|
The interesting part for me about the T-34 was that the issues were quickly indentified and plans drawn up to fix them on the assembly line but it was decided that the improvement in performance would not be the loss in production as factories were retooled. Given the results it's tough to argue they were wrong.
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 19:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 13:12 |
|
|
I heard somewhere in the various mil his threads that the soviets did a study on the life span of their tanks and basically concluded that the average T-34 would be scrap long before the engine issues would seriously effect performance of the individual T-34, so they just said gently caress it to improving that facet of the T-34.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
That youtube video has a part with Parshall talking about WWII tank production, he goes over that T-34 aspect.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:
Definitely fits EA. Buy competing companies, make impossible goals, and then gas them when they inevitably fail.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
This game needs to be out NOW! My bloodlust for Nazi scum must be quenched. Also I hope we get to kill Malcolm Excellent fucked around with this message at 00:07 on Oct 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:To be fair, between the occult stuff and the super-science stuff, it was the occult stuff that almost succeeded in both Return to Castle Wolfenstein and Wolf09 - were it not for a certain Polish-American curb stomping every Nazi in a 20 mile radius, of course. The occult stuff may have almost succeeded, but the super-science stuff did succeed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 00:17
|
|
|
Paingod556 posted:One thing I get annoyed by in these 'why Germany hosed up' is the overstatement of the idea their tech was good but too expensive. Even Russian tank crews loved the Sherman. It was a great fighting vehicle in just about every non-glamorous way possible. Meanwhile the Tiger burns about three gallons of gas for every mile it travels while fighting for a country that has no natively controlled oil fields, has a transmission that breaks down so often that the vehicles have to be transported by train under almost every circumstance, weighs too much to cross bridges and has to have a special snorkel installed for fording rivers, and a gun so long that using it in cramped areas like forests or cities often means you slam it into a building or a tree and can't engage your target. But hey one time Oberst Megahitler of the 420th SS went on a wicked sick kill streak with it 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 00:28
|
|
|
Here's a Twitch stream from yesterday where they show off the feature discussed in E3 where (I'll spoiler it just in case) you can revisit cleared level areas from your hub for side missions or just to shoot things. It has them going back to the Roswell parade level, except it's night, the crawling with robots/KKK/Nazis, you're armed from the get-go and given a mission to kill some Nazi general in the level. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/183693121
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
i thought the US shermans were considered tiny vulnerable weak pieces of poo poo saved by the fact that they were produced en masse, was that not the case?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:00
|
|
|
GUI posted:Here's a Twitch stream from yesterday where they show off the feature discussed in E3 where (I'll spoiler it just in case) you can revisit cleared level areas from your hub for side missions or just to shoot things. It has them going back to the Roswell parade level, except it's night, the crawling with robots/KKK/Nazis, you're armed from the get-go and given a mission to kill some Nazi general in the level. Oh whaaaaat?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
Shermans, especially the later versions, owned super hard and were probably the safest tanks of the war to serve in. The crowd that think they were bad are generally also the people that go on about "Krupp steel."
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:09
|
|
|
SirSamVimes posted:The occult stuff may have almost succeeded, but the super-science stuff did succeed. Sure, but Deathshead in RtCW and Wolf09 didn't know that. Deathshead in 1946 and onward had reason to be smug and talk down to his occult counterparts, Deathshead in 1944-1945 did not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Less talking about nazi real life tanks, more about nazi murder, thank you and god bless
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
Cowcaster posted:i thought the US shermans were considered tiny vulnerable weak pieces of poo poo saved by the fact that they were produced en masse, was that not the case? Shermans were roughly about as well armored as the most common German fighting vehicle, the Panzer IV. One design decision that stands out about the Sherman (and US-produced tanks in general) was that the armor was designed to buckle if it suffered a penetrating hit. This meant that it was slightly less effective than the rigid armor of Soviet and German tanks, but easier to repair, and more to the point, if the rigid steel used in German tanks suffered a penetrating hit, it *shattered*, sending shards of metal flying through the crew compartment. While Shermans were knocked out in huge numbers, they had some of the highest ratios of crew surviving the tank being disabled, as well as rates of being repaired and sent back into the field. The 75mm cannon used on the earliest variants of the Sherman was effective against virtually everything the Germans had except the Panther and Tiger front armor at medium to long range. The 76mm cannon later variants were equipped with, coupled with HVAP rounds, were effective against everything except clownmobiles like the Tiger II. The main thing is that the Germans had mass produced infantry anti-tank weapons like the Panzerfaust and the Panzershreck (a copy of the American bazooka upscaled to fire an 88mm projectile) that were very effective against the Sherman, so they were getting knocked out by more than just enemy tanks. tithin posted:Less talking about nazi real life tanks, more about nazi murder, thank you and god bless gently caress YOU TANKS FOREVER Chillgamesh fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Oct 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:16
|
|
|
GUI posted:Here's a Twitch stream from yesterday where they show off the feature discussed in E3 where (I'll spoiler it just in case) you can revisit cleared level areas from your hub for side missions or just to shoot things. It has them going back to the Roswell parade level, except it's night, the crawling with robots/KKK/Nazis, you're armed from the get-go and given a mission to kill some Nazi general in the level. Oh poo poo. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
I am more excited for this game than ever because of that feature revelation a ways up, but alsoHeaven Spacey posted:gently caress YOU TANKS FOREVER Because Tank stories are one of the best ways to humiliate nazis
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
Cowcaster posted:i thought the US shermans were considered tiny vulnerable weak pieces of poo poo saved by the fact that they were produced en masse, was that not the case? This is more or less the idea most people have, but its pretty thoroughly poo poo on when you start reading into it. For the most part the Sherman was one of the best tanks of the war at actually doing the things it was designed for. It had decent armor at its inception, the crews liked them, it was well gunned for the kind of infantry support role it was designed, and it was reliable as gently caress. The 75mm gun it started with was excellent at supporting infantry actions against fortified positions, and was so good at that it actually was kept in service even though the the 76mm gun was much better against heavier German tanks. The 5:1 kill ratio thing is also mostly just a bullshit myth, as the reason "it took 5 Shermans to kill 1 Tiger" on average was because you sent a platoon of Shermans to do anything, and that was 5 Shermans. The actual K:D ratios for the Sherman are far less lopsided than that, and like 90% of all Sherman losses were to poo poo like AT guns or ambushes by StuGs. Fun fact, in the US area of operations for most of Normandy there were literally zero Tigers assigned to any German units. Only Panthers, Panzers and StuGs. Tigers only showed up in the British areas, and in small numbers. The Tiger/Panther on paper is a "better tank" than the Sherman, but there are a lot more loving reasons why the Shermans were actually the better vehicle for the war that was fought (or any war really). Mazz fucked around with this message at 01:32 on Oct 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
Cowcaster posted:i thought the US shermans were considered tiny vulnerable weak pieces of poo poo saved by the fact that they were produced en masse, was that not the case? Later Shermans are some of the best tanks ever designed/built, and were upgraded and used in an effective manner all the way into the 1970s by some countries.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
that feature reveal actually worries me because it sounds suspiciously similar to what shadow warrior 2 tried to do and that game was hot poo poo from a butt
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
also “shermans were knocked out in massive numbers, but the crew usually survived and also it was mostly due to weapons other than enemy tanks”, while nice for the crew involved kind of only reinforces how disposable they were, to me
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:49
|
|
|
Stugs were actually where the best German tankers got assigned because they were small, cheap and dangerous as gently caress as defensive ambush vehicles. StuG is also an awesome name.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
Cowcaster posted:also “shermans were knocked out in massive numbers, but the crew usually survived and also it was mostly due to weapons other than enemy tanks”, while nice for the crew involved kind of only reinforces how disposable they were, to me What's wrong with disposable? The tanks were designed to be cost-effective, and with the idea that they were inevitably going to be knocked out or encounter mechanical failure, so they should do so as safely as possible. It's a lot better than a 50 ton shitbox that gets irretrievably destroyed by a muddy ditch 20 miles out from the combat area. Arcsquad12 posted:Stugs were actually where the best German tankers got assigned because they were small, cheap and dangerous as gently caress as defensive ambush vehicles. StuG is also an awesome name. StuGs were some of the most effective fighting vehicles the Germans had so naturally they never capitalized on it because Hitler wanted stupid poo poo like the Tiger II or V-series rockets instead. GUI posted:Here's a Twitch stream from yesterday where they show off the feature discussed in E3 where (I'll spoiler it just in case) you can revisit cleared level areas from your hub for side missions or just to shoot things. It has them going back to the Roswell parade level, except it's night, the crawling with robots/KKK/Nazis, you're armed from the get-go and given a mission to kill some Nazi general in the level. This is exciting. I really liked the score attack mode in TOB and having more enemies to brutalize is always good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Games > Wolfenstein: Mein Tank is Fight, Your Tank is Nicht!
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:03
|
|
|
Heaven Spacey posted:What's wrong with disposable? The tanks were designed to be cost-effective, and with the idea that they were inevitably going to be knocked out or encounter mechanical failure, so they should do so as safely as possible. It's a lot better than a 50 ton shitbox that gets irretrievably destroyed by a muddy ditch 20 miles out from the combat area. i don’t know what to tell you man my inital post was “i thought that shermans were crappy things that got destroyed at the drop of a hat but were able to be instantly replaced through sheer numbers” and you all chimed in with how they were the most exceptional armored weapons system of the age that just so happened to get knocked out at the drop of a hat but were instantly replaced. what exactly are we disagreeing about here
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
i guess, they were pieces of crap, but they were really safe pieces of crap?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:13
|
|
|
Psycho Landlord posted:I am more excited for this game than ever because of that feature revelation a ways up, but also Ask and ye shall receive. Ramming an emeny tank with your tank that is on fire and then having them both explode is a really metal way to go out. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
Cowcaster posted:i guess, they were pieces of crap, but they were really safe pieces of crap? When things get shot with explosives, they break. When Shermans broke, they didn't break badly enough to kill the crew all that often, and were also easy to fix. German tanks, on the other hand, broke impressively and with extreme lethality. This was a war, so things were getting shot with explosives more often than not. Ergo, Sherman is a good tank.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
Cowcaster posted:i guess, they were pieces of crap, but they were really safe pieces of crap? If you got shot a in a Sherman, you likely survived statistically speaking. In turns out attacking into prepared defensive positions in extremely poor tank country means you get shot a lot. There's very little you can do about this. There is literally no tank in WW2 that would've done well in the situations the Shermans faced. Lots of T-34s died the same way. Lots of German poo poo when attacking also did too. If you're argument for "better tank" is get shot less, literally no tank in WW2 would satisfy that goal.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:19
|
|
|
Nothing is invulnerable, but when they did get knocked out by something or broke down all they had to do was swap some parts around and repair holes and it was good as new within a few days or sooner as well as easy to operate by anyone from rural America who could've driven a tractor. Unless completely wrecked, most US tanks would continue to work several times before being scrap while a German tank tended to be scrap after a single time of being knocked out, or scrapped itself before it even saw combat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:19
|
|
|
tithin posted:Less talking about nazi real life tanks, more about nazi murder, thank you and god bless Heaven Spacey posted:gently caress YOU TANKS FOREVER Compromise, there clearly needs to be DLC where some dudes salvage a Sherman and some laser cannons and go  with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:19
|
|
|
Cowcaster posted:i don’t know what to tell you man my inital post was “i thought that shermans were crappy things that got destroyed at the drop of a hat but were able to be instantly replaced through sheer numbers” and you all chimed in with how they were the most exceptional armored weapons system of the age that just so happened to get knocked out at the drop of a hat but were instantly replaced. what exactly are we disagreeing about here all tanks were. thats the issue. like the problem you are bringing up is the problem of what armor inherently is. it's something that has always been super easy to take out with conventional weapons/unconventional ideas. even today expensive poo poo like the abrams can be destroyed by poo poo like ieds ( albeit the bombs need to be bigger now. ). it's not the majestic noble fight of champions, it's a big ol' box you push with. the stug, tiger, and panther also got demolished en masse by improvised explosive, panzerfausts, and bazookas just as often as they did shermans. the only difference is the german war economy was absolute garbage, and they couldn't field anything even resembling replacements for lost units. shermans being more disposable only exists if we also take into account we had so many shermans we could have them hunt in packs of 5, and there would often be several hundred shermans out and about at any give time. compare that to the germans who maybe had 5-12 tanks operational at the same time across both fronts at points. of course more shermans would go down, and of course more shermans would go down to improvised explosives. but that's just because we built so many of the drat things we could flood every battlefield with them, not because they were inherently worse when it came to design. and then take into account Psycho Landlord posted:When things get shot with explosives, they break. where if you hit a sherman with a faust the crew would generally survive and we could almost always repair the tank after the battle, so it did it's duty just fine. it was only designed to push, and it pushed and then got repaired for the next push without needing to be fully replaced. meanwhile if you hit a german tank with a faust it was all crew dead, tank in multiple pieces, all nearby nazis also dead from the explosion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:21
|
|
|
Cowcaster posted:i guess, they were pieces of crap, but they were really safe pieces of crap? I'm kinda uncomfortable taking this derail further but I think the disconnect we're having is that you're thinking armor thickness and gun caliber are the only things that make a tank "good" when the reality is more complicated than that. The Sherman was designed as a multirole infantry support vehicle and it did that job extremely well while also being very cost effective and relatively safe for its crews. The Tiger meanwhile was designed to kill enemy tanks, and considering all the resources they poured into it, it was a pretty miserable failure in that role and they should have just made more StuGs and PzIIIs instead. Tony Snark posted:Compromise, there clearly needs to be DLC where some dudes salvage a Sherman and some laser cannons and go I would loving love this. Just rolling on a shitload of Nazis in a parade ground and going Fury on them. Chillgamesh fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Oct 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:23
|
|
|
The most important component of any crewed vehicle is the crew. Experienced crew who survive engagements to fight another day do better than those who die and replaced with a green crew who haven't fought before and don't know their vehicle and using the terrain to the best of their abilities.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:26
|
|
|
Rookersh posted:of course more shermans would go down, and of course more shermans would go down to improvised explosives. but that's just because we built so many of the drat things we could flood every battlefield with them, not because they were inherently worse when it came to design. what exactly am i saying wrong that isn’t this
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
If all the tanks were driven by Blazko then they would all be invincible. He'd blow up an enemy tank and then run over the wreckage to replenish his armor. And a Panzerhund would beat any allied tank by eating it and burping fire.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:If all the tanks were driven by Blazko then they would all be invincible. He'd blow up an enemy tank and then run over the wreckage to replenish his armor. And running over Nazis replenishes his health.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
Cowcaster posted:what exactly am i saying wrong that isn’t this <  >Arcsquad12 posted:If all the tanks were driven by Blazko then they would all be invincible. He'd blow up an enemy tank and then run over the wreckage to replenish his armor. The Panzerhunds are cool but I would love if there were a level where the resistance steals a Nazi tank, paints it green with a bunch of  slogans, and assaults a big nazi superbase with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:29
|
|
|
quote:There are in fact very few studies that examine direct tank vs tank engagements; which only constitute a minority of engagements involving tanks. The only study that has been published and examined in published books is the United States Army's Ballistic Research Lab (BRL) study in 1946, which has been cited in several books by Stephen Zaloga (notably Armored Champion, published in 2015). I mean, drat, just look at how bad Shermans were. Edit: A lot of common beliefs about WW2 were influenced or even created by surviving germans/nazis, such as the so-called superior German tanks vs inferior American/Soviet tanks. Corvinus fucked around with this message at 02:35 on Oct 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
Vadoc posted:And running over Nazis replenishes his health. Who doesn't feel better after running over a nazi
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 13:12 |
|
|
please don’t call me a nazi, even as a joke
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2017 02:31
|
|