Anti-German Bias

[=7CAV=SPC.Henson.K]

In spite of historical evidence, German armor is extremely weak when compared to Russian and American armor. Pzkw IV H-J are killed with one shot by both the low velocity Russian 76mm and the American 76mm. The same German vehicle, with the KwK 40 L/48 needs several shots to kill Shermans, T-34s and KV-1s, a gun designed specifically to kill those vehicles. You practically have to be point blank to kill a T-34 or a KV-1. I'm wondering why this is?

[Tankfriend]

Ammo rack placement depends on the type of Sherman you're looking at. All of them have a small ready rack inside the turret, but that one probably is the first to be emptied by the loader and doesn't hold much, so it's likely not a problem.

Other than that, the early models of the Sherman have some ammo below and at the back of the turret, as well as a good deal of ammo in the side sponsons above the tracks, with their right side holding more ammo than their left one.

Meanwhile, the later wet stowage (W) Shermans have all of their ammo below the turret, and the ammo rack should also be a bit more difficult to blow up if the effect of the wet stowage is implemented correctly.

[IAmNotMatthew]

Killing a KV-1 or a T-34 is easy, shoot the KV-1's tower's side or back.
Shoot the T-34's neck(the wielding between the tower and the tank itself)

[Hagglefoot]

Publicado originalmente por kenthenson:

In spite of historical evidence, German armor is extremely weak when compared to Russian and American armor. Pzkw IV H-J are killed with one shot by both the low velocity Russian 76mm and the American 76mm. The same German vehicle, with the KwK 40 L/48 needs several shots to kill Shermans, T-34s and KV-1s, a gun designed specifically to kill those vehicles. You practically have to be point blank to kill a T-34 or a KV-1. I'm wondering why this is?

I orginially felt Russians tanks were overpowered, so instead of posting a flame thread on the forum I did a whole lot of research. As it turns out, German tanks were better than anything at the time. In most cases American armor couldn't even touch one at point blank. And as for Russian armor, it was built SPECIFICALLY to combat (and be better than) German armor. In other words, they made tanks with armor that could resist German guns and guns that could penetrate German armor. Now if you think about it, if American tanks couldn't touch German armor, and Russian armor is meant to beat German armor in every way, you could imagine what a tough time an American tank would have with a Russian tank.

[Arathian]

Publicado originalmente por cowinspace:

Publicado originalmente por Rumpelcrutchskin:

There is alarming amount of immortals lately where you shoot them through the multiple ammo racks with zero effect. Just today I shot M4 through the two different ammo racks and fuel tank with shrapnel flying everywhere and it still lived.
Three hits from the side with Pz IV H where single hit should have been lethal.
Happens to other tanks too, I dont know where the hell they keep their ammo lately, sure aint in the racks.

Probably a smart Sherman driver who doesn't fill his ammunition racks completely. It makes it much harder to detonate them. I know this works because I do it myself.

I NEVER load more than 31-34 shells on my sherman and I get one shot ammo racked all the damned time. Then again maybe they know EXACTLY the rack to hit.

I clearly don't on well... anything, I have failed to ammo rack(when the x-ray showed me hitting the ammo racks with my shells) pz3/4, t-34, and even other shermans.

Also somehow my engines/fuel tanks seem to be more prone to exploding then pretty much anyone else I face.

Also while I didn't notice it at first. It seems every sherman from M4 downward have raised plates in the side SCREAMING "AMMUNITION STORED HERE! PLEASE SHOOT PLEASE!"

The only way it could be more obvious is if I put decals on them.

The M4a! doesn't seem to have those plates as I understand it. I can't understand why one would design an armored fighting vehicle with such visually obvious weak points.

[Vandalen]

because that time, they did not had xray view or perfect optics. ^^ And they were designed to face the enemy, in large groups. all this 1on1 in WT is nice, but not realistic.

[Tankfriend]

Publicado originalmente por Arathian:

The M4a! doesn't seem to have those plates as I understand it. I can't understand why one would design an armored fighting vehicle with such visually obvious weak points.

Luckily, the real-life designers didn't base their designs on the experience of a videogame played from a comfortable armchair with god-knows how many helping GUI elements, crystal clear vision, pinpoint-accurate mouse control and no physical or psychological impact of combat on the crew, i.e. the player.

[Tiberius]

Publicado originalmente por Vandalen:

because that time, they did not had xray view or perfect optics. ^^ And they were designed to face the enemy, in large groups. all this 1on1 in WT is nice, but not realistic.

True. And in real life there is something called " Teamwork ". There is no military unit on this planet which had succes without a good organised team and a positive working team. Even if you had just a couple of Shermans, if they worked together fine, they could easily take out one tiger.

[Rottenflieger]

Publicado originalmente por Arathian:

Publicado originalmente por cowinspace:

I NEVER load more than 31-34 shells on my sherman and I get one shot ammo racked all the damned time. Then again maybe they know EXACTLY the rack to hit.

You can set a keybinding to show you the x-ray view of your tank whilst in a match. Using it will show exactly where your shells are stored. Unfortunately the Shermans (and the M3 Lee) have ammo everywhere. I keep about 30 shells too, and that still leaves the right side and 1/2 of the left with amo stored behind those armoured plates. At least it removes it from the turret though.

[brbrbr]

Publicado originalmente por Epic Fail Guy:

Publicado originalmente por brbrbr:

you can't defeat engineering and historical facts(of poorly-designed German armor. or more likely mass-production-centered), just in spite of "political correctness" or personal perception of actual imprfections(reflecting Actual status of them)as "absurd".

German armour was not at all mass-production centred. One Panther tank took 55,000 man hours to produce in comparison to the 9000-3000 (numbers vary by factory and year) man hours it took to produce a T-34.

in fact they is. they seriously comporomised both armor, engine for sake of simpler assembly. 90' degree "arour", riducullous transmission and fragile discs, tracks(especially on Panther). T-34 aren't "more mass-production" tank, they simply done in HARSH conditions, thousands of workers, including children and women, make then 24/7 in several locations, with only 4-5 sleep rest and with 15min breaks beteen 2 hrs(not always). not time for proper food, not time for proper bath(they used simplified shower and hot air, never used even in penecitary system) and first days of peace, first days of "ordinary", they simply wander, stare at themselves, trying to accomodate to "peacetime" mentally/morally. t-34 uses more complicated welding process(fully-automated, compared to manually-doned, quite weak, inconsistent(this is done in era, when majority of US "tanks" still had AP "armor", holded together with rivets and ridiculous transmission and engines(sometimes more than one). armour steel was considerably better on Soviet tanks too. they aren't simpler, no, its their production simply Better ORGANIZED, managed, rather than Nazies imaginary/fictiona superiourity lead to bigger production. USSR had fully-wartime economy, while AH failed/rejected to switch to warmode economically even after years of wartime. or to be exact, he was tried, but thats politely "shrugged-off", humilated by his subordinates.

[Bogs]

Publicado originalmente por Epic Fail Guy:

Publicado originalmente por brbrbr:

you can't defeat engineering and historical facts(of poorly-designed German armor. or more likely mass-production-centered), just in spite of "political correctness" or personal perception of actual imprfections(reflecting Actual status of them)as "absurd".

German armour was not at all mass-production centred. One Panther tank took 55,000 man hours to produce in comparison to the 9000-3000 (numbers vary by factory and year) man hours it took to produce a T-34.

Yes but T-34 was great tank! Could not kill a Tiger from the front and at kursk 10 of them had to ram tiger to disable it's barrel, killing all T-34's in the process! Stronk soviet tank!

[2Rs Bloimey]

Publicado originalmente por MG___42:

Publicado originalmente por Epic Fail Guy:

German armour was not at all mass-production centred. One Panther tank took 55,000 man hours to produce in comparison to the 9000-3000 (numbers vary by factory and year) man hours it took to produce a T-34.

Yes but T-34 was great tank! Could not kill a Tiger from the front and at kursk 10 of them had to ram tiger to disable it's barrel, killing all T-34's in the process! Stronk soviet tank!

What are you smoking? Pass it here.

[Neckstabba]

Publicado originalmente por 2Rs Bloimey:

Publicado originalmente por MG___42:

Yes but T-34 was great tank! Could not kill a Tiger from the front and at kursk 10 of them had to ram tiger to disable it's barrel, killing all T-34's in the process! Stronk soviet tank!

What are you smoking? Pass it here.

I think hes CoH2 addicted, or maybe thats his strategy there - ramming till gun is down xD

[Allau1]

I saw a program about the battle for normandy, it was a Tiger vs a Sherman the Shernam shot at the Tiger and the shell hit the tank and flyed off.

[brbrbr]

less hours of t-34 production no imply oversimplifications, quite contrary. less manpower resources spend on each - just resuly of better Management(of production),planning, rather than design compromises, done by Germans to achieve same goal. Soviets will do however, seriously slow-down adoption of newer models(nearly 100 prototypes/variants designed during wartime, and less than 12 was seriously mass-produced. simply had not time for that).

[=7CAV=SPC.Henson.K]

Better management, planning and design? By Soviets? I don't think so. Russian drivers were issued hammers so they could beat the transmissions into gear. Sloppy tolerances and poor QA produce vehicles that were to be driven out one day, blown up on the next.