Troll cave II

T-34 was good but lack of the radio and commander copula in early versions makes it an easy target and not that effective even in bigger numbers.
The slope amour is certainly a good thing but I would not consider a flat amour so outdated in 1942. It allowed them to make better use of the space and slightly angled it was nearly as effective as if sloped.
Panther was the best tank in my opinion but it suffer from the extra weight a lot. I would choose it over the Konigstiger.
And I would rather choose M4A3E8 (Fury) for army in 1945 even though T-34 already had new turret and gun by that time.

Yeah Soviets made nearly 86 000 tanks and were given over 11 000 from UK and USA. Germans made nearly 25 000.

Half-tracks were crucial. But Soviets had problems to even get ordinary trucks so the USA send them some - both trucks and Half-tracks.

2 Likes

@DrFusselpulli @Wenceslaus, how about modern tanks? Which one is your favorite?

Tough question.
The Abrams is a “classic” but I think Leopard 2 and Challenger 2 are similar good.
(As far as I know the Abrams uses the precise german gun and the excellent british armour, quite cherrypicking). I think the differences in this tanks are not so big.

And then we have this new russian tank, T14 armata. But how good is it really? Interesting concept, but I donÂŽt trust it completely. I think the automatic system can be a curse if the tank is hit and something is broken.

And then we have an in my opinion underrated tank, the Merkava IV, this thing is a beast.

But which one would I choose
 hmmm
 maybe the Merkava against infantry and in urban territory.
Against tanks? Maybe the latest Leopard version. I trust in german engineering here, but I would not be mad if I had to trust on the Challenger or the Abrams.

M1 Abrams does, M1a2 and all upgrades past that no longer use the Brit bong armor.

Yeah Abrams and Leopard are especially similar, since they both came out of the canceled MBT 70 project.

I like the Abrams a lot because it’s by far the most combat tested MBT in the world. The newest M1a2 sep2 is the most heavily armored tank in the world.

What about you, what tank would you use? :slight_smile:

Hard to say, probably either an Abrams or Leopard. I find them very atheistically pleasing, i think the Abrams has the most combat under its belt, so probably an Abrams.

1:32:22

“The Japanese fleet was beating off the first wave of attackers”

Fucking dying. The fact that the narrator has a British accent makes it even funnier. :smile:

Well the pope has just likened Jesus to ISIS, and said Europeans need to breed with migrants.

Where the hell is Ezio auditore when you need him.

1 Like

how about you provide some sauce?

The whole interview also reeks of commie bullshit, him talking about “redistributing wealth”. Hilarious considering the guy lives like a king.

Not gonna lie here , that’s exactly how I picture @SirWarriant :smile:

3 Likes

I can’t even run, i usually just use a mobility scooter.

2 Likes

yea the Jesus x ISIS comparation was not the smartest idea he had.
In times of Jesus the christianiny was not (yet) violent. But ISIS is just violent.

As to the commie thing. What do you expect? He is a christian and christianity by its nature is socialistic.

No it is not. Christianity, and Jesus advocated charity. Not using the power of the state to forcibly redistribute wealth.

The reason the pope is so pro commie, is because he comes from South America, a place where there is a huge anti U.S, anti capitalism, pro communism sentiment.

As for the other comments, they sound very similar to what prominent Muslim clerics have been preaching, “Breed with European women” ect.

Well christianity was never full socialistic.

But first christian colonies were groups of people who shared their wealth, food and basicaly everything.
Thats sounds pretty socialistic to me.

Sounds closer to a voluntarist society. They willing shared these things, because they knew their very survival depended on it. They didn’t use the power of the state to force the families with more food to give it up.

Either way those colonies were not very successful, everyone in Roanoke disappeared completely, and Jamestown had to resort to cannibalism to survive.

are you sure you are not talking about comunism?
I am not really sure that socialism is ALL ABOUT using power of state to forcibly redistribute wealth.
But i am too lazy to search it up.

Is that not what taxation is? Socialists are always advocating for higher taxes, which if you simplify it, is using the power of the state to force people to give up their wealth so it can be redistributed.

Socialism is the redistribution of wealth.

the definition says nothgin about forcibly redistributing wealth.
So if there was a colony where everyone shared thier wealth and everyone took just what they needed. Then it is socialistic society.