Tanks & armored vehicles discussion thread

[Pandeeria]

When asking about the best tank of World War Two, are we asking about sheer quality of each individual tank, or which ones were most practical, reliable, and easy to produce in vast quantities?

I meant as the all around best. But judging by the King Tiger votes many have individual tank vs tank battles in mind. So choose whatever you want.

Overall: M4 (T-34 also very, very, very good for the overall category)

Per individual basis: King Tiger (the normal Tiger and Panther could also win)

[Arlenton]

I voted the T-34, though I think it and the M4 Sherman are a tie. I voted the T-34 because because I used its much longer post-war service life as a tie breaker.

Oh yeah being used as a shit tier tank by shit tier nations is why its the better tank.

righttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

I'd rate the Chinese military as much higher than "shit-tier".

[Fordorsia]

I meant as the all around best. But judging by the King Tiger votes many have individual tank vs tank battles in mind. So choose whatever you want.

Overall: M4 (T-34 also very, very, very good for the overall category)

Per individual basis: King Tiger (the normal Tiger and Panther could also win)

Define "overall" and "per individual".

[Husseinarti]

Oh yeah being used as a shit tier tank by shit tier nations is why its the better tank.

righttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

I'd rate the Chinese military as much higher than "shit-tier".

I would.

And even they don't use T-34s anymore, they have their hordes of cheap T-55 copies.

Its the Norks who probs still have T-34-85s not-ironically kicking around for anything else beyond parade use.

[Pandeeria]

Overall: M4 (T-34 also very, very, very good for the overall category)

Per individual basis: King Tiger (the normal Tiger and Panther could also win)

Define "overall" and "per individual".

Overall: taking into account reliability, ease of production, and how well they suited for a quantity-over-quality approach, and perhaps how they also handled external factors like whether (though this could also fall under reliability).

Per individual: taking into account only the sheer stats of a single tank. Basically, whichever tank would win on a 1 on 1 fight in decent conditions would be considered the better "per individual" tank.

[Pandeeria]

Oh yeah being used as a shit tier tank by shit tier nations is why its the better tank.

righttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

I'd rate the Chinese military as much higher than "shit-tier".

The Chinese don't use shit T-34s far anything militarily serious anymore. Maybe at celebration and parades and stuff, or if there is a petty little outbreak of unrest somewhere, but they would never use them for actual military combat.

[Arlenton]

I'd rate the Chinese military as much higher than "shit-tier".

I would.

And even they don't use T-34s anymore, they have their hordes of cheap T-55 copies.

Its the Norks who probs still have T-34-85s not-ironically kicking around for anything else beyond parade use.

The Type 59. Gotta' love the classic round turreted tanks of mid cold war communist aggression.

[Arlenton]

I'd rate the Chinese military as much higher than "shit-tier".

The Chinese don't use shit T-34s far anything militarily serious anymore. Maybe at celebration and parades and stuff, or if there is a petty little outbreak of unrest somewhere, but they would never use them for actual military combat.

Never said they did.

[Pandeeria]

The Chinese don't use shit T-34s far anything militarily serious anymore. Maybe at celebration and parades and stuff, or if there is a petty little outbreak of unrest somewhere, but they would never use them for actual military combat.

Never said they did.

It seemed you implied it.

[Fordorsia]

Per individual: taking into account only the sheer stats of a single tank. Basically, whichever tank would win on a 1 on 1 fight in decent conditions would be considered the better "per individual" tank.

Maus beats any WWII tank in that vague scenario.


Se how worthless that comparison is?

[Pandeeria]

Per individual: taking into account only the sheer stats of a single tank. Basically, whichever tank would win on a 1 on 1 fight in decent conditions would be considered the better "per individual" tank.

Maus beats any WWII tank in that vague scenario.


Se how worthless that comparison is?

The Maus was terrible.

[Husseinarti]

I would.

And even they don't use T-34s anymore, they have their hordes of cheap T-55 copies.

Its the Norks who probs still have T-34-85s not-ironically kicking around for anything else beyond parade use.

The Type 59. Gotta' love the classic round turreted tanks of mid cold war communist aggression.

Yeah nice T-55 clone.

To bad its being fielded by a hugely incompetent army.

The Chinese don't use shit T-34s far anything militarily serious anymore. Maybe at celebration and parades and stuff, or if there is a petty little outbreak of unrest somewhere, but they would never use them for actual military combat.

Never said they did.

Then your wording sucks major ass.

[Arlenton]

The Type 59. Gotta' love the classic round turreted tanks of mid cold war communist aggression.

Yeah nice T-55 clone.

To bad its being fielded by a hugely incompetent army.

Never said they did.

Then your wording sucks major ass.

Yeah sorry about that. I was saying that the T-34 saw service longer than the M4 Sherman, so I used that as a tie breaker to vote in the poll.

[Fordorsia]

Maus beats any WWII tank in that vague scenario.


Se how worthless that comparison is?

The Maus was terrible.

Exactly, because war isn't putting two tank in front of each other in a vague scenario and seeing which one wins because of better paper stats. Comparing two tanks "in a 1v1 battle" is worthless.

[Yugoslav Memes]

the t-55 has an immortal place in my heart for the sheer amount of times its appeared in yugoslav war footage

I prefer the original T-55. I just love Soviet tanks of the mid-late 40s and 50s.

The skirt armor the Serbs cooked up were pretty cool tho

[Pandeeria]

The Maus was terrible.

Exactly, because war isn't putting two tank in front of each other in a vague scenario and seeing which one wins because of better paper stats. Comparing two tanks "in a 1v1 battle" is worthless.

I never said it was. I'm saying that if you did that, the Tiger or Panther would be the best tanks.

[Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi]

I would have to say that the M4 was the best tank of WWII. It was easy to produce(Unlike the panzer IV), it had relatively good ergonomics(Unlike the T-34), its optics were good(Unlike the T-34), its reliability was decent(Unlike the German heavy tanks), had a huge number of variants including the M18 which was phenomenal in tank to tank combat. Its one disadvantage was the fact it had a nasty tendency of going off in flames.

[Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi]

I'd rate the Chinese military as much higher than "shit-tier".

The Chinese don't use shit T-34s far anything militarily serious anymore. Maybe at celebration and parades and stuff, or if there is a petty little outbreak of unrest somewhere, but they would never use them for actual military combat.

But North Korea still does...

[Fordorsia]

Unlike the German heavy tanks

uh

had a huge number of variants including the M18

uuuh

Its one disadvantage was the fact it had a nasty tendency of going off in flames.

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh

[Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi]

Unlike the German heavy tanks

uh

had a huge number of variants including the M18

uuuh

Its one disadvantage was the fact it had a nasty tendency of going off in flames.

uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh

I stand by my comments.

[Pandeeria]

The Chinese don't use shit T-34s far anything militarily serious anymore. Maybe at celebration and parades and stuff, or if there is a petty little outbreak of unrest somewhere, but they would never use them for actual military combat.

But North Korea still does...

North Korea = poop
China =/= poop

Does everyone on this thread understand now?

[Arlenton]

I would have to say that the M4 was the best tank of WWII. It was easy to produce(Unlike the panzer IV), it had relatively good ergonomics(Unlike the T-34), its optics were good(Unlike the T-34), its reliability was decent(Unlike the German heavy tanks), had a huge number of variants including the M18 which was phenomenal in tank to tank combat. Its one disadvantage was the fact it had a nasty tendency of going off in flames.

The M18 Hellcat wasn't related at all to the M4 Sherman. Are you thinking of the M10?

[Democratic Peoples republic of Kelvinsi]

I would have to say that the M4 was the best tank of WWII. It was easy to produce(Unlike the panzer IV), it had relatively good ergonomics(Unlike the T-34), its optics were good(Unlike the T-34), its reliability was decent(Unlike the German heavy tanks), had a huge number of variants including the M18 which was phenomenal in tank to tank combat. Its one disadvantage was the fact it had a nasty tendency of going off in flames.

The M18 Hellcat wasn't related at all to the M4 Sherman. Are you thinking of the M10?

Yeah, I mixed those two up.

[Pandeeria]

I'd say the Tsar Tank would've been the greatest tank of the first half of the 20th century. Only if the Tsardom got around to putting them into action, but they were too busy dealing with the Bolsheviks and getting shot.

[Fordorsia]

The M18 Hellcat wasn't related at all to the M4 Sherman. Are you thinking of the M10?

Yeah, I mixed those two up.

The M10 still isn't an M4 variant