LostCosmonaut Posted October 18, 2015 Report Share Posted October 18, 2015 Overrated German stuff is well known here, but what sort of stuff on the allied side has a reputation outstripping its combat effectiveness? Battleships in general to me: obsolete in the anti-ship role compared to carriers since about the early 30s (even if people didn't realize it yet), and for the same cost you could build multiple 203 or 155 armed ships that would probably be just as good in the fire support role. Most useful as armored AAA platforms. Also, people seem to think the Il-2 had a lot more payload than it actually did for some reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priory_of_Sion Posted October 18, 2015 Report Share Posted October 18, 2015 Allied bombers over Europe get a lot of attention that I don't think is that warranted plus "tank buster" planes. Domus Acipenseris 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeeps_Guns_Tanks Posted October 18, 2015 Report Share Posted October 18, 2015 The P-51 Mustang. By the time it came along the Germans were already on there knees. Domus Acipenseris 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted October 18, 2015 Report Share Posted October 18, 2015 I... I'm not sure. Considering that every single piece of equipment produced by the United States was better than anything produced by the Germans or the Japanese. Ummm... Colt M1911A1? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperComrade Posted October 18, 2015 Report Share Posted October 18, 2015 I'm tempted to say Swordfish. Built its reputation more from the incompetence of the Italians and Germans it faced earlier in the war and the skill of its pilots than its actual qualities as a warplane Domus Acipenseris 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter_Sobchak Posted October 18, 2015 Report Share Posted October 18, 2015 I'm going to guess that the reputation of the SU-152 as a "beast slayer" may be a bit exaggerated. I'd like to know how many German "Cats" were actually knocked out by these vehicles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 M1 Garand. Just check out how much I had to softball this article tearing it a new asshole. Dragonstriker 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostCosmonaut Posted October 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 The P-51 Mustang. By the time it came along the Germans were already on there knees. Speaking of the P-51, I think the Merlin is pretty overrated. If it wasn't for the invasion panic, the Brits would have had it replaced in most applications by the Griffon in late 41 or early 42. Also, in my opinion, the Allison V-1710 (when properly supercharged) was a better engine; it was capable of making just as much power, and was also simpler to produce. Jeeps_Guns_Tanks and Domus Acipenseris 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 For the record, just because something is "overrated" doesn't necessarily make it "bad". At least in my opinion. Sturgeon, LeuCeaMia, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks and 2 others 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostCosmonaut Posted October 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 Yeah, the Merlin, Iowas, Il-2 and whatever else weren't terrible, it's just that I feel peoples' opinions of them are a wee bit inflated at times. Domus Acipenseris 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 As much as I like it, I think the Thompson is pretty overrated. That fucker is pretty heavy for a SMG. Sturgeon, Donward and Domus Acipenseris 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 I'm going to guess that the reputation of the SU-152 as a "beast slayer" may be a bit exaggerated. I'd like to know how many German "Cats" were actually knocked out by these vehicles. any of them that were hit by the 152 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeuCeaMia Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 The a-bomb being exaggerated as the nigh sole cause for the Japanese surrender. Also maybe the Pershing because Belton Cooper and with mainly Zebra mission, it barely qualifies as being more of a WW2 weapon than the Centurion or T-44/54. The Firefly was more of a WW2 T-62. It compromises for its big gun so that it's not straight up better than its predecessor and it was arguably worse than the 76mm Shermans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 This is actually a REALLY hard to topic to post for since any peice of allied equipment that is hung in the hollows of fame usually deserves it, and the rest if anything, are underrated Make this Overrated Allied Weapons of the Cold War and then we will be talking, then again, chances are i would be the one making that thread, and therefor it would get 4 reponeses at best I guess the Iowa, maybe the hellcat but anything with that gun moving at that speed atleast seems like a very good strategic weapon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zinegata Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 Fireflies were definitely overrated. Trading more gunpower for poorer accuracy doesn't really help very much. Mustang is way overrated. There is a general idea that the P-51 was better as a fighter than the P-47, but in reality the later-model P-47s pretty much outperformed the Mustang in every way while the P-51 couldn't be anything more than a long-ranged light fighter. They were complementary systems. The Pershing's pretty overrated; as its engine issues were still a problem in the Korean War. I don't think the SU-152s were really considered for heavy anti-tank work except for the rush job at Kursk; and in any case the tank destroyer that was reknowned for cat-killing was the SU-100. Of course with Panzer General logic the Su-152 is the bestest TD you can upgrade to. On the reverse side of things, the Mosquito really needs more credit even though everyone already sings it praises - it was just that good and it demonstrates what really kept bomber pilots alive instead of the silly "self-defending" delusions. Armoured vehicle-wise the one everyone keeps forgetting is the T-70 / SU-76. Domus Acipenseris 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 the T-70 was pretty unremarkable as far as light tanks go. By no means bad, but not fantastic. the Su-76 is a much more versatile platform, though i certainty wouldnt say its been forgotten Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zinegata Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 the T-70 was pretty unremarkable as far as light tanks go. By no means bad, but not fantastic. the Su-76 is a much more versatile platform, though i certainty wouldnt say its been forgotten It was unremarkable until you consider its extremely short design time (less than a year) and the use of a lot of "off the shelf" parts like the twin bus engines; and yet it was essentially the equivalent of a mid-range Panzer III which took nearly 3 years to design with only half the weight. It wasn't a great tank stat-wise, but from a design and manufacturing perspective it's a reflection of the Soviets being able to make do despite the massive industrial losses caused by Barbarossa. Indeed, I would say the T-70/SU-76 was the second most important tank in the Soviet arsenal, second only to the T-34; and was the most important vehicle in the critical year of 1942. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 Firefly is a great suggestion, since in reality it was basically irrelevant as soon as the 76 Shermans showed up. Thompson is an even better suggestion than Garand, as Thompsons are actually not great (the Garand IS great, but it's put on a pedestal as being competitive even with today's arms, an opinion that thankfully has receded a bit since some of those die hards took their guns out to action matches). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 the Su-76 was always the 2nd most important to war effort, but equating the T-70 to a Panzer 3 is alittle hopeful. Im not saying the T-70 is by no means a bad tank, and i hate to tote the boo's tagline, but the Panzer 3 has much better situational awareness and strategic use than a light tank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 Firefly is a great suggestion, since in reality it was basically irrelevant as soon as the 76 Shermans showed up. Thompson is an even better suggestion than Garand, as Thompsons are actually not great (the Garand IS great, but it's put on a pedestal as being competitive even with today's arms, an opinion that thankfully has receded a bit since some of those die hards took their guns out to action matches). Thompsons are great for the same reason Garands are, becuase the other guy's has a bolt action or a less optimal submachine gun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 This is actually a REALLY hard to topic to post for since any peice of allied equipment that is hung in the hollows of fame usually deserves it, and the rest if anything, are underrated Make this Overrated Allied Weapons of the Cold War and then we will be talking, then again, chances are i would be the one making that thread, and therefor it would get 4 reponeses at best I guess the Iowa, maybe the hellcat but anything with that gun moving at that speed atleast seems like a very good strategic weapon You said it. I'm trying to come up with some weapon systems that the United States had that were "bad". Maybe some footwear and uniforms early on or that were inappropriate for the climate. See the Aleutian Island campaign. There were instances where there were flaws in pieces of machinery like, say, the Liberty Ships which developed cracks in the hull due to poor metallurgy and manufacture techniques. But these were addressed and fairly quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 I would say the Colt m1911, then again world war 2, and especially the Pacific for the Americans might be the one good exuse to run around with one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priory_of_Sion Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 KV-2 gets about the same treatment from me as the Su-152. IS-3 is overrated as some people still believe it fought in the war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 KV-2 gets about the same treatment from me as the Su-152. IS-3 is overrated as some people still believe it fought in the war. KV-2 is arugably the most effective heavy tank of the great patriotic war, or atleast had the best "lone stand" record in history Is-3 gets off since its a great design overall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priory_of_Sion Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 Nothing against the KV-2's lone stand, but it seems a pretty niche vehicle and doesn't seem to have great strategic value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.