Best Tank Destroyer

[AbhMkh]

Ahh Polish I see................

Ya I knw polish airborne divisions participated in "operation market garden"

and polish armored divisions participated in the allied offensive in taking the fight to Germany

nationality is irrelevant here,i was joking about it cuz it seemed to me that paciat is taking criticism of the british to his heart

Nyways as to the valentine can you guys imagine what will be the result of the following duels?


valentine vs stug
valentine vs p4
valentine vs marder
valentine vs paks?

I shudder even to imagine how valentines 40 mm gun will perform against these units


In the desert threatre tank technology was not at its best , things were still being tried and tested......

and yes that difference in armor made pz 3 impenetrable to the british tank guns of tht time and the valentine penetratble to the 50 mm german cannon!!

[Seeme]

Any tank can really beat any tank. They just need the right skill and a fine tatic.

[Zerstörer]

late war Valentines where armed with 6pdrs=57mm=the same the US 57mmAT gun which is a copy o the 6pdr built under license. Its AT performance was better than a 75 M1 on shermans.

History-Game balance 2 different things

At least read wikipedia articles about weapons/vehicles if you want to argue about such things 

[AbhMkh]

Thts precisely what i want to put here!!

historically valentines had the 40mm cannon which when introduced in the game would be a large imba

even with the 57 mm cannon(as that of the churchill) it will be no good against nything better than the stug

[Paciat]

Nyways as to the valentine can you guys imagine what will be the result of the following duels?


valentine vs stug
valentine vs p4
valentine vs marder
valentine vs paks?

I shudder even to imagine how valentines 40 mm gun will perform against these units


In the desert threatre tank technology was not at its best , things were still being tried and tested......

and yes that difference in armor made pz 3 impenetrable to the british tank guns of tht time and the valentine penetratble to the 50 mm german cannon!!

"pz 3 impenetrable to the british tank guns of tht time" so why did the germans lost? British main AT guns at that time were also 2 pounders.

Only the PzIII with 50 mm KwK 38 L/42 gun and those with 37mm guns (up to PzIIIH) should be compared with Valentines with 2 pounders.
PzIII with 50 mm KwK 39 L/60 should be compared to Valentines with 6 pounders.

There was an idea a while ago (when the Soviet Sherman was OP) to replace the Sherman with a Valentine (probably with Churchills 57mm gun and Cromwells armor). It would be a perfect counter to PE AC, PE PzIVs, and Wehrmacht Pumas (even if upgunned) and would be an equal to Osteer PzIII.

It was a good idea, but time consuming so now Soviets have a 76mm Sherman with most stats nerfed (acc, HP, and - not sure about this one - speed).

Also, you shouldnt compare tanks to tank destroyers.
The price of a Valentine should be as low as Stug but its efectivness vs infantry should be better than vet 1 Stug (just like PzIII).

So how about

valentine vs PE AC spam
valentine vs PE Pz4
valentine vs 50mm Puma
valentine vs PzIII?

[Venoxxis]

"pz 3 impenetrable to the british tank guns of tht time" so why did the germans lost? British main AT guns at that time were also 2 pounders.

Paciat that is the worst arguement i heard from you yet. Its like saying a panther is worse than a t-34 because the axis lost the war.

The Allied had other advantages, surely - it wasnt the quality of their tanks - as you surely know. The british had decent tanks, but mostly thier armamanet were inferior to the ones of thier enemies. till the 17pdr came up.
¬


But back to topic. This topic is about the best tank destroyer. And this role surlely goes to an russian or german one.



Regards,

-V-

[Paciat]

"pz 3 impenetrable to the british tank guns of tht time" so why did the germans lost? British main AT guns at that time were also 2 pounders.

Paciat that is the worst arguement i heard from you yet. Its like saying a panther is worse than a t-34 because the axis lost the war.

No, Its like saing that T-34 could destroy a Panther.
Panthers armor wasnt impenetrable to the Soviet tank guns of that time.
Am I right or am I right?

Valentines were outclassed by PzIV, not PzIII.

[MRX]

  The King Tiger it's Defenetly the best tank of the entire WWll, but in the game I think it's the american Sherman whit all the upgrades, I mean the canon , the smoke shels and the Gunner,and don't Forget about the mine chain destroyer, very usefull at close range with the infantery =))

[Venoxxis]

"pz 3 impenetrable to the british tank guns of tht time" so why did the germans lost? British main AT guns at that time were also 2 pounders.

Paciat that is the worst arguement i heard from you yet. Its like saying a panther is worse than a t-34 because the axis lost the war.

No, Its like saing that T-34 could destroy a Panther.
Panthers armor wasnt impenetrable to the Soviet tank guns of that time.
Am I right or am I right?

Well actually you are just bullish atm
What i said: t-34 < panther

and this is why you are telling just shit man sorry.



Regards,

-V-



IMO the best tankdestroyer is the SU-100 or the G-wagen.
the best tank/tankdestroyer is the jagdpanther.

Lets see what the reward units will bring ..

[Paciat]

"pz 3 impenetrable to the british tank guns of tht time" so why did the germans lost? British main AT guns at that time were also 2 pounders.

Paciat that is the worst arguement i heard from you yet. Its like saying a panther is worse than a t-34 because the axis lost the war.

No, Its like saing that T-34 could destroy a Panther.
Panthers armor wasnt impenetrable to the Soviet tank guns of that time.
Am I right or am I right?

Well actually you are just bullish atm
What i said: t-34 < panther

and this is why you are telling just shit man sorry.

Youre the one that understands "shit".
AbhMkh said that "pz 3 impenetrable" to 2 pounders.
How did the British destroy german tanks then? Ive asced.
The anwser is: Using their 2 pounders as Static AT guns, as tank guns and even as guns on Hurricane IID plane.

The fact that T-34 can destroy a Panther dosnt mean it is better.
Understand now?

Sorry devs. Im done here.

[Venoxxis]

lets leave it here and stay freinds.

Both, you and me defend our opions/suggestions and meanings till the bloody end.

that makes us being self-willed fighters. I always respected you just like you are, and i guess you do the same with me. And thats the most important thing. 


by the way,
Have you seen the new announced reward units on moddb.com already?

[Seeme]

Wow, V, I never saw you like this.

But I have to go with Paciat here, you kinda saying if it has a better gun and better amour, no tank under it can beat it. And thats very wrong.

But anyway you hopefully made up, so I will stop here.

[Tico_1990]

Given the fact that the original list contains a number of vehicles besides tankdestroyers, I'm going to go wild and say that the Stuka is the best one. The proper model with the proper pilot could wreak havoc amongst armoured columns, infantry, trains, and from what I've read on wikipedia (yes, I know that it is a really bad source) even ships.

Cheers

[AbhMkh]

I'll give the answers to all of your queries!!

1. The Germans lost the war because of the following reasons

- Shortage of manpower(Germany is a very small country,sooner or latter they are bound to run out of proper soldiers)

- Trying to improve technology to bring in heavier tanks rather than massing on their std tanks

- No of nations they were fighting(practically whole of the europe and later on america too),what do you expect in duel of 1country vs 4-5 countries???

- Last but not the least "Hitlers Foolishness"


@ Paciat

1. I'm convinced that ur not British, ur so incourteous to your tenses(no offences mate!!)

Well what i was saying was that pz3 was impenetrable to the british tanks guns not AT guns


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!!

[Tico_1990]

AbhMkh:

-Germany a very small country? Dare I ask where you are from, because to European standards, Germany is a large country. Also, it is very well possible for small countries to win against larger ones (even with badly trained soldiers). Some examples: the war of 1812, the American war of independence, the 80-years war.

- I sort of agree with this point. Than again, the Germans didn't have the luxury to keep producing panzerIV's and Panzer V's because they will, as you pointed out, run out of men. Couple this to the fact that the allies were basically going for a "If you throw enough junk at them they'll lose" strategy, it is more than obvious that the Germans tried to go for advanced tanks although they did overdo that at some point.

-The way you make it sound, is that they were fighting the whole of Europe at once which is not true. It was done piecemeal. Also, the division between European countries fighting against Germany is more around 50-50.

-Hitler's foolishness is indeed a good point. Had he not ordered Goering to stop bombing British airfields, the Germans would have actually destroyed the RAF, which would have allowed them to go forth with operation Seelöwe which in all likelyhood would have meant the entire occupation of Britain. This in turn would have made D-day almost impossible to pull of.

Also, the part above (and that which I replied too, are very off-topic, they belong in the "why did Germany lose thread").

(sort of) on-topic
The whole comparison between "x pounders" and "Y mm" is not completely valid, depending on the design of a shell, you can have several matches between "X1 pound" and "y mm".
Also, if the 6 pounders were mounted on tanks (don't know if this happened) than there shouldn't be a difference in penetration, also, penetration is highly dependant on the type of shell used.

The fact that the British leased shermans from the Americans, has more to do with the fact that the shermans were able to be cheaply mass produced and that the Americans didn't have to worry about their cities/factories being bombed to pieces.

Cheers