I think that this “over-engineering” is given too much weight. Panthers had problems at Kursk because they were rushed and sent to the front too early and Hitler insist on 80 mm front plate instead of 60 mm which brought more problems, but those were solved mostly. Ferdinand has also problems but it was rare discontinued vehicle anyway. The true wasting of resources in my opinion was Tiger B, but that hardly changes anything.
But yes, Germans simply did choose having more difficult repair… over having more burning tank wrecks.
The Ferdinand was a embarrassing failure in my opinion, it does not even had a machine gun and the motor was far to weak.
What to you do if you are in this tank and you see enemy infantery is going on one of your tanks. Do you shoot them with the cannon? Stupid as hell.
With the Panther, yes. This was a good tank, and it had its problems first in the beginning like nearly all the other tanks.
Well if it was HE then you could : -) It wasn’t supposed to be a tank but rather a support so there should be infantry and tanks around so they though they can save the MG… but indeed it showed as not as good idea. So they add MG eventually. Yes, it wasn’t good vehicle. Only made because Porsche had alternative Tiger hull I think.
is that you?
No? This is obviously a girl…?
It was in my favorite club, but unfortunately it burned down in 2011 after a lightning hit the building and it was never rebuild…
oooh yea, bby.
All goths must have loved that.
btw, it is not obvious it is a girl.
But I admit this person is much skinnier than you.
Okay true… sometimes you have some strange people there…
The moment a sentence about military equipment starts with “if it runs”, you know it is shit.
It may have been a good theoretical concept, but it’s practical drawbacks made it detrimental to Nazi war cause.
BTW, I have just started reading The Black Earth.
Excellent book. I have read a lot about WW2, but this is an entirely new viewpoint for me.
2 Likes
Not to mention they couldn’t really mass produce those tanks, especially when compared to how the allies mass produced theirs. Germany had a lot of the same issues Japan did, they couldn’t afford to replace all their lost/destroyed equipment while their enemies could. It only took one decisive battle in both the Pacific(Midway) and in Europe(Kursk) to pretty much completely destroy their offensive capabilities.
First hand holocaust accounts are definitely interesting. Really hard to comprehend how people could commit atrocities like that. I find it even more incomprehensible that people who live in those countries today are perfectly okay with being disarmed.
Which one you are referring to?
Well total war Warhammer has mixed reviews. Can’t say I’m surprised with CA’s recent track record. Did you preorder it @TheDivineInfidel ?
When we already talk here about strategy games. Here are a lot of people interested in the second world war, does anyone of you play combat mission?
Never heard of it until now, looks interesting. I play a lot of the men of war series when it comes to ww2 rts, mainly assault squad 2. It has by far the most realistic armor penetration/damage system ive ever seen in a game.
The combat mission series is way better then anything else. It is very bulky and stubborn, but the depth of the game and the realism in it is simply amazing. And it does have a cool multiplayer mode, thats why I am asking.
That is one reason why it is so unknown, it does have more realism and less acarde. Not enough fun for most people.
1 Like
Have you ever played men of war? It too is insanely realistic and very in depth. If there’s a game out there that’s more realistic i’d like to try it.
Yes, I have played men of war. Not for very long to be honest, maybe I have missed the best parts but I prefer the combat mission series.
I guess the Sten was better than the Mg-42, also according to this brit bong it’s also the reason the allies won the war.
This is why limeys shouldn’t make gun videos.
Well, I like Lindybeige, but this video is bollocks! Probably his worst video ever.
whats wrong with it?
Because is it bullshit. He is ranting against the “Spandau” because it is “not accurate enough”, which is bullshit, as it is very accurate. And he said that the Bren was the proven better gun because it was used in some commonwealth armies till 2002. He did not mention that the “Spandau” is still in use in a lot of armies around the world, and that its system was used for modern machineguns like the M60, while the Bren… was just a Bren.
All in all: Bad research. Read the comment section under the video.
1 Like