Lock 'n load - Tanks! part 2/5
Uploader Comments (ThePanzerWarMachine)
All Comments (80)
-
M4A1 my ass :P That's M4A3E8
-
@SecuR0M On the other hand, you don't know shit about Germany's doctrine neither, as expected.
Of the "Nazi things" I listed, you ignorant kid, most were indeed meant to fight enemy armor, and even the assault guns were supposed to be multi-combat purposed.
Again, without the need of humiliating you (specially because you're excellent at doing it to yourself) and verbally insulting you, I ask and advise you to get your facts straight, kiddo.
Take care.
-
@SecuR0M Ahahah as soon as I disproof your invalid and fake arguments, the "insults" start falling in. So american of you...
Read the Armored Force doctrine and show me where it says american tanks weren't supposed to fight enemy armor, if needed. SHOW ME! Here's the link: ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/ref/F
M/PDFs/FM17-10.PDF -
@Th3Hatebreeder I'm sorry but you are fucking stupid.
Please read the actual tank destroyer doctrine, dipshit. Tank destroyer battalions were meant to engage large, massed formations of armor. Tanks, not TDs, were meant to support the infantry on the offensive.
The lack of German armor on the Western Front meant that TDs were relegated to use as tanks by doctrine.
All those Nazi things you listed were assault guns btw meant to support infantry.
-
@SecuR0M Since the M36 and M18 were tank destroyers, you HAVE to compare them with the German counter-part tank destroyers as well, smart ass.
Compare those shitty M36,M18 and M10 to the Stug, JagdPanzer IV, Jagdpanther, Elephant and Jagdtiger and you'll embarrass yourself even more.
And the Sherman WAS meant to deal with armor, as well as infantry.
Get your facts straight kid.
-
@Th3Hatebreeder American tanks weren't meant to fight other tanks.
So it's not fair to compare them. Compare the M36 or an M18. It beat them every time. Not only because it had an anti-tank gun instead of a low velocity HE lobber, but tank destroyer crews were versed in anti-tank combat.
The majority of German tank kills came from these tank destroyer units, or from American anti-tank guns, not American tanks like the Sherman or Stuart.
-
@xylaphonemaster Erm...Sherman Jumbo had twice the armour of the Tiger...
Never mind the fact that American tanks were never meant to engage other tanks. Thy were meant to engage bunkers, LAVs, and fixed machine guns while support infantry assaults.
Tank destroyers were the primary tank killers in American doctrine and when they were used according to doctrine, the tank destroyers kicked ass.
-
he took a what an all most 25 year jump from tank to tank jeesh theres a lot of tank history in between
-
Amarillo: Quantity/ Germany: Quality.
German engineering has always been superior (and I'm American, so no bias) but in America you can build a whole heck of a lot. You decide what is better.
-
lol? "haha, direct hit, we got them"? he's 2 meters away from the wall....
is that not an israil sherman or firefly i asked as its got double muzzale break firefly had only one
rango388 3 months ago
@rango388
nope, it is the famous M4A3E8 '' Easy Eight'' sherman, with the American 76.2 mm Gun, designed to fight the Panther and alos becuase the Yanks diden't wanted a Gun from an other country.
ThePanzerWarMachine 3 months ago 3
He seems to have glossed over the fact that the only Shermans that had a chance against Tigers were the ones packing the British 73 pounder, the Firefly.
xylaphonemaster 6 months ago 5
@xylaphonemaster
you mean 17. pounder Firefly?
ThePanzerWarMachine 6 months ago 11