Girls Und Panzer RP OOC (Previously Interest) Thread

by **Stormhound** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 3:31 am

Finorskia wrote:Well he goes on to basically say that the Tiger was a good tank. But so was the Sherman and the T-34. Honestly these were all good tanks. The Tiger may have been slow and had some mechanical problems, but overall it was an amazing machine. It had firepower that was leagues ahead of any other tank at the time and more armor than you could shake a fist at.

The Tiger was a heavy tank, the Sherman and T-34 were mediums. Two entirely different roles.

I'm not really sure I would call it slow. 9 to 12 mph cross country is an excellent speed for a WW2 heavy, especially when you're talking about a 70 ton one.

Rynagria wrote:
(Image)

That's my baby.

by **Ulvenes** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 4:54 am

Stormhound wrote:
Finorskia wrote:Well he goes on to basically say that the Tiger was a good tank. But so was the Sherman and the T-34. Honestly these were all good tanks. The Tiger may have been slow and had some mechanical problems, but overall it was an amazing machine. It had firepower that was leagues ahead of any other tank at the time and more armor than you could shake a fist at.

The Tiger was a heavy tank, the Sherman and T-34 were mediums. Two entirely different roles.

I'm not really sure I would call it slow. 9 to 12 mph cross country is an excellent speed for a WW2 heavy, especially when you're talking about a 70 ton one.

Especially when the Allies attempted to make a vehicle similar it wouldn't come close to the same maneuverability.

by **Stormhound** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 8:04 am

Ulvenes wrote:
Stormhound wrote:
The Tiger was a heavy tank, the Sherman and T-34 were mediums. Two entirely different roles.

I'm not really sure I would call it slow. 9 to 12 mph cross country is an excellent speed for a WW2 heavy, especially when you're talking about a 70 ton one.

Especially when the Allies attempted to make a vehicle similar it wouldn't come close to the same maneuverability.

The unreliability of the vehicle has been exaggerated. It had mechanical problems, sure, but so did practically every other tank during that war.

by **Ulvenes** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 8:12 am

What's a shame is that I read that more Panther's were built than Tigers. If it had been the other way around it might have made a significant difference, or if anything delayed the war for another couple months to a year.

by **Finorskia** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 8:43 am

Stormhound wrote:
Ulvenes wrote:
Especially when the Allies attempted to make a vehicle similar it wouldn't come close to the same maneuverability.

The unreliability of the vehicle has been exaggerated. It had mechanical problems, sure, but so did practically every other tank during that war.

Except the Sherman.

by **Ulvenes** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:29 am

Finorskia wrote:
Stormhound wrote:
The unreliability of the vehicle has been exaggerated. It had mechanical problems, sure, but so did practically every other tank during that war.

Except the Sherman.

Hence why he said "practically".

by **Finorskia** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 11:40 am

Ulvenes wrote:
Finorskia wrote:
Except the Sherman.

Hence why he said "practically".

Well I suppose that's not actually entirely true. Early Sherman's suffered from poor ammunition storage and tracks that were so narrow it had a ground PSI greater than that of a Panther.

by **Ulvenes** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 12:21 pm

Finorskia wrote:
Ulvenes wrote:
Hence why he said "practically".

Well I suppose that's not actually entirely true. Early Sherman's suffered from poor ammunition storage and tracks that were so narrow it had a ground PSI greater than that of a Panther.

But was still a pretty great medium tank that served well in to the 80's I believe.

by **Rynagria** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 12:23 pm

Ulvenes wrote:
Finorskia wrote:
Well I suppose that's not actually entirely true. Early Sherman's suffered from poor ammunition storage and tracks that were so narrow it had a ground PSI greater than that of a Panther.

But was still a pretty great medium tank that served well in to the 80's I believe.

The M51 Super Sherman.........

Able to kick a T-62's ass wide open.

by **Ulvenes** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 12:24 pm

Haven't heard of that variant.. Sounds like something I should research.

by **Rynagria** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 12:31 pm

Ulvenes wrote:Haven't heard of that variant.. Sounds like something I should research.

It's basically a Sherman that Israelis had and gave it a French 105mm gun, with the HEAT round specifically designed to defeat the T-62's armor.

by **Monfrox** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 12:33 pm

Monfrox wrote:Pretty sure if Fin let us go into the Cold War era, he'd get this

Did you guys even look at this when I first posted it?!

by **Ulvenes** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 12:58 pm

I don't recall.

by **Rynagria** » Wed Sep 03, 2014 1:06 pm

Monfrox wrote:
Monfrox wrote:Pretty sure if Fin let us go into the Cold War era, he'd get this

Did you guys even look at this when I first posted it?!

I did..........

That's why I knew about it.

by **Stormhound** » Sun Sep 07, 2014 6:20 pm

RP has fallen silent...

by **Monfrox** » Sun Sep 07, 2014 6:22 pm

The classroom shtick bores me, to be honest.

I joined this RP to play as cute pre-teen girls in a tank shooting shit up.

by **Ulvenes** » Sun Sep 07, 2014 6:42 pm

Monfrox wrote:The classroom shtick bores me, to be honest.

I joined this RP to play as cute pre-teen girls in a tank shooting shit up.

Same.

by **Finorskia** » Sun Sep 07, 2014 7:15 pm

Monfrox wrote:The classroom shtick bores me, to be honest.

I joined this RP to play as cute pre-teen girls in a tank shooting shit up.

It won't be long. Next post is gonna wrap it up. I'll have it up, probably sometime this week, but no promises.

by **Monfrox** » Sun Sep 07, 2014 7:25 pm

Finorskia wrote:
Monfrox wrote:The classroom shtick bores me, to be honest.

I joined this RP to play as cute pre-teen girls in a tank shooting shit up.

It won't be long. Next post is gonna wrap it up. I'll have it up, probably sometime this week, but no promises.

I think I speak for everyone...

by **Stormhound** » Sun Sep 07, 2014 8:06 pm

Monfrox wrote:The classroom shtick bores me, to be honest.

I joined this RP to play as cute pre-teen girls in a tank shooting shit up.

The characters are pre-teen?

Also, agreed on the bit about the classroom.

by **Ulvenes** » Sun Sep 07, 2014 8:36 pm

Stormhound wrote:
Monfrox wrote:The classroom shtick bores me, to be honest.

I joined this RP to play as cute pre-teen girls in a tank shooting shit up.

The characters are pre-teen?

Also, agreed on the bit about the classroom.

None of my characters are preteen.

by **Stormhound** » Sun Sep 07, 2014 9:30 pm

Ulvenes wrote:
Stormhound wrote:
The characters are pre-teen?

Also, agreed on the bit about the classroom.

None of my characters are preteen.

My commander and gunner are both over the age of consent. >.>

I think most of the GuP cast are teenagers, iirc.

by **Monfrox** » Sun Sep 07, 2014 9:41 pm

Stormhound wrote:
Ulvenes wrote:
None of my characters are preteen.

My commander and gunner are both over the age of consent. >.>

I think most of the GuP cast are teenagers, iirc.

Semantics. Technicalities.

You knew what I meant.

by **Ulvenes** » Sun Sep 07, 2014 9:43 pm

I think they're all around 15. But not confident on that. But nonetheless all my characters are 17.

by **Stormhound** » Sun Sep 07, 2014 10:01 pm

Monfrox wrote:
Stormhound wrote:
My commander and gunner are both over the age of consent. >.>

I think most of the GuP cast are teenagers, iirc.

Semantics. Technicalities.

You knew what I meant.

I did, and I was pointing out it was wrong.

Girls Und Panzer RP OOC (Previously Interest) Thread

Who is online