Best Tank Destroyer

[AbhMkh]

Tico my friend are you a german???

If so,i didnt mean to offend but yes germany is a small country,though its the largest economy in europe but as u may see tanks cannot drive themselves , germany is like just another patch on the map when compared to either russia or america , size of a country is an indicator of how much manpower it can produce

P.S : I'm from India and germany is roughly equal to one state+1/6 of another state of India(out of 29 states)


As to x pounders with y mm guns is to make paciat understand...

@Tico where did you read history from???,Shermans were asked by Montgomery because the British couldn't fight at equal terms with the jerry , with their poor matildas or crusaders and churchills the sherman 75 mm cannon was excellent against the panzers of tht time...

Yes i knw im offtopic but i couldnt help mentioning!!

[Tico_1990]

No, I'm not German, I'm Dutch (from the tiny country next to Germany;))

No offence taken. In my opinion, your comparison is faulty. You compare a country (Germany in this case) to Russia and America. Most countries are just patches on the map when compared to those two. In my opinion, Germany is a country of average size, while countries like China, America, Russia and India are large countries. Countries like the Netherlands, Belgium are what I consider to be small countries;)
Size is not always a good indicator. Norway for example, is four times as large as the Netherlands, it does however have only one fourth of the population of the Netherlands (if I'm not mistaken)

I read my history from university (I study history). That being said, I'm afraid we didn't cover WW2 as thoroughly as I'd like (in other words, no military history) so I don't know too much about details and such.
I do know, that there is never one single reason for something, so the production problems which I mentioned earlier are certainly a major factor in my opinion.

The sherman might have been good against certain panzers, but most panzers generally outclassed shermans. Sherman tankcrews themselves stated that the sherman was a horrible tank in terms of protection for the crew and such. Also, it's main gun wasn't that effective against tanks like the Tiger and the Panther. Yes, I do realise that the tiger and the panther are heavier tanks than the sherman, but still, they are not as overpowered etc. as say a maus and such.
The main reason for the sherman (I'm talking standard American shermans here, not upgunned fireflies and such) to be so effective against Panzers, is that they generally outnumbered them at least 5 to 1.

Btw, if my post(s) sound harsh, it is not meant as such. I have a tendency to come across as such though so I'll apologise in advance

Cheers

[GodlikeDennis]

Not to mention the Shermans had a huge bullseye right over the munitions storage in the tank. The crews had to slap mud over the big white stars on the side otherwise the Germans had a perfect aiming target. Horrible tank, would have rather been an infantryman than a Sherman crewman. In fact, many did ask to get transferred.

[Strayker]

Well im from Slovakia (which was Germany´s ally in WWII) and from my point of view and i think its basically a all-european view Germany is a big country in fact its the biggest one besides France in Europe. My home country can be called a little patch on the map...but certainly not Germany. Btw greatness of a country is not measured by its sheer size rather than as Tico_1990 said its measured with population who lives there and ofcourse its economy and military might. In summary Germany had the best economy in late 30s and early 40s, because rest of the world was still just recovering from world economical crisis. And its military might in early 40s was undoubtly best in Europe, hence the quick defeat of France and conquer of whole mainland Europe.

Beg me pardon AbhMkh but your arguments are rubbish, because as my memory recalls even such a big country as India was conquered and colonised with the British...which is from your point of view a little patch on the map with only two isles. So it does not work as you think, that bigger country will no-doubtly win against smaller!

...Anyway back to the topic, because this is off-topic for sure...so as the best Tank destroyer in game i would vote for Marder III. Its cheap, easy to quickly deploy, easy to mass produce, it has excellent firing range, good speed and most importantly it can fire while being set-uped realy quickly...what more would you want for a tank destroyer unit than that?

[Seeme]

Well Strayker at the time they were indinans with only wooden spears compared to fine britsh soldiers with swords and muskets.

ANd if thats not 100%, lets just say the brits had better tech

[Strayker]

Well Strayker at the time they were indinans with only wooden spears compared to fine britsh soldiers with swords and muskets.

ANd if thats not 100%, lets just say the brits had better tech

That was exactly what i was talking about Seeme. About military might and economy strength. Simply enough British were the best armed and organised force back then and they conquered the India despite its a much larger country.

[AbhMkh]

Your arguments are completely legitimate guys , I don't question the mettle of Germany in terms of technology, even today Germany remains by and far europes largest economy

But you guys , have to agree that there are two contributing factors to a countries superiority

1. Technology
2. Manpower

BTW the dutch have proved their mettle(at least in soccer!!)


Coming back to the point germany was technologically superior throughout the war but why did it lose the war,clearly because of the second factor,germany had to field "old men and young boys" , as i mentioned afore "tanks can be made but we need people to drive them" and let me give the list of countries that germany was fighting by the end of the war


1. Russia
2. Britain
3. America
4 The Dutch
5. Poland
6. Greece
7. Belgium
8. Luxembourg

9.Norway

10. Yugoslavia


If this isnt the whole of Europe then perhaps i shouldn't have passed school geography!!!!

@ Strayker the size of the country is mentioned only to lay emphasis on its potential to produce manpower...

And thts why USA and USSR emerged as superpowers after war and still retain the might whereas Germany and become "just another European country"

As to what you mention about indian history is very correct .. but you see 400 yrs ago when the british attacked india india as a nation did not exist there were monarchies existing in each state,the british defeated each monarchy one by one!!!!!( British had colonized many countries in this manner,infact the entire commonwealth(which includes america as well whether they like it or not)) 

Though history is a witness of battles where a smaller country has defeated larger countries, but you must observe that they were traditional battles which involved horse cavalry and foot infantry etc  the will of a man is what measures here!! , It was a man to man battle not a rifleman to panzer4 battle!!!



@ Seeme gunpowder was prevalent everywhere including India at that time,India was overtaken due to the afore mentioned reasons!!
Post Merge: July 09, 2010, 06:13:21 PMAlso its very hard to administer large countries sheerly cuz of their size but if a gov manages to do it then that country is surely to become a superpower!!!

USSR faced the consequences of bad governance and as far as i remember history , this situation also existed in Europe when there were clans instead of countries!!

[Tico_1990]

Define "being at war with a country". Countries like Belgium, the Netherlands and Norway hardly had any regular army units helping in the liberation of Europe.

Also, with that list, I'd suggest that you have another go at geography.
America is obviously not part of Europe and Russia is debatable.
After that, you forgot
Spain, Italy, Vichy France, Switzerland, Finland, Sweden, Romania, Bulgaria, Ireland, Denmark.
That puts the score at 8 fighting against the Germans, 1 being debatable European and 10 who didn't fight or who fought on the German side.
Hardly all of Europe don't you think?

Cheers

[AbhMkh]

Fully agreed tico but these countries had their resistance units

and many of them had partisan units as well and i dont literally mean the "whole of Europe" its just to signify the no of european countries

Except Italy hardly any of the german allies played a role in the war!!!

And Russia is half in europe and half in asia!!

[Paciat]

P.S : There is a hell lot of a difference between the 6 pounder AT gun and the 57 mil mounted on a churchill or valentine(the penetration is considerably less)


And thts why the british had to lease shermans from the americans!!

The penetration of OQU 6lbs was better than Shermans or Cromwells gun and much better than any PzIII tank.
And thats why US started producing their own 6lbs (57mm) for their army!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordnance_QF_6_pounder

Britain used Shermans becouse they had a big HE shell (to destroy AT guns) were fast, realiable and Lend Leased unlike Churchills.
Valentines and even Cromwells were to small to mount a 17lbs.
"And thts why the british had to lease shermans from the americans!!"

[Seeme]

Russia isnt in europe anymore.

[Red_Stinger]

Russia isnt in europe anymore.

Why? 

[AbhMkh]

All right i think paciat is correct about the shermans

being lent to the british, so obviously sherman outperformed the british tanks of tht time!!!

[GodlikeDennis]

I believe Russia is considered European because of it's ancestral history and Moscow is in Europe.

[Tico_1990]

I think that, politically speaking it belongs to Europe, and Geographically, it belongs to both, not sure though.

Cheers