Jump to content


Top Five Tanks of WW2


  • Please log in to reply
696 replies to this topic

Tiger_23 #41 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 20:58

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10155 battles
  • 10,207
  • [-NHL-] -NHL-
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

1-StuG

2-T-34

3-Sherman

4-PzIII

5-Valentine

 

now, fite me irl


Edited by Tiger_23, Jan 23 2014 - 21:23.


EnsignExpendable #42 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 20:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View Post1_ace_1, on Jan 23 2014 - 14:56, said:

 

To be fair, all the tanks broke down a lot back then. Including the t-34. At least the Panther had a good gun and it's life expectancy was more than 2-3 hours...

 

150 kilometers before the final drive fell out. Even the earliest T-34s were not this unreliable. 

 

View PostTiger_23, on Jan 23 2014 - 14:58, said:

1-StuG

2-T-34

3-Sherman

4-PzIV

5-Valentine

 

now, fite me irl

 

Panzer four more like panzer fail



SULOMON #43 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 20:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 6853 battles
  • 11,185
  • Member since:
    09-25-2011

View PostKanzler_Bismarck, on Jan 23 2014 - 19:48, said:

Really? No.

It broke every 150km and 45mm anti tank went straight through the side armor.



EnsignExpendable #44 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 20:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostSULOMON, on Jan 23 2014 - 14:58, said:

It broke every 150km and 45mm tank 14.5 mm ATR bullets went straight through the side armor.

 

FTFY



MagicSeagull #45 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:01

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 4 battles
  • 866
  • Member since:
    08-15-2013

View PostEnsignExpendable, on Jan 23 2014 - 21:58, said:

 

150 kilometers before the final drive fell out. Even the earliest T-34s were not this unreliable. 

 

 

Panzer four more like panzer fail

Umm, when the panzer 4 came out it was miles ahead of anything the russians had, all the panzer 4 had to worry about was t-46's and bt tanks. it was the workhorse of the german army and produced many successful tanks based on its chassis.

Not fail at all if you ask me



Tiger_23 #46 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:02

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10155 battles
  • 10,207
  • [-NHL-] -NHL-
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

View PostEnsignExpendable, on Jan 23 2014 - 16:58, said:

Panzer four more like panzer fail

 

Still better choice than the Panther...

 

 



ramp4ge #47 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:05

    Major

  • Special Beta Testers
  • 333 battles
  • 9,868
  • Member since:
    06-16-2010

View PostMagicSeagull, on Jan 23 2014 - 12:01, said:

Umm, when the panzer 4 came out it was miles ahead of anything the russians had, all the panzer 4 had to worry about was t-46's and bt tanks. it was the workhorse of the german army and produced many successful tanks based on its chassis.

Not fail at all if you ask me

 

When the Panzer IV came out it was a 100% dedicated infantry support tank, so it didn't really matter what tanks the Russians had. Panzer IV wasn't built to fight them.

 

Also, first-generation Panzer IVs had what, a 40mm vertical glacis?



EnsignExpendable #48 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:06

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostMagicSeagull, on Jan 23 2014 - 15:01, said:

Umm, when the panzer 4 came out it was miles ahead of anything the russians had, all the panzer 4 had to worry about was t-46's and bt tanks. it was the workhorse of the german army and produced many successful tanks based on its chassis.

Not fail at all if you ask me

 

When it came out, it had an obsolete leaf spring suspension, a piddly 75 mm low velocity gun, and worse armour than the PzIII. There was nothing special about it, but it had a bigger turret ring than the PzIII, which made it last longer as a viable combat design. I can promise you that it wouldn't be running into any T-46es. If you think that, you should go read a history book and learn what tanks the Soviets actually had.

 

View PostTiger_23, on Jan 23 2014 - 15:02, said:

Still better choice than the Panther...

 

A rusty bucket is a better choice than the Panther.



MagicSeagull #49 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:08

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 4 battles
  • 866
  • Member since:
    08-15-2013

View Postramp4ge, on Jan 23 2014 - 22:05, said:

 

When the Panzer IV came out it was a 100% dedicated infantry support tank, so it didn't really matter what tanks the Russians had. Panzer IV wasn't built to fight them.

 

Also, first-generation Panzer IVs had what, a 40mm vertical glacis?

it still dosen't mean the tank was fail, it was still miles ahead for its time. 40mm of armor was a fair amount for the time, when most tanks still had popguns as cannons



ramp4ge #50 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:09

    Major

  • Special Beta Testers
  • 333 battles
  • 9,868
  • Member since:
    06-16-2010

It wasn't really miles ahead of anything. It was a big, relatively thinly-armored box with a dated suspension design and a low-velocity short-barreled gun.

 

Later when it was up-armored to a half-decent glacis and the L/48 it was a decent tank--in fact I'd say it was probably the best all-around tank Germany had. But by that time it was hopelessly dated too.

 

Meanwhile, 45mm and 57mm AT guns that could penetrate it at combat ranges were fairly common.



EnsignExpendable #51 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View PostMagicSeagull, on Jan 23 2014 - 15:08, said:

it still dosen't mean the tank was fail, it was still miles ahead for its time. 40mm of armor was a fair amount for the time, when most tanks still had popguns as cannons

 

The Soviet 45 mm model 1932 gun could penetrate that much armour at any reasonable combat distance. The PzIV had no features that placed it ahead of anything.



Tupinambis #52 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:10

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 36220 battles
  • 15,272
  • Member since:
    12-22-2010

1. M4 Sherman

2. StuG III

3. T-34

4. Jagdpanzer 38t

5. SU-85/SU-100

 

Japanese Chi-Nu gets an honorable mention for being an excellent design, since it *approached* the T-34 and M4 in hard power stats, but only weighed 20 tons.

 

I'm not sure about the Tiger or Panther since they were hideously over-engineered and, for those reasons, weren't "war winning" tanks. The Panther and Tiger, in the grand scheme of things, probably hurt Germany's ability to win the war. There's a lot more to a tank than simply being effective in combat.

A strong tank design isn't necessarily a GOOD tank design.



furydog44 #53 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:13

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 4740 battles
  • 239
  • Member since:
    07-20-2011

1.) T-34 85 Over 50,000 of these suckers were made!

2.) M4 Sherman, because it's a sherman

3.) The almighty Tiger tank. Brought fear to a lot of battles

4.) Would say King Tiger, but it suffered many Mechanical problems. So I'll go with the terrifying Panther I tank

5.)  Panzer IV it was better than a lot of other medium tanks of it's era.

 


Edited by furydog44, Jan 23 2014 - 21:13.


supershutze #54 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 4723 battles
  • 8,291
  • Member since:
    08-27-2011

In terms of most important?

 

1. T-34

 

2. M4 Sherman

 

3. Stug III

 

4. Panther

 

5. Panzer IV



EnsignExpendable #55 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:15

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View Postfurydog44, on Jan 23 2014 - 15:13, said:

1.) T-34 85 Over 50,000 of these suckers were made!

2.) M4 Sherman, because it's a sherman

3.) The almighty Tiger tank. Brought fear to a lot of battles

4.) Would say King Tiger, but it suffered many Mechanical problems. So I'll go with the terrifying Panther I tank

5.)  Panzer IV it was better than a lot of other medium tanks of it's era.

 

 

And yet you put the T-34 and Sherman over it, so which medium tanks of its era was it better than?



Tiger_23 #56 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:16

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10155 battles
  • 10,207
  • [-NHL-] -NHL-
  • Member since:
    07-27-2010

View PostSULOMON, on Jan 23 2014 - 16:41, said:

Why do people keep picking the crap Panther? It broke down a ton and was knocked out by 1930 technology.

 

Because is German, ''Sexy'' and German >.>

 

Also, looks at this sexy British lady m8, cute as Bridget Jones :3

 

 

 

Panther is bad, you should feel bad m8



BabyOlifant #57 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:17

    Major

  • Players
  • 10718 battles
  • 6,135
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    03-06-2011

is-2 shouldnt be on there because it doesnt suck nearly as hard as all the rest

 

this is the top five shittiest tanks of wwii right?



LEROYthePIMP #58 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:19

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 34421 battles
  • 268
  • Member since:
    09-29-2012

View PostKnuckleduster_2015, on Jan 23 2014 - 20:13, said:

5. JS-2 model 1944 with forged hull

 

4. Panther Ausf. D

 

3. Tiger

 

2. Panther Ausf. G

 

1. King Tiger

 

Wha da fu no Russian tanks but thete sooooo good in this game ? Lol



collimatrix #59 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 12102 battles
  • 2,794
  • Member since:
    02-01-2011
By "top" you clearly mean "which tank is the tallest."

In that case, I think the top tank of WWII was clearly the T-35, at a whopping 3.4 meters tall.

FISSION_CURES_ANIME #60 Posted Jan 23 2014 - 21:19

    Major

  • Players
  • 33897 battles
  • 3,222
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-23-2013

1. M4 Sherman

 

Fought on both Western and Eastern front, excellent in both anti-infantry and anti-tank roles. Over 3x as effective as Panther. Also, 'Murica.

 

2. T-34

 

Stronk medium tank of proletariat smashes fascist box tanks. Only #2 because of American nationalism.

 

3. Panzer III

 

Best German tank design of the war. Main flaw was small turret ring.

 

4. IS series

 

Germans, this is how you build a heavy/breakthrough tank.

 

5. StuG III

 

So gangsta. Pretty effective too.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users