SpudFiles

dongfang wrote:

The Nazi tanks of WW2 might have been the best in the world but they lost the war Wink

Wasn´t it Guderian to say: All in all, a German tank is 10 times as effective a weapon as a Russian one. The damn thing is that the Russians have 20 times more tanks than we have....

The T-34 wasn't really that bad of a tank, its true they had alot more then the Germans but the T-34 was as easy to make as a Sherman and alot better.

Back on topic, I usually go for a bit of both, though im not a fan of dead space, so I try and keep that as minimal as possible.

I think i know a similar quote, and its one of my favorites,
"In Germany, they dont build ten tanks, they build one that is so good as to do the work of ten"

dude.
you need to like, not worry about that kinda stuff.
like they say, function over form( but it might help if it looks awsome!)

You have a DWV bell reducer on that cannon. It may suck and look good, or be good and look not too great, but either way, it's still unsafe.

MrCrowley wrote:

dongfang wrote:

The Nazi tanks of WW2 might have been the best in the world but they lost the war Wink

Wasn´t it Guderian to say: All in all, a German tank is 10 times as effective a weapon as a Russian one. The damn thing is that the Russians have 20 times more tanks than we have....

The T-34 wasn't really that bad of a tank, its true they had alot more then the Germans but the T-34 was as easy to make as a Sherman and alot better.

even though it's off-topic, best allied tank of WW2 (n my opinion) is,
The Comet. Not including the Centurion, which wasn't really in full production till after.

Back on Topic, Yeah "Function over Form" is probably the best philosophy but i really try and balance them out abit.

Is thats a reducer on the chamber? DWV = not good

I build mine for power, only one for looks. Any way nice cannon.

-e1337

Redcoat wrote:even though it's off-topic, best allied tank of WW2 (n my opinion) is,
The Comet.

In one-on-one combat the Tiger II would have blown up the Comet long before it would have been able to shoot back. Of course the Tiger was an overweight monster and in logistical terms, it would have been better for the Germans to concentrate on the Panther, ah well, boo hoo sucks to you fritzy

Yes JAck, but you've got to put the two into comparison, A one on one tank battle isn't going to be standing still aimed shots.
THere will be maneuvering, gunning and the environment. All of these have to be taken into consideration.
I don't doubt the Tiger is a better tank in an Outgunning contest but in a real world situation i think it would be a fair to say that it would be quite close and either could win.
The Comet could out manouvre it quite easily while the Tiger would be moving more slowly, However, The Tiger would be able to put more heavier destructive rounds down than the Comet and Has heavier Armour, Also there could be a great chance that the Comet could outmaneuver the Tiger in the Surrounding environment, take the dutch countryside for example and I reckon that It could almost sneak into range and a clear shot without the tiger seeing it, bar the noise. Also the comet has a farther range than the Tiger.
I'm sorry i ranted, i could go on .

This is drifting off topic, I know, but here goes

Redcoat wrote:Also the comet has a farther range than the Tiger.

The Comet had a lighter, lower velocity version of the 17 pounder gun. The Tiger II was equipped with the massive 88mm L/71 that could penetrate over 15cm of armour at 2 kilometres. The thickest armour on the comet was a mere 10cm. On the other hand, the Comet couldn't pierce the frontal armour of the Tiger even using discarding sabot shot at half that distance. The Tiger also had the benefit of German optics that were much better than the Allied counterparts giving it a higher hit probability. In a one-on-one match, there would be no contest.

oh sorry i meant distance range that they could travel (the whole tank)not gun range.
sorry, i was going to change that.And i don't think it would be "no contest"

yes this is drifting off-topic.

Bleh. If someone was coming along with a Tiger tank I'd wait for it to break down.

Or borrow a ISU-152 from the russians and blow it in half

Hotwired wrote:.Or borrow a ISU-152 from the russians and blow it in half

Not if the Jagdtiger could help it ;D

jackssmirkingrevenge wrote:

Hotwired wrote:.Or borrow a ISU-152 from the russians and blow it in half

Not if the Jagdtiger could help it ;D

^_^

First shot to hit wins at these calibres.

Hotwired wrote:First shot to hit wins at these calibres.

Good point, though the Jagdtiger does have the upper hand - its frontal armour is more than double that of the ISU. Also while the Russian gun is of higher calibre, the pak-44 on the Jagdtiger fires its shell over 300 metres per second faster, giving better penetration and flatter trajectory, therefore higher hit probability. If the jagdtiger can choose the range, it will win.

Stop with the bloody tanks! We've gone from appearance of spudguns to which damn battle tank would win!
I will be forced to break out a plasma rifle in the 40-watt range if you persist further.

I agree most strongly with what spud yeti said. I design for power, followed by adjusting the design slightly from the optimum for practicality and looks, then make the remaining adjustments by adding stuff.

I also believe that multiple elements should be combined to get power. Why waste part of the advantage because of another less than optimum element?