Jump to content


STOP F-ING THE GERMANS OVER! (E25/SPIC)


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

Defender2803 #21 Posted Jun 17 2016 - 06:55

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 17101 battles
  • 96
  • [DP] DP
  • Member since:
    08-18-2011

View PostLegiondude, on Jun 16 2016 - 22:33, said:

The E 25 follows the stats laid out by Spielberger in Special Panzer Variants well enough, though it still stands to be brought up to date with the dimensions presented in Panzer Tracts 20-1(as in, it should be approaching Kanonenjagdpanzer size) it will remain protected by WG's "No nerfing premiums" policy

 

Type 59 was nerfed...forgot...the T22...gut punch.

Edited by Defender2803, Jun 17 2016 - 06:58.


Legiondude #22 Posted Jun 17 2016 - 09:09

    Major

  • Players
  • 20522 battles
  • 23,193
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostDefender2803, on Jun 16 2016 - 23:55, said:

 

Type 59 was nerfed...forgot...the T22...gut punch.

Type 59 preceded the nerf to the Super Pershing, which instated the policy

 

And the T22, being a reward tank and thus not paid for with actual cash directly, is not applicable under it



ManicDVLN #23 Posted Jun 17 2016 - 18:23

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 18605 battles
  • 633
  • Member since:
    06-19-2013

Everyday, new believers of Russian Bias, it's like I don't even need to make awareness threads. 

 

If you piss them off, they will come.



aethervox #24 Posted Jun 17 2016 - 18:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 27033 battles
  • 2,845
  • [PFLL] PFLL
  • Member since:
    08-19-2011

Not that anyone will care but take a look at how WG 'F-ed' the Ger tier 2-4 arties.

It used to be the Bison - the StPzII - the Wespe (I believe). Anyway - quite 'historical'.

Now the Ger tree contains a POS English vehicle at tier 2 - the Wespe at tier 3 and not one but two arties at tier 4 (one being the StPzII). Now - very 'unhistorical'.

Since 'when' should the Ger tech tree contain an English vehicle? Total Garbage.



WulfeHound #25 Posted Jun 17 2016 - 18:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 12919 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011

View Postaethervox, on Jun 17 2016 - 12:44, said:

Not that anyone will care but take a look at how WG 'F-ed' the Ger tier 2-4 arties.

It used to be the Bison - the StPzII - the Wespe (I believe). Anyway - quite 'historical'.

Now the Ger tree contains a POS English vehicle at tier 2 - the Wespe at tier 3 and not one but two arties at tier 4 (one being the StPzII). Now - very 'unhistorical'.

Since 'when' should the Ger tech tree contain an English vehicle? Total Garbage.

 

Because as it turns out, the Nazis used whatever they could get their hands on, whether it was French, British, Russian, or American.

 


Edited by WulfeHound, Jun 17 2016 - 18:52.


Apache1990 #26 Posted Jun 17 2016 - 20:38

    Major

  • Players
  • 35603 battles
  • 6,976
  • Member since:
    06-16-2011

View PostObsidian_Death, on Jun 17 2016 - 00:15, said:

why is the auto loader now dependent on firing all three rounds in order to reload? Keep in mind you could fire off after waiting the 20+ seconds and the 3 seconds between each shot, 2 rounds and hit reload and start cycling up for  3 rounds and now you have to use all three rounds an then you can reload a new 3 rounds ( it doesn't carry that many rounds ).

 

Press C.  If that doesn't work, check your control settings, because it still works for me.

Obsidian_Death #27 Posted Jun 18 2016 - 02:42

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 42796 battles
  • 104
  • Member since:
    12-10-2012

View PostRiptide109, on Jun 17 2016 - 04:21, said:

Oh boy. For one, the E25 was never built, and its size was barely touched in its HD remodel. The gun is to compensate for the good mobility and camo, and who can complain about a decent gun that shoots like an autoloader? Now, the SP1C. All autoloaders require you to reload the full mag reload even if you shoot only one shot. Decent players know when to reload, and it's not that hard.

 

Edit: From what I'm looking at right now, you have 4207 battles in your E25 and almost 1000 in your SP1C. The nerfs to the E25 took place in like 9.12 or something. and you obviously know how to play the E25. Why start complaining now?

The E25 was built and the issue is all the sources in that some say yes it was at trials and others that say no, and then some saying that at the end of the war the Training field get RF'ed ( Rat F@*ked ) meaning all this stuff was up for grabs by either Americans or Russians and in this case it was the Russians. Hulls were found and all the variant types of guns as well. Keep in mind it's like the NAVY currently testing the Rail Gun, it's there and being tested but is not on a ship as of yet but could be on the mock up in NM ( there is a full size to spec Carrier in White Sands NM in the desert to test weapons plat forms on ). I'm not sure what book this guy has but it does explain that it was created and being tested and that they vanished at the very end. https://youtu.be/nNhPkq3H4sw

View PostLaceylace, on Jun 17 2016 - 04:27, said:

The tank was never built lol. Please do some actual sources or something before you claim that it was "Real" and "had these features". Lol.

http://zxhistory.blo...f-e.html       https://youtube.be/nNhPkq3H4sw         https://sites.google...Heer/e-series /

Laceylace: there are also other sites that  state it wasn't built so the question becomes who is right or wrong or just had more resources and with you being German and being able to read it you shouldn't have issues with both the Pro and Con sites for this tank...Recht oder falsch?

View PostLegiondude, on Jun 17 2016 - 04:33, said:

The E 25 follows the stats laid out by Spielberger in Special Panzer Variants well enough, though it still stands to be brought up to date with the dimensions presented in Panzer Tracts 20-1(as in, it should be approaching Kanonenjagdpanzer size) it will remain protected by WG's "No nerfing premiums" policy

This tank was small for the size and just a bit bigger than a Hetzer not the size of the Konenejagdpanzer, granted they did toy with a 50 ton version and the 50 ton version seems more to what the Konen was, but the Konen was created much latter.

View PostMini_Katyusha, on Jun 17 2016 - 04:54, said:

LOL this post must be a joke (just like E-25 is a joke to begin with) Can u explain us all how a never developed nazi crazy project for a 25 tons multi-role tank chasis under the massive weight of the allies pouncing the german industrial capacities and huge lack of resources and qualificated manpower could be smaller than Hetzer, a well proven CZECH made veteran weighting "only" 16 tons??? 

 

Dirizon: Interesting dude no battle played ever but almost 2k post? I can smell tons of hatred and racism here. You should go and try some of your great patriotic murican tank games... wait! there is none... go play some wacky bloody murican game, anyway, lol

Mini Katyusha: The Germans realized this issue and this was the fix in that this tank would be modular in the sense that the Hetzer was and not complicated like the Tiger and all the other tanks in the inventory and they experimented with a two man version and the for man version at 25tons. In what I've seen on all the historical stuff yeah this was based off the Hetzer and modified with many variants in the works despite the war coming to a close...

 

E-25/1 Jagdpanzer - Assault gun/tank destroyer armed with 7.5 cm PaK 41 L/70 and 2.0 cm FlaK 38
E-25/2 Waffentrager - Weapon carrier armed with 10.5 cm GebH 40 L/28
E-25/3 Waffentrager - Weapon carrier armed with 15 cm sFH 18 L/30
E-25/4 Flakpanzer - Self-propelled anti-aircraft battery armed with 3.7 cm FlaK 37
E-25/5 Sturmpanzer - Assault gun armed with 15 cm StuH 43 L/12
E-25/6 Panzerbefehlswagen - Command variant armed with 7.92 mm MG34
E-25/7 Panzerbeobachtungswagen - Artillery observation variant armed with 7.92 mm MG34
E-25/8 Bergepanzer 25 - Armored recovery vehicle armed with 7.92 mm MG 34

 

 

 

 

View PostSchnitzelTruck, on Jun 17 2016 - 05:05, said:

These "unofficial nerfs" you are pulling out of your butt dont exist.

 

 

SchnitzelTruck ​: Granted you're a good player and all and i'm not saying otherwise but with your record of only 61 battles in your E25, I could paint that tank pink in your inventory and I don't think you would know any better! Plus doesn't WG have their hand up BULBA's [edited]? I mean granted if they do I wouldn't bite the hand that feeds me either but once again with 61 battles in this VIC ( Vehicle ) I don't think you can honestly state that you have or haven't noticed a nerf!

View PostWulfeHound, on Jun 17 2016 - 05:43, said:

 

E-25 never was built. According to Spielburger's Special Panzer Variants it's the correct size, but it's too small according to Panzer Tracts 20

 Once again I find some sources that state it was and others that state it wasn't and you run into the same issue with it being the right size currently and that it is smaller than what it is? The most they have are a few hulls and it's hinted that the Russians got the test ones since the locations on the plants were Essen and Poland mainly.

 

Krupp, developer and producer of the Panzer IV and Steyr-Daimler-Puch, a supplementary producer are both engaged in the construction of the E-25, with most manufacturing taking place in Essen, Germany at the Krupp Works and at various locations throughout Austria, for Steyr-Daimler-Puch. Later orders were added from the nationalized Państwowe Zakłady Inżynieryjne works in central Poland and the Fiat factories in Italy./​ "https://sites.google...e_Heer/e-series"

 

 

 

CONCLUSION: This tank was fast with excellent acceleration and turning ability while moving and while stationary when it came out ( in truth with all tanks they all turn fast doing a 360 pivot : hence why you never stand next to them! ) and since then it's been getting NERFED unofficially ( that means you don't get a notice that WG has tinkered with it ). Cry about it's amazing cammo, but do keep in mind that it has light armor and tier 6 gun that is very dependent on GOLD ROUNDS to Pen and do DMG and now with tanks like the IS-6 getting a buff that it didn't really need, you're not going to do anything to them but give them a " Steel Wall Award" with the only weak area being the [edited]! Lastly this tank isn't OP, if it is OP then it's because you know how to use it like many of the other tanks in the game! Best of luck to everyone and I wish you well...

 

Tschuse...

 

 



WulfeHound #28 Posted Jun 18 2016 - 02:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 12919 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011
So you're using a site that uses no sources whatsoever to back up your claim that the E-25 was built. How can any be built when in January of 1945 they hadn't even determined what gun to use? According to a single man three hulls were produced at Alkett, but none were found. Most likely no hulls were built in the first place

Obsidian_Death #29 Posted Jun 18 2016 - 03:47

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 42796 battles
  • 104
  • Member since:
    12-10-2012

View PostWulfeHound, on Jun 18 2016 - 01:56, said:

So you're using a site that uses no sources whatsoever to back up your claim that the E-25 was built. How can any be built when in January of 1945 they hadn't even determined what gun to use? According to a single man three hulls were produced at Alkett, but none were found. Most likely no hulls were built in the first place

 

I'm wondering if you even clicked on the links or just browsed through them fast and missed the below sources? As for the Hulls and the tanks in testing phase some list them as being in test and another site lists them as just hulls as you stated, concerning  the gun for the tank they primarily went with the 7.5 PAK 42/L70 , however they toyed with many variants which in a test phase wouldn't be out of the norm! Concerning the tanks and where did they vanish to, keep in mind after the dust settled or was settling many things were ushered away by everyone from scientist,researchers to SS soldats to form the American SF, keep in mind America did a great job keeping the 1-400 Class Submarine "I-yon-Hyaku-gata sensuikan" from the Russians. An you honestly don't think the Russians could of carted these off after raiding Essen and the other sites?   

 

   Panzer Tracts 20-1, page 42 (Jentz, Doyle)
- Special Panzer Variants, pages 71-72 (Spielberger, Doyle)
- Waffen und Geheimwaffen des deutscher Heeres 1933 - 1945, part 2 page 66 (Hahn)
.



WulfeHound #30 Posted Jun 18 2016 - 04:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 12919 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011

View PostObsidian_Death, on Jun 17 2016 - 21:47, said:

 

I'm wondering if you even clicked on the links or just browsed through them fast and missed the below sources? As for the Hulls and the tanks in testing phase some list them as being in test and another site lists them as just hulls as you stated, concerning  the gun for the tank they primarily went with the 7.5 PAK 42/L70 , however they toyed with many variants which in a test phase wouldn't be out of the norm! Concerning the tanks and where did they vanish to, keep in mind after the dust settled or was settling many things were ushered away by everyone from scientist,researchers to SS soldats to form the American SF, keep in mind America did a great job keeping the 1-400 Class Submarine "I-yon-Hyaku-gata sensuikan" from the Russians. An you honestly don't think the Russians could of carted these off after raiding Essen and the other sites?   

 

   Panzer Tracts 20-1, page 42 (Jentz, Doyle)
- Special Panzer Variants, pages 71-72 (Spielberger, Doyle)
- Waffen und Geheimwaffen des deutscher Heeres 1933 - 1945, part 2 page 66 (Hahn)
.

 

I'm referring to this site, which has no sources listed. That first link you posted was broken and is using the E-25 hull as a basis for the "Klein-Tiger" project rather than strictly about the E-25. That second Youtube link is also broken, as is the third link (which I'm assuming is the same as the previous link)

 

I'm using Panzer Tracts 20-1 as a reference and it's saying that there may have been hulls constructed but that it was most likely misinformation given by the director of the E-series program.

Page 42



Chaosticket #31 Posted Jun 21 2016 - 02:19

    Captain

  • Players
  • 25564 battles
  • 1,126
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011

Has anyone brought up that the E-25 was actually a tank with a  turret, and that what is ingame is the JAGDPANZER e-25?

 

I dont think it would actually be possible to construct.

Its speed while high, its ignored by players that high maximum speeds are top speed on perfect roads, so off-road they would be much slower.

Its fitting a L/70 75mm in such a small vehicle would have problems such as reloading or carrying sufficient shells. Similar small tank destroyers such as the JagdPanzer 38T (Hetzer), even had the open breach too close to the hull so shoving a shell in it was difficult.

 

The Jagdpanzer e-25 has 2 flaws, no turret(small problem as its speed and turning are amazing) and low penetration for its tier. It speed and rate of fire are amazing so it often just beats people in DPM and anything too armored gets Gold ammo or just shot in the side.



WulfeHound #32 Posted Jun 21 2016 - 03:43

    Major

  • Players
  • 12919 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011

View PostChaosticket, on Jun 20 2016 - 20:19, said:

Has anyone brought up that the E-25 was actually a tank with a  turret, and that what is ingame is the JAGDPANZER e-25?

 

I dont think it would actually be possible to construct.

Its speed while high, its ignored by players that high maximum speeds are top speed on perfect roads, so off-road they would be much slower.

Its fitting a L/70 75mm in such a small vehicle would have problems such as reloading or carrying sufficient shells. Similar small tank destroyers such as the JagdPanzer 38T (Hetzer), even had the open breach too close to the hull so shoving a shell in it was difficult.

 

The Jagdpanzer e-25 has 2 flaws, no turret(small problem as its speed and turning are amazing) and low penetration for its tier. It speed and rate of fire are amazing so it often just beats people in DPM and anything too armored gets Gold ammo or just shot in the side.

 

Everything that is known about the E-25 program shows that it was solely meant to be a casemate tank destroyer (a jagdpanzer). Please show an actual source from a reputable armor historian that shows the E-25 was supposed to have a turret.

 

In-game the E-25 is too small to actually fit the ammunition load, engine/transmission, and crew. The actual size can be seen here:

Spoiler

 



Chaosticket #33 Posted Jun 21 2016 - 04:01

    Captain

  • Players
  • 25564 battles
  • 1,126
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011

Ok, You do know the different between a Panzer and a Jagdpanzer, right? If you dont know already, go look up the different between the E-100 and jagdpanzer e-100. Or You can look up the Jagdpanzer 38T(hetzer), Jagdpanzer 4, jagdpanther 1 and 2, etc.

 

The E series of tanks were designed to use shared components for mass production. E-10, e-25, E-50, e-75, e-100. Self-propelled anti-tank Jagdpanzer versions like the Jagdpanzer e-100 were also designed.

 

Wargaming is not a reliable source of historical information. They still wont admit the Soviet 122mm artillery gun on the Kv-85 and higher tier vehicles had 145mm penetration, not 175mm.



WulfeHound #34 Posted Jun 21 2016 - 04:22

    Major

  • Players
  • 12919 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011

View PostChaosticket, on Jun 20 2016 - 22:01, said:

Ok, You do know the different between a Panzer and a Jagdpanzer, right?

 

That's basic knowledge for German armor.

 

Block Quote

  If you dont know already, go look up the different between the E-100 and jagdpanzer e-100. Or You can look up the Jagdpanzer 38T(hetzer), Jagdpanzer 4, jagdpanther 1 and 2, etc.

 

 

The Jpz E-100 in-game is actually the Sturmgeshutz E-100 that was planned prior to all superheavy projects being cancelled in 1942

 

Block Quote

 

Wargaming is not a reliable source of historical information. They still wont admit the Soviet 122mm artillery gun on the Kv-85 and higher tier vehicles had 145mm penetration, not 175mm.

 

 

 

You've given no sources at all. The A-19 and D-25 were given 175mm of penetration for balance reasons. Here's a source showing it had 165mm of penetration @100m (http://tankarchives.blogspot.com/2013/03/penetration.html) and in WWII Ballistics and Gunnery, testing showed that 122mm AP and APBC penetrated anywhere between 174mm-201mm @100m.

 



Chaosticket #35 Posted Jun 21 2016 - 04:54

    Captain

  • Players
  • 25564 battles
  • 1,126
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011

No. Im not going to believe you obscure source that supports what you say exactly when you need it. Youre just picking a fight now as this thread ISNT ABOUT THE SOVIET 122MM GUN.

 

The Jagdpanzer e-25 is a great example of an imaginary tank without balance that probably couldnt have worked in real life. a very small hull with a large gun and a high speed.

 

Its basically the example of munchkin. Look at the Czech Skoda T-25. Its very compact and it has the logical weakness of a small size resulting in slow reload and low DPM. Ingame vehicles still shouldnt be able to move 100% speed over anything but paved roads. generally they should be 65% speed off-road, and less in swamps, rubble, and so on. Even after that moving high speed and over hard terrain should damage or destroy its own tracks. According to Wargaming ever world war 2 battle has vehicles racing around close range while moving 70kph, which is almost the opposite of reality.

 

really Wargaming, remove all historical names. Im tired of a faux-historical-hybrid-arcade game that wont go full arcade. Bring up hover suspension systems  and plasma cannons.

 



WulfeHound #36 Posted Jun 21 2016 - 05:31

    Major

  • Players
  • 12919 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011

View PostChaosticket, on Jun 20 2016 - 22:54, said:

No. Im not going to believe you obscure source that supports what you say exactly when you need it. Youre just picking a fight now as this thread ISNT ABOUT THE SOVIET 122MM GUN.

 

I'm sorry, you're the one who brought up the 122's, not me. I merely proved why WG acted the way they did when it came to balancing the penetration. (And Archive Awareness, Panzer Tracts, and WWII Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery are not obscure sources. They're well known in the armor historian community)

Block Quote

 

 

The Jagdpanzer e-25 is a great example of an imaginary tank without balance that probably couldnt have worked in real life. a very small hull with a large gun and a high speed.

 

 

 

E-25 is not imaginary, as it was a planned design (see the Panzer Tracts page I posted above). And no, it was anything but small. It's as tall as the Jpz 38t, wider by about a meter, and slightly shorter due to the transverse engine. If the L/70 can be crammed into the Panther's turret, it can fit into an E-25.

 

Block Quote

 

Its basically the example of munchkin. Look at the Czech Skoda T-25. Its very compact and it has the logical weakness of a small size resulting in slow reload and low DPM. Ingame vehicles still shouldnt be able to move 100% speed over anything but paved roads. generally they should be 65% speed off-road, and less in swamps, rubble, and so on. Even after that moving high speed and over hard terrain should damage or destroy its own tracks. According to Wargaming ever world war 2 battle has vehicles racing around close range while moving 70kph, which is almost the opposite of reality.

 

 

 

Skoda T-25 is by no means a "small" tank, nor does it have low DPM. All the tier 6 mediums are hovering around 1900-2000 DPM. "Slow reload"? It's 330 burst and reloads in 8sec. That is not slow by any means. if you want slow, play the Batchat which can take over 30sec to reload its magazine. This game is not a simulator by any stretch. Think of how frustrating it would be to be moving along at half speed just because you're on softer ground.
 

Block Quote

 really Wargaming, remove all historical names. Im tired of a faux-historical-hybrid-arcade game that wont go full arcade. Bring up hover suspension systems  and plasma cannons.

 

Cry more. if you want something that's more "accurate" go play WTGF or Steel Beasts: Kharkov 1942


Edited by WulfeHound, Jun 21 2016 - 05:33.


TLWiz #37 Posted Jun 21 2016 - 05:42

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 22320 battles
  • 9,770
  • [DSSRT] DSSRT
  • Member since:
    12-26-2014

View PostChaosticket, on Jun 21 2016 - 04:54, said:

No. Im not going to believe you obscure source that supports what you say exactly when you need it. Youre just picking a fight now as this thread ISNT ABOUT THE SOVIET 122MM GUN.

 

The Jagdpanzer e-25 is a great example of an imaginary tank without balance that probably couldnt have worked in real life. a very small hull with a large gun and a high speed.

 

Its basically the example of munchkin. Look at the Czech Skoda T-25. Its very compact and it has the logical weakness of a small size resulting in slow reload and low DPM. Ingame vehicles still shouldnt be able to move 100% speed over anything but paved roads. generally they should be 65% speed off-road, and less in swamps, rubble, and so on. Even after that moving high speed and over hard terrain should damage or destroy its own tracks. According to Wargaming ever world war 2 battle has vehicles racing around close range while moving 70kph, which is almost the opposite of reality.

 

really Wargaming, remove all historical names. Im tired of a faux-historical-hybrid-arcade game that wont go full arcade. Bring up hover suspension systems  and plasma cannons.

 

And it keeps spewing....   :facepalm:



Chaosticket #38 Posted Jun 22 2016 - 04:28

    Captain

  • Players
  • 25564 battles
  • 1,126
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011

View PostTLWiz, on Jun 20 2016 - 22:42, said:

 

And it keeps spewing....   :facepalm:

 

And you are just trolling.

 

Do you have anything to say about the e-25 or SP1C or no?






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users