Wanna talk about tanks? <3

>Like WWII tanks
>Only online tank games are made by butthurt Russians that consistently nerf German tanks while giving the T34 Stalinium magic armor

I'm not joking they have one multiplayer game where a Jagdpanzer IV is the same battle tier as a PT-76.

They actively punish players for playing tiger tanks by making them fight against post WWII vehicles with 1950s and 60s guns and ammo.

i like the sherminator, vroom vroom

After watching Tiger Brigade drive 50 mph through the sand blowing turret after turret after turret off of dug in T60's, the M1A1 has my heart.

TOG MASTER RACE

I have grown fond to early british tanks in ww2. Matilda, Crusader, Valentine, Cruiser MK 4. I know they were crap most of the time but they have a certain charm. Anyone else feel like it? ;_;

KV-1>KV-2
desu

I've always liked the Sherman over the kraut meme tanks.
Dem curves boiiii

Oh look, another buttflustered wehraboo.

>what is the best tank

This is going to be dependant on what you mean.

The T-34 was the best, most important tank of WWII... in the sense that it did the lion's share of the fighting, was easy to mass produce, reliable enough, really outclassed its peers when it showed up on the battlefield, was pretty mobile, etc.

Now if instead you're imagining some sort of 1 vs. 1 cage match between one tank and another tank, it wouldn't be the best tank in that regard. If you put it up with a King Tiger, for example, it would be completely outclassed. Not nearly the armor, not nearly the gun.

Now if you're asking what's the best in this regard, I'd say the IS-3.

What's my personal favorite? Probably the M-18.

panther considered best ww2 tank by literally every expert

high mobility
good armour
extreme armour penetrating and accurate gun

wrong board faggot

>IS-3
>WW2
You should probably just reevaluate your life.

youtube.com/watch?v=sNYTx8Ay5rk

Entered service May of 1945. Deployed in the east against the Japanese, before the ending of the war later that year.

I always liked KV2, had some impressive achievements individually, even if it was terrible on larger scale.

I don't get why people are obsessed with strict definition (what not all country use anyway) of tank. Even original tanks wouldn't count as tank under it.

Show on puppet where WoT developer touched you.

The use of the IS-3 against the Japs is unverified as far as I'm aware.

The Soviet Union claims that they did. There's no surviving evidence from other sources either way. It's known to have entered production and service by may of 1945, it was in the Victory Day Parade, claiming that it wasn't a WWII tank just kind of reeks of German butthurt.

>high mobility
if its drivetrain doesn't breakdown
>good armor
40mm of side armor that can be penetrated by fucking PTRS
>extreme armour penetrating and accurate gun
all guns at the time had similar mechanical accuracy, the biggest source of error is range estimation, which the high velocity gun did help
however, its penetration is not really special; about the same level as the 17pdr

>+3 GP

thats very diffcult to choose, because they are very good tanks, since 1939 to nowadays.
But in my opinion, the best tank is the T-34,but the germans, the british and the americans (the M4 Sherman had good qualities) they had (and have) good tanks

another pic of the T-34

Are you 12 years old?

Just kill me, this tank exists

good tank-destroyer. One of my favorites

the Sherman have good things, but I don´t think that it has been a good tank

I just post merkava

bad news, that tnak had exist. A Bob Semple tank, of New Zealand

>good tank-destroyer
It was an assault gun and its doctrine was to be used as an assault gun.

I know that, but it was used for that purpose (tank-destroyer)

Tank destroyer is not a term denoting a type of a machine. It properly describes a US doctrine. Anything from self-propelled direct fire guns to towed AT guns were part of tank destroyer units.

>T-34
Which one?

Well, I didn´t know it that fact

Both, but specially the T-34-85

Nice derp gun you got there

Germany did have self propelled tank destroyer units. Assault gun units are considered artillerymen and are usually attached to infantry divisions whereas tank destroyer units were usually independent or attached to armor units.

>KV-2

Couple major issues with the KV-2, both a result of the weight of the turret; small hits that no possibility of penetrating could easy jam the turret ring, and the turret could not traverse unless on completely level ground.

in warthunder there's huge Russian bias but in WoT Americans are probably the best at basically everything since like 2014.

Used in Vienna once. Proved what Russian staff already knew. I think there were 2 of them destroyed, one by flanking(Panther flanked it), second one by infantry with panzerfausts.

No wonder they were so reluctant to their heavy tank programme and scrapped it all together after Stalin died.

>but I don´t think that it has been a good tank
well, you are wrong but that's okay

poor lt35 (or is it 38 i always get them confused) :(

Better than the Japanese ww2 tanks

I don't think such a feat is possible for the Bob Semple.

nah

it actually does

this is really gay

Except it's rangrange was 1 mile.. if it didn't break down yet.

The KV-2 wasn't meant for tank combat, I hate when people base their history off a retarded game called War Thunder.

Three IS-3 faced off against two Maus tanks personally commanded by Hitler outside the Reichstag.

Merkava a cute
A CUTE

>the Sherman have good things, but I don´t think that it has been a good tank

But that's wrong. The Sherman was arguably the best medium tank of WW2 and a prime contender for best WW2 tank overall.

Took the gf to see this a few months ago and climb over.

Best is probably the legendary L3/33. Rumor has it that the Soviets would sacrifice four or five T34s to take out one of these beasts

That is a fucking abomination, would have been better if it had suffered a direct hit from a 88.

that pic is so cringy.

Where's a fucking Panzerfaust when you need it?

>The KV-2 wasn't meant for tank combat

What does that have to do with its faults?

I wonder how a tank battle gets this fucked up.

People think that the purpose of tanks was to fight other tanks. While they did fight other tanks, including KV-2s, that was only a fraction of what they did.

Ironically, I suppose this guy got the idea that tanks were supposed to fight tanks from video games.

Gun is jammed. Crew member wounded. Commanders seeing tanks around him being destroyed, orders the driver to ram. All kinds of crazy shit happened in tank combat.

Citation needed.

Isn't STuG III an assault gun, not a tank? No turret, and it was primarily for bunker destroying?

The original purpose was for assaults. So bunkers, machine gun nests, any kind of fortification that could stall an infantry advance.

Like many armored fighting vehicles, it found it worked well in multiple roles, including an anti-tank role, particularly because it had a low profile and easy to conceal.

The whole point of casemate style tank destroyers is that they're much cheaper to produce than turreted tanks. If somebody wanted to call them a tank for the purposes of this I don't have a problem with that.

Try playing with high tier American tanks in War Thunder, then you will know what pain truly is.

I'm tier 5 in americans and I haven't got a problem.

But yeah, werhaboos are whiny as fuck. Their vehicles are perfectly competitive.

Like those pea shooters would even be effective against a T-34.
Then again ramming must be pretty effective against a tank with riveted armor, if shots to the armor plates could cause lethal shrapnel in the crew compartment imagine what a ram would do.

it's LT 38
35 has the long benish shaped thing over the barrel

>gf
Fuck off

Yeah, I'm not a German. All I'm saying is that there is no evidence it actually served.

>sherminator

Best tank of WWII and the cast hull M4A1 is the cutest.

There's so many but I'm going with Panzer IV ausf H. There really isn't anything bad I can say about it. It was combat effective, reasonably cheap and good looking. It's called the workhorse of the German army for a reason. The only negative thing I can say is that by 1945 it was losing it combat potency to newer allied medium tanks. I also have a softspot for the Italian M13/40.

user, they didn't have seat belts in the 1940s. They didn't have airbags or cushioned seats or crumble zone panels. That they did have is lots of awkward pointy metal bits sticking around at all sorts of angles. So if you're cruising along at 40 kmh and you hit another tank, a tree, or a big rock... somebody's going to get hurt.

So damn adorable.

youtube.com/watch?v=7TrovtcNhpQ

...

...

...

...

...

>manual breech
laughing slavs.webm

They won't be laughing when all the ammunition explodes around them.

or when their fancy autoloader inevitably fucks up and they can't do the shooty shooty bang bang part of being a tank.

cryingarmlessslavs.webm

The T-72's autoloader was reputed to have removed the arms of hapless Slav loaders.

>The T-72's autoloader was reputed to have removed the arms of hapless Slav loaders.
If you ignore the large metal plate that separates your arm from the autoloader, sure. If anything, the lack of a physical barrier behind the breech of the Abrams makes it more prone for the loader to be injured.

Yes, but that doesn't stop the KV-2 from facing enemy tanks.

Tanks were meant to break through fortifications, but tank-on-tank battles were so common that you can't rule it out.

>Good looking
Not with the Schurzen it isn't.

KV-2 was an especially bad vehicle.
Firstly, it is less of a tank and more of a self propelled gun. Whilst on rare occasions it did engage armoured vehicles it's main purpose was anti-material specifically pill boxes and fortified houses. This does not require the vehicle to be an effective fighting machine rather it just had to get its gun and crew to the target under its own power.

The engine in the vehicle was similar or exactly the same as that used in the KV-1 a significantly lighter machine thus giving the KV-2 a massive performance disadvantage in mobility and in the long run reliability.

The immense weight of the turret made the KV-2 top heavy and prone to falling over without much effort. The weight also significantly effected the turret rotation, if the vehicle was at a 2° incline, it would not turn at all.

that thing is awesome

Are you retarded? The Flak 88 and the KwK 36 were developed independent of each other.

Centurion mk3
>Literally ol, boy
>Queens cruiser
>Dat gun
>Dem angles
>Don't even get me started on the side skirts
>It makes me want to cum
>It will take you out to dinner and treat you light a naughty girl that night.

Centurion huh.

I came at least six times