Sturgeon Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 Thompsons are great for the same reason Garands are, becuase the other guy's has a bolt action or a less optimal submachine gun The Thompson is about as "less optimal" as they come, besides the Jap subguns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 At Under 50 meters i couldnt think of a better Non Soviet submachine gun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 The Thompson is about as "less optimal" as they come, besides the Jap subguns. 10+ pounds unloaded and only firing a pistol cartridge. I mean, I want one. Kinda alot. But it's not an optimal weapon design, even for the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 10 pounds my ass, they are ergonomic and a blast to shoot, you guys are a bunch of wimps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 10+ pounds unloaded and only firing a pistol cartridge. I mean, I want one. Kinda alot. But it's not an optimal weapon design, even for the time. I have shot them enough to not want them. MP40 much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeeps_Guns_Tanks Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 The Merlin is definitely overrated and the V1710 underrated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 I have shot them enough to not want them. MP40 much better. maybe outside of 100 meter sure, but the tompson just feels more reliable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collimatrix Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 I'm going to have to defend the P-51 here. Is the performance all that? No; the P-47M/N and a number of other Allied fighters could out-fly it. However, it could run down anything the Axis had in the skies save very rare opponents like ME-262s, KI-84s and TA-152s. Also, it was much cheaper than any Allied design that was greatly superior. Also, it had insanely long legs for a fighter of its cost. A handful of fighters, Axis and Allied were better individually, but as a long-range implement of strategic air superiority, it was good enough and, more importantly, numerous enough to kill the last remaining Axis air power. 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 this is all i got Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 this is all i got The topic is "Overrated" Tied, not "Underrated". I've slogged through enough M1 Carbines Bounced Off Of ChiCom Uniforms at Chosin comments to earn royalties from the David Marshall Williams estate. Sturgeon and Dragonstriker 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 You relies the Garand was in service at the same time right! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 Yes. Yes. And the M1 Carbine fit the role in which it was designed for, being a light, handy weapon to arm second-line troops, officers and support elements with so they didn't have to lug around a heavy M1 Garand while being more useful than a M1911 pistol. Once it got select fire capability, the weapon was better than a Thompson or an M3 submachine gun (IMHO) Sturgeon 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 Must overr8ted weppen! *Laugh's Maniacally* jeffster 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 Probably a bit less reliable, but infinitely handier and more useful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 Must overr8ted weppen! *Laugh's Maniacally* Uh oh. Shots fired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zinegata 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 Yeah the Panzer III is better in those regards, but that comes at the price of being 15 tons heavier. Armor-wise they're actually very similar in thickness level and the gun is about as good as the Panzer III with the short 50mm. That's again a surprising amount of capability for something designed under one year using a lot of civilian parts. The SU-76 then pretty much rectifies most of the problems to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperComrade Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 With the VT-42, the gun was about on-par with the KwK 39 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter_Sobchak Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 any of them that were hit by the 152 I don't doubt the ability of the SU 152 to knock out an enemy heavy tank, I just doubt that they really had the chance to do it very often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 I don't doubt the ability of the SU 152 to knock out an enemy heavy tank, I just doubt that they really had the chance to do it very often. That Assault gun/TD is not much "overrated". I never heard about hordes of ISU-152s hunting for German cats, or anything of similar level of overblowing real situation. Actually, according to what i see and hear in English-speaking part of internet, SU-152 and ISU are slightly underrated weapon systems, as they rarely appear in discussions or when they appear, they are a "side note" at best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 I don't doubt the ability of the SU 152 to knock out an enemy heavy tank, I just doubt that they really had the chance to do it very often. being that they are assualt guns made for infrantry support, i doubt they did Think of them like the sherman 105 in the Pacific, sure they spent alot of time making their name by blasting Jap positions, but they can also knock any Japanese tank into next week (which is also what normal shermans can do, but it looks less amazing) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 It occured too me at work, that the British were also part of the Allies Belesarius and Zyklon 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter_Sobchak Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 That Assault gun/TD is not much "overrated". I never heard about hordes of ISU-152s hunting for German cats, or anything of similar level of overblowing real situation. Actually, according to what i see and hear in English-speaking part of internet, SU-152 and ISU are slightly underrated weapon systems, as they rarely appear in discussions or when they appear, they are a "side note" at best. I just remember as a kid every book on tanks that I read called the IS-152 a "Beast Killer" and gave the impression that the Red Army used them to blow up Tiger tanks all the time. I'm sure it was a very useful direct fire support vehicle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 The Su-152 was a beast killer to tigers just as Shermans were beast killers to panzer 4s They could do the job alright, but they earned their grit by lodging HE at infantry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collimatrix Posted October 19, 2015 Report Share Posted October 19, 2015 For those more conversant with Russian-language sources than I am, how much of a psychological impression did the big cats make on the Soviets? I have heard that after Kursk many of the newspapers announced that "The Tigers are Burning!" and a few other stories that would seem to indicate that the tiger definitely got the Soviets' attention despite not being a particularly effective weapon overall. 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.