LeuCeaMia

 

One thing American tankers report wishing they had was this capability; apparently it allowed the panther to leave a position unusually quickly (you know, assuming the final drives didn't splinter).

I have a feeling that what they were actually envious of was ability of use the auxiliary clutch and brake steering to turn on a pivot.

There seems to be a fair amount of controversy on whether the Panther could neutral steer or not.

I like how intimidating the 32.5" grousers make the M4 look.

Yes. T-55 Enigma. Iraqi upgrade for T-55/T-55A. It has ceramic spaced armor (no idea if this is better than normal spaced armor). The idea might not seem impressive to you, but it's actually very good vs Iran because at the time the Enigma was made, Iran was doing nothing but spamming HEAT shells.

Aren't the blocks made of spaced layers of aluminum, rubber and steel?

Apparently it adds 240mm eRHA against HEAT and 270-320mm eRHA against KE

Is that the GM XM1?  I can only tell the two apart by the number of road wheels.

Yeah it's the GM XM1

It's one thing to get the T-64's history wrong

It's another to write alternate history for the M1.

People keep ragging on about commander's cupolas being such a German advantage, yet why don't the Jagdpanther, Jagdpanzer and Jagdtiger have them ?

I'm going to miss the Minekaze's 10km torpedoes and super stealth

Blog is deleted. 

The page is still cached by google though.

Is the El Camino a muscle car or a glorified pickup truck?

So Kindle /E-Books are the new vanity press?

 

Okay who does the guy list as references, and is "4Chan" in that list?

There isn't any references but there are wikipedia links strewn about.

e.g.

The Grant, basically a light tank, was soon discarded for the medium-weight M-4, or General Sherman, which became the Allies’ workhorse of the war. It, too, was inadequate. Its high, boxy profile made it an easy target, and its short seventy-five-millimeter gun was out ranged a full thousand feet by the German Panther, which the Nazis began producing in 1942 to deal with the Soviet T-34. Further worsening the odds, the Sherman’s gun-stabilization system was so bad that gunners preferred to turn it off and rely on their cross hairs.

...

 

On July 18, 1944, during Operation Goodwood, an attempt to break out of the Normandy beachhead, 1,350 British- and Canadian-manned Shermans were pitted against about 400 German Tiger and Panther tanks near Caen. “Almost in one minute,” wrote a British survivor, “all of the tanks of three troops and Squadron HQ were hit, blazing and exploding.” In seventy-two hours, the Germans destroyed at least 300 Shermans. No wonder they nicknamed them for the flame thrower Ronson - they lit up every time

The only logical escalation of the T-72 autoloader myth the ability to load the gunner's balls...

But Soviet MBTs also had many defects, which emerged in the Arab-Israeli wars. While the low silhouette added to a Soviet tank’s survivability, the Soviets’ determination to reduce the size of their tanks (to make them harder to hit) left so little room for the crew that no one taller than five feet four inches could fight in one. In prototypes of the T-72, the autoloader revealed a distressing tendency to load vital parts of the gunner, who was jammed next to it. One U.S. Army tanker who studied Israeli-captured tanks said, “We believe this is how the Soviet Army Chorus gets its soprano section."

Is it just me or is the vehicle handling in AW a bit off. It has that lazy delayed feeling, which I assume is there to make the tanks feel heavy but ends up being poor for gameplay reasons.

That kind of handling was ok in Crysis since it contrasts well with the FPS sections. But keeping it that way for a game were there is only tank warfare...

Since you're close the T-54 lightweight I presume you have the LTTB?

All the T-44 has over the LTTB is better gun depression (-7 vs -3), hit-points and front turret armour. In most other categories and especially mobility wise the LTTB is better for the same MM. Still it depends on how much you value gun depression, personally I find the WZ-131 more balanced and a lot people favor the Bulldog for its deadly auto-loader.

For what to get, the T-54 lightweight is a team battle/e-sports staple for a reason. The T-44 on the other-hand hasn't changed much after the LB-1 and 680 hp engine was added years ago back when there were only 3 tier 8 mediums and none of them had over 210mm of penetration.

I have read recently that the keyhole in the 152 caused the barrels to burst.

 

It would have been a decent turret design if they'd given it a gun that actually worked.  Lack of rangefinder would have sucked, but I suppose LRFs were just around the corner.

It was a problem with the Sheridan's 152 mm M81 too so they made the keyway shallower on later guns, only as deep as the rifling on the M81E1. The XM162E1, which the M60A2 had when it was standardized, also had a shallow keyway.

It's more like a mutant cross bred by mad science, for whom every single moment of existence is agonizing pain and it wheezes for us to put it out of its misery.

It looked good on paper though, fooled the Soviets into thinking it was a bit better than the T-64B and a lot better than the T-72/T-64A.