gredeker Posted July 11, 2001 Share Posted July 11, 2001 The best tank is the one that is in the right place at the right time. Seriously, I tend toward assault gun & tank destroyer combos (stuh/wespe and hetzer for Germans, priest/m8 hmc and hellcat for americans - haven't played the Brits enough except to know that the croc is lots of fun). In terms of actual tanks, I've got to go with the Panther or the Sherm Jumbo 76, although they're both too expensive for the point values I'm usually playing with (which is why I go with the cheaper combos). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patton_71 Posted July 11, 2001 Share Posted July 11, 2001 The problem with these discussions is that we are really debating the accuracy of CM's designers points values of the vehicles, and nothing about their historical value. That being said, in the game, I find the STUG III answers nicely. Good enough firepower for anti-armor, and definitely capable in the infantry support role too. With the price of usually around 100, I think it's a bargain. ( By the way, anyone who uses the 1000 Stuart tactic is nothing but a gamey bastard) Historically speaking, the most effective tank on the western front 44-on has to be the Sherman. Easily(especially when considering the multitude of chassis sub-types) equipping the majority of the western allies armor, it also had the reliability and the ruggedness for all types of terrain. The maintenance nightmare that was the German army could not even cope with the lowly Sherman's stallar record of dependability. ( kind of like a reliable old ford to a porsche that is always in the shop) Patton 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88mm Posted May 13, 2003 Share Posted May 13, 2003 Agreed on that. There must be something wrong here. while most player call the Hetzer crap, the germans in WWII loved it. Now if the Hetzer was that bad, why would they love it ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted May 13, 2003 Share Posted May 13, 2003 The Hetzer is actually a true CMBO favourite with almost all players I know. In CMBB the insane turn rates hurt it badly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nippy Posted May 13, 2003 Share Posted May 13, 2003 Originally posted by redwolf: The Hetzer is actually a true CMBO favourite with almost all players I know. In CMBB the insane turn rates hurt it badly. I loved the Hetzer in CMBO. The huge slope of the front armor would shruge off 75mm hits and the main gun did wonders on the Sherman and Cromwell series. In CMBB it's already outclassed by the T-34/85. The 85mm gun will go through front armor (God help you if the T-34 has tungston) and the main gun on the Hetzer has problems penatrating the front turret on the T-34/85 series at any extended range. The Hetzer is okay for busting up SU-76s and the odd T-34/76, but when the T-34/85 and JS-2s start showing up, the Hetzer is fudged... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted May 15, 2003 Share Posted May 15, 2003 Actually, the change in front armour description hurts the Hetzer more. In CMBO, it had a slope of 60 degrees, which was pretty solid, especailly in hull down. In CMBB, it now has a 'curved' front plate, which is pretty poor - it counts more like 30 degrees on average. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Posted May 17, 2003 Share Posted May 17, 2003 There's several reasons why Warmaker's so right. The Germans may have developed the best tank tactics prior to and during the beginning of WW 2, but the appearence of the T34 clearly displayed the lack of progress in German tank design. (yes, yes bar the Tiger) So to a certain degree they were playing catch up. The Tiger, whilst an excellent tank is quite heavy, hard on spares and slow to build. The Panther on the other hand weighed less, was a less complex design and easier to build. It also utilised the exsisting 75mm based on the Pak 40, simplifying production once again. Truth is, they couldn't build enough of them by that stage of the war anyway, Too little Too late. And the allies, well it's got to be the T34 doesn't it. Lovely sloped armor. Mass production at it's finest and easily upgradable. (just pop on another turret with a bigger gun) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybubb Posted May 17, 2003 Share Posted May 17, 2003 i've been reading for the last little while which tank is the most effective for the money. imust agree that for germans it is the STUG III and the us it is the STUART 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted May 18, 2003 Share Posted May 18, 2003 Originally posted by Richie: The Panther on the other hand weighed less, was a less complex design and easier to build. It also utilised the exsisting 75mm based on the Pak 40, simplifying production once again. Truth is, they couldn't build enough of them by that stage of the war anyway, Too little Too late. Actually, Panther's gun (KwK 42 L/70) was different from the PaK40 or the KwK 40 L/48 on PzKpfw IV. KwK 42 penetrated more than the 88mm on Tiger I. Panther's frontal armour was also more resistant than that of Tiger's because of its slope. Flanks were weak. It is interesting that T-34 was originally a pre-war design, but is even today in the inventory of some less privileged armies. Not that I'd step into one if the enemy had anything better than RPT's (Rocket Propelled Toothpick). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Posted May 19, 2003 Share Posted May 19, 2003 What you say is true Sergei. I do have numerous books tucked away in boxes and I should load my brain first. I'm aware of the improved performance over the Tiger I's 88 and of the fact that the Panthers gun slightly improved on the PaK 40 etc... Can someone enlighten me on a couple of points. How heavy were the shells for the L/70 (surely it's easier to chuck them about than the shells for the Kwk 36 L/56) and were the shells retro compatable between guns, say with the L/48? I know storage was a little more on the Tiger I despite the larger shell. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Posted May 19, 2003 Share Posted May 19, 2003 Besides, the Panther is fast and mobile. It can take a hit or two without brewing up (if used correctly, in pairs) With a bit of infantry support there isn't much you can't do. It's nice to know you can exchange a few rounds at range with most other tanks out there and most times come out alive. Except for the Jabo's... :mad: And that damned Tungsten... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted May 19, 2003 Share Posted May 19, 2003 LoL! Who dug this one up? CMBO: I loved the sherman 75. That is all I ever bought and it worked great for me. The key to the sherman was patience. You can easilly take out a panther from the side, take Mark IV's and StuG's head on. Not only that, but with 3 mg's and a great HE load they were death to infantry. Cant wait for CMAK to come out so I can get back in my sherman 75 and sherman 105! CMBB: Hands down the StuG III. Cheap, great gun till the end of the war and near indestructible when hull down until the T34/85 shows up. I have even heard them called gamey in a game before! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[UF]fridericus Posted May 20, 2003 Share Posted May 20, 2003 first: armor and guns of tanks in cmbo have many numbers, but interesting is only one point: enough or not? so it can take only the values 1 or 0. cheap tanks without real high velocity are worthless, what do want to do with a burning wreck of a cheap tank, when you could still have a living, expensive tank. most light vehicles, which could try to flank out enemies heavy armor, can be killed by 37mm and 40mm aa-guns. so you need tanks to deal with enemies heavies frontally. as german i use: tiger 2 (kingtiger), hetzer, psw 234/3 as us: jumbo76, hellcat, greyhound, m8hmc as uk: churchill 8, daimler so you have the superiority at the point of the battlefield, which is the most important to you. 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.