. But you're right, it's especially the elder generations that like the Eastern front. Probably has got something to do with Cold War sentiments and the threat of that time. In my youth the mood was very anti-German when it came to WW2, which isn't strange of course. And yet people were much more interested in German military actions and equipment than that of the Allies. But it's the same with the Napoleonic period. Napoleon was after 1815 also seen as a butcher and a criminal and yet everybody is fascinated by that little megalomaniac. I wasn't around for the Cold War but studying the history of Russia was what made me an Eastern Front fan. Something about two titanic terrible regimes punching each other to death on the steppes. Edited March 7, 2021 by Anonymous_Jonze 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E5K Posted March 7, 2021 Share Posted March 7, 2021 Yes everyone has there favorite. Eastern front Western front. But one thing I look at is The Russians have tanks that can stand up to the big cats. Yes the Firefly is tough. But not JS 2 tough. Just sayin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aragorn2002 Posted March 8, 2021 Share Posted March 8, 2021 20 hours ago, E5K said: Yes everyone has there favorite. Eastern front Western front. But one thing I look at is The Russians have tanks that can stand up to the big cats. Yes the Firefly is tough. But not JS 2 tough. Just sayin. Everything considered had the Russians the best tanks of the war. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Dare Posted March 8, 2021 Share Posted March 8, 2021 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Dare Posted March 8, 2021 Share Posted March 8, 2021 t-shirt I'm wearing just now... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted March 8, 2021 Share Posted March 8, 2021 21 hours ago, E5K said: Yes everyone has there favorite. Eastern front Western front. But one thing I look at is The Russians have tanks that can stand up to the big cats. Yes the Firefly is tough. But not JS 2 tough. Just sayin. JS 2 is a field gun on tracks firefly is an AT Gun in a tank. Comparing apples with oranges really. I am not a huge fan of the firefly it was a product of innovation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Probus Posted March 8, 2021 Share Posted March 8, 2021 4 hours ago, chuckdyke said: I am not a huge fan of the firefly it was a product of innovation. Not sure I am following you. Do you mean it was just pieced together and wasn't a new design? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E5K Posted March 8, 2021 Share Posted March 8, 2021 1 hour ago, Probus said: Not sure I am following you. Do you mean it was just pieced together and wasn't a new design? I think the firefly brought the Sherman type tank up to par with German armor in fire power. yes the turret had to be modified to fit the 17 lb. But I think it was worth it. The US should have adopted the 17lb when they had a chance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E5K Posted March 8, 2021 Share Posted March 8, 2021 7 hours ago, Aragorn2002 said: Everything considered had the Russians the best tanks of the war. All in All I would have to agree with you sir. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E5K Posted March 8, 2021 Share Posted March 8, 2021 7 hours ago, Dan Dare said: Now thats an accessory. And as the enemy gunners adjust there optics to get a better look. Boom there off to Valhalla. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 5 hours ago, Probus said: Not sure I am following you. Do you mean it was just pieced together and wasn't a new design? Exactly it was not a tank in the strictest sense of the word. An innovation shoehorned a 17 pounder ATG in a too small of a turret. Kudos to the people who served in it. Better the 77 mm of the Comet, there they produced a different shell for the gun. Easy for us to judge what is a good tank. Brews up the other guy and the armor protects you excellent. We don't sit in it and operate it from the PC. We sit in a computer chair with a cup of coffee clicking at leisure. Never mind the smaller size of a T72 for example, its 125mm gun can penetrate an Abrams. That a tank is good in a PC game doesn't mean it is good in real life. JS III in the Sinai vs Israeli Shermans in 1956. Guess which tank came out on top it was not the JS III. Both tanks were an improvement on the WW II counterparts. 28 Shells takes 2 stages to load the gun and has a lower rate of fire. People have the right as a computer gamer to call it the best tank in WW II. I disagree happy gaming. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethaface Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 4 minutes ago, chuckdyke said: Exactly it was not a tank in the strictest sense of the word. An innovation shoehorned a 17 pounder ATG in a too small of a turret. Kudos to the people who served in it. Better the 77 mm of the Comet, there they produced a different shell for the gun. Easy for us to judge what is a good tank. Brews up the other guy and the armor protects you excellent. We don't sit in it and operate it from the PC. We sit in a computer chair with a cup of coffee clicking at leisure. Never mind the smaller size of a T72 for example, its 125mm gun can penetrate an Abrams. That a tank is good in a PC game doesn't mean it is good in real life. JS III in the Sinai vs Israeli Shermans in 1956. Guess which tank came out on top it was not the JS III. Both tanks were an improvement on the WW II counterparts. 28 Shells takes 2 stages to load the gun and has a lower rate of fire. People have the right as a computer gamer to call it the best tank in WW II. I disagree happy gaming. Neither the JS III or the Israeli Super Sherman served during WWII. Although those Israeli Shermans were upgraded in a similar 'innovative' way like the Firefly's 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Lethaface said: Neither the JS III or the Israeli Super Sherman served during WWII. Although those Israeli Shermans were upgraded in a similar 'innovative' way like the Firefly's I wrote (copy and pasted) Both tanks were an improvement on the WW II counterparts. Edited March 9, 2021 by chuckdyke 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 9 minutes ago, Lethaface said: Neither the JS III or the Israeli Super Sherman served during WWII. Although those Israeli Shermans were upgraded in a similar 'innovative' way like the Firefly's Like the Easy 8 American 76 mm Shermans could be called a completely different tank. The Russians did something similar put a different turret on a T34. The 17 pounders was put in a standard M4 turret which was according the YT experts too small (Chieftain and David Fletcher of Bovinton museum). I take their word for it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethaface Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 3 minutes ago, chuckdyke said: I wrote (copy and pasted) Both tanks were an improvement on the WW II counterparts. Yes but any improvement after the fact doesn't really have validity in discounting what was the best tank of WW2. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 2 minutes ago, Lethaface said: Yes but any improvement after the fact doesn't really have validity in discounting what was the best tank of WW2. This forum calls it the best tank of WW 2 the best in what? Lower rate of fire 28 shells only ergonomics in the turret. Are the arguments against it. I imagine to be located inside the blast of an exploding 122 mm HE shell is not a pleasant experience. For the 28 shells and lower rate of fire, the solution is 2 JSII tanks. Quantity has a quality all its own. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethaface Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 8 hours ago, chuckdyke said: This forum calls it the best tank of WW 2 the best in what? Lower rate of fire 28 shells only ergonomics in the turret. Are the arguments against it. I imagine to be located inside the blast of an exploding 122 mm HE shell is not a pleasant experience. For the 28 shells and lower rate of fire, the solution is 2 JSII tanks. Quantity has a quality all its own. Don't know who calls it the best tank, I didn't. Also not sure of the value of comparing a heavy tank (IS2) to a medium tank (Sherman). Anyway, just thought that your mention of the performance during the Sinai conflict wasn't relevant for that argument 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 20 minutes ago, Lethaface said: Don't know who calls it the best tank, I didn't. Also not sure of the value of comparing a heavy tank (IS2) to a medium tank (Sherman). Anyway, just thought that your mention of the performance during the Sinai conflict wasn't relevant for that argument The best tank is the one which brings victory. The Sherman was a winner during the war and in post war deployments. It did the role a tank is supposed to do. The topic was the ISII the best tank in WW 2 I just committed the unforgivable sin to disagree with it. How many JSII's or Tiger tanks are still in running order? It still fought in the Sinai and on the Golan heights up to more than 25 years later. Naturally, it is relevant even in this game it is an excellent weapon. Outgunned? use it to call in a fighter bomber other HQ Sherman makes it operate under an umbrella of artillery. But if you don't look further than the gun or armour the argument of mediocre carries some, I said 'some' weight. I think it is better to keep my mouth shut on the forums. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aragorn2002 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 14 minutes ago, chuckdyke said: The best tank is the one which brings victory. The Sherman was a winner during the war and in post war deployments. It did the role a tank is supposed to do. The topic was the ISII the best tank in WW 2 I just committed the unforgivable sin to disagree with it. How many JSII's or Tiger tanks are still in running order? It still fought in the Sinai and on the Golan heights up to more than 25 years later. Naturally, it is relevant even in this game it is an excellent weapon. Outgunned? use it to call in a fighter bomber other HQ Sherman makes it operate under an umbrella of artillery. But if you don't look further than the gun or armour the argument of mediocre carries some, I said 'some' weight. I think it is better to keep my mouth shut on the forums. No, don't. On this forum you're allowed to express your opinion. I'm sure Lethaface fully agrees. Let's not get too sensitive or demonize each other (as I personally experienced on several occassions), but let's keep this forum open minded and in good spirit. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethaface Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 1 hour ago, Aragorn2002 said: No, don't. On this forum you're allowed to express your opinion. I'm sure Lethaface fully agrees. Let's not get too sensitive or demonize each other (as I personally experienced on several occassions), but let's keep this forum open minded and in good spirit. Indeed, @chuckdyke if we always all agree with each other we never learn anything new and are of no value to one another; if nobody dare to share their (subjective) opinions than this wouldn't be a forum. Disagreeing is not something bad imo, nor is it to be proven wrong. Actually I personally see it as a virtue to be able to change ones mind after being presented with convincing arguments. I have certainly been wrong plenty of times in my life and will probably be engaged for the rest of my life finding out more of those occasions (learning & improving). Also I like logical arguments and enjoy training reasoning skills by pointing illogical arguments out Anyway I still don't think the comparison between IS2 or Sherman makes much sense, nor that performance of Israeli M-50/M-51 Supersherman in Sinai has much to do with their WWII performance. That's just my view Anyway on another note the strategic importance of the Sherman and all it's variants is probably larger than the strategic importance of the IS2 in WW2. However I'm not sure whether the same could be said for the T-34, which is more similar type like the Sherman. They were all 'winners' though, as in that their host nations won the war. However also that doesn't necessarily mean that all their hardware was the best from all perspectives. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 @Lethaface we make our judgements in regards which tank came closest to the MBT concept of postwar Europe. 3 tanks shined in that regards during WW 2. The German Panther, The T34/85 and the Sherman Easy Eight with the 76 mm Gun. The Sherman Easy 8 was a Johnny come lately, around Christmas 1944. Post war Europe they had the tanks they wanted during WW 2. Only the ATGM made them obsolete. The Josef Stalin family became obsolete quickly, its gun was a field gun and not a tank gun. In the Sinai it showed its weakness it was designed to beat the static German army of 1944. Against the maneuvering Israeli army, it just sat in a static position. The T34/85 as a tank was much better it carried the ammunition required in an MBT around 60 and as a tank it was suitable for pursuit. The strength of the Sherman was that it could be used as a tank and already as a FiST vehicle. The name was not invented yet. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Probus Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 38 minutes ago, Lethaface said: Anyway I still don't think the comparison between IS2 or Sherman makes much sense, nor that performance of Israeli M-50/M-51 Supersherman in Sinai has much to do with their WWII performance. That's just my view OK, OK. The only way we are going to solve this is to extend the Cold War game to include Joseph Stalin and SuperShermans. I don't see any other way around it. (We may need to cut partisans from Fire and Rubble and have those folks work on Cold War 1950s tanks for the Sinai so no schedules will slip. Ah heck, just include the 1946 WWIII option while your at it.) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 The Chassis of the JSIII's was used to transport intercontinental missiles during the cold war. The dinosaur still had its uses. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thewood1 Posted March 9, 2021 Share Posted March 9, 2021 https://www.amazon.com/Soviet-T-10-Heavy-Tank-Variants/dp/1472820517/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=T-10+osprey&qid=1615299248&s=books&sr=1-1 I read this last year and it talks about how the JS3 was almost nonfunctional. It had so many engine and powertrain issues most were never even able to support training. It took a fairly big effort to get them in place in the victory parade. The T-10 (initially follow-on JS tanks) were built to rectify those issues. The JS3 would have never been a factor in anything but a very short duration war. Some JS3s were re-engined for export. 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.