So in UK's tanks there are reverse?

laughs in archer

@@thebravegallade731 Well the “Archers” ‘reverse’ gear is actually the forward gear... The gun is pointed to the back.

@@KoljaGamer The gun is pointing in the front, the tank is pointing in the back

@@xXDeltaTwoZeroXx No, the gun was pointed to the rear of the Valentine Mk. 1 chassis. The front is more armored then the rear and there is the driver's optic. Also a Wikipedia author wrote _“[...] with the gun facing to the rear, which kept the length of the Archer short.”_ and _“The rear mounting combined with its low silhouette made the Archer an excellent ambush weapon, allowing its crew to fire, then drive away without turning round.”_ (en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer_(tank_destroyer)#Design_and_development).

*Sad transmission noises*

F

88 likes lmao

coincidence? I think NOT

my salt is unimaginable, same for the tiger II 10.5cm KwK and even more so for the maus

Its kinda sad this was the best one for the phanter 2

So did i... but i couldnt get thr maus:(

@@bakist5540 Same. I got both the tiger 2 105 and panther 2 right before the removed it but couldn't get any research on the maus in time. I think it might come back for an event tho so keep your eyes open.

@@calebkleinhans3668 did you get the flakpanzer 341?

I was so close to getting it I was sad

I am sad i didn't get the maus or panther 2 and the tiger 10.5

Chonky Boy.

@@Soldner41 i like em chonky i like em big

Chonker

I downloaded the launcher on my grandma's pc and to this day (some years after) i need to update it

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/h7Obiq2BtKzSeqc.html&t=257

You should have an added section like "What tanks to watch for" like the is-3. They're brawlers and facing one in a panther 2 is almost guaranteed knockout to hangar

@@Sultan-cf5wf I literally show and tell how to kill one in the video. "Aim for shot traps and cupolas on Soviet tanks" Then I have a picture showing you where to shoot it if side-on.

@Yeet Yeet You're just repeating what I said in the cut-away about the Panther 2. Yeet Yeet The Tiger 1's 88 shell not penning a T-34/85 is just rng BS, especially on that curved gun mount on the line between the gun mantle and the turret cheek, it's modeled wonkily. I have NEVER had trouble penning the UFP with any 5.3+ gun. Everyone bitches about the HEAT-FS, but I never hear anything about Germany not being able to kill those HEAT-FS tanks. CAS in general is frankly a downright frustrating addition to the game, at ANY BR except maybe top and bottom tier. Anyways, you are just as able to kill the HEAT-FS spammers as they are towards you, except for those few thiccboi heavy tanks. Oh, if you think 6.7 is awful, don't play it. Play a BR you actually enjoy. Stop bitching and get blitzing.

@Yeet Yeet I believe you mean CHEAT-FS

I have Many Miles Away to thank for telling me about that.

If it was never built in metal, anyway.

Salty Swede they should bring back the Maus then. According to Gaijin, "In the exact case of the Maus, its exceptionally strong armour can be a menace for lower rank ground vehicles, whilst higher rank machines with more powerful APDS, HEAT or even APFSDS have no trouble overriding the Maus’s one key advantage." Except the armor is able to be beaten at 6.7 and up while angling can stop HEAT-FS from penetrating at 7.3. Most heavily armored vehicles have this problem anyway. Tiger 2 105 and Panther 2 can stay gone, but I want the Maus back as an optional researchable vehicle.

@@goosegg4653 they just removed the Maus because they are too lazy to actually alter the game enough to where it would be reasonably balanced. At its current BR, 7.7, it gets devoured by 8.7 premiums, but at 7.3, it would roflstomp everything. If the higher BRs were decompressed a little more (8.7 premiums moved to 9.0 where they can all dump on each other with the XM-1), the Maus would be perfectly fine. But Gaijin is downright obsessed with minimizing queue times, so they won't decompress the BRs because that would increase queue times. :/

@@SaltySwede laughs in 6.7 T28 lol. That literally unkillable monster noone ever talks about.

@@jay9384 I literally kill one in the intro!

...unless the tech tree in question would be left SORELY lacking without it. The whole reason the Panther 2, Tiger 2 (10.5cm), and Coelian were added in the first place was so Germany had a more versatile lineup _and have a fighting chance_ against the Russian T-54s, IS-3, and IS-4. They were there _from the very start_ because that was all Germany could possibly have within reason given Gaijin's rule as it was ONLY Germany and Russia back then; no US, or Britain. And Germany didn't start actually producing their own tanks again until the Leopard 1 in 1965, iirc.

@@SaltySwede Uhhh my dude did you see what the event vehicles are? The second is a fricking paper airplane. According to militaryfactory it never left mock up stage before it was canceled in 1944. And what did they replace the Coelian with? The Ostwind II...another paper tank! Look personally I am more than happy to have paper airplanes and tanks as long as they have semi-sane performance (hell I have serious doubts about some of the real plane FMs, like I seriously doubt CW21s could UFO better than a Ki43 or that Yak-3s could hang from their props like a damn helicopter) and I'll even buy that excuse back when we only had like 3 tank trees and they were thread bare...but when you are adding BS like the Ho-Ri production and adding 162s and 262s as rare event vehicles (and selling them for an assload of cash I might add) while keeping the 229 and not one, not two, but three R2D2s? Yeah...sniff sniff....I smell bullshit. If they really didn't want paper vehicles they could have replaced the 229 with either the event or squad 262 (both are capable of the CAS role the 229 was supposedly added for) and the R2D2s could be replaced by the T33/P80 as Japan used 'em as trainers. Hell that would even fit as you could have the T33 which could only carry bombs or rockets which fits the same role as the USA b57A and then have the P80 which would fit into the same slot as the B57B. Hey if they want paper vehicles? Great, fine all for it, add the flapjack to the USA tree and that German pulsejet fighter and all the cool mad scientist stuff, sounds good to me. Just be consistent, either say "no there will be no paper vehicles" and remove them all or say "yes this isn't DCS and these vehicles are fun" and leave 'em be. That is all I'm asking. Hell if they don't fit the meta just leave them unconnected to a tree like the French crap tanks and let the players decide if they want to bother, sounds fair to me. But saying you are yanking them because they are paper vehicles while leaving in other paper vehicles AND saying you are gonna sell them in the gaijoob store? Sorry the smell of bullshit is getting rather thick from Gaijin HQ.

Japan without its prototypes and US imports (except the Duster omegalul, there's no fixing this can) is basically target practice from br 3 to 6.

Both equal in game

I already did a Tiger 2. Check my channel.

@@SaltySwede Oh yea forgot Panther A then🤪

@@j.k6943 Miles did the Panther D already. The A is just that but with actual turret traverse.

Hell yeah it is. Kills MBTS from the side easy on custom battles. Long 88 my beloved.

Perhaps they should be treated like add-on armor modifications. When you don't have NVD researched, they will not appear on the tank model, but once you unlock them, then they are added. -What I'd love to see even more is removable side skirts. The sand skirts on the American tanks are ugly.-

The Maus was fully built, though. The IS-7 was fully built. Gaijin's criteria is that, unless gameplay balance necessitates something more, the tank needs to be fully built IN METAL. The IS-7 was fully built in metal so it's valid. It was a fully functioning prototype. The Obj 685 was fully built in metal, even if it wasn't assembled. I hate the Ho-Ris, but Japan's tech tree is still pretty bare bones. So, unfortunately, removing them right now would severely hurt their lineups. Germany is no longer in such a state. Again, these German paper tanks were added for GAME BALANCE (Ho-Ri? Balanced? lol) at the very start because they had nothing else that could really compete with early post-war designs (that's kinda what happens when you lose a war). Gaijin said they would be hiding the Panther 2, Tiger 105, and Coelian YEARS ago. The Maus' hiding is because it's a really weird tank and difficult to balance. Gaijin's hiding of it just means they aren't willing to tweak the game to the point where the Maus would have some semblance of balance (it roflstopms at 7.3, but gets destroyed by 8.7 premium spam at 7.7) And finally, the only paper part of the Panther 2 is the 8.8cm gun in the narrow turret. A hull was built, and the narrow turret was also built, mounting the 7.5cm gun for the F variant. Same thing with KT 105.

@@SaltySwede, Maus i would not take ANY excuse In factz lowering BR to 7.3 AB and RB would more than suffice for balancing, AB 7.3 has PLENTY of leopard 1s and other vehicles armed with HEAT-FS or ATGMs with more than enough pen to bypass 220mm of RHA, plus there ARE some initial UK 120mms around the BR range 7.3 gets into, there's now the patton tanks with 90mm HEAT-FS, 305mm of pen can work. The issue with Obj 685 is that THE DAMN THING has no data that sensibly represents the performance (Maus had a V1 turret made of pure Cast Steel to represent the turret weight to see the effects, this makes the yest data already more than enough for specs on mobility), i don't see ANY DOCUMENT speaking about a vehicle under minimal assembly (at least hull with a mock-up turret representing the weight and balance changes it would do) for testing. The IS7 is by far a more CLEAR target for removalz TOO FAST for a heavy (up to 64kph AB, easily keeps 50kph there), armor is TOO BROKEN for 8.3 (APDS of the area can't do shit, even HEAT-FS and DM23 APDSFS of L7 guns FAIL to damage anything but whatever's in a straight line of where the shot hit, the gun is outright OP (L7 APDS pen with APHE power, in a BR range that there's even 9.3s that CAN'T take the hit from the front, most that can are Soviet); fast, TOO WELL ARMORED for the speed class, gun has TOO GOOD of a performance, autoloader and BIASED REPAIR SPEED.... IS7 is for everything something i see as WHAT SHOULD BEEN REMOVED. Maus is Slow, needs support to work well (so you're always near allies and you're a CAS magnet), gun is NOT GUARANTEED to pen even crap lower than it (7.3 IS3 CAN block the 128mm from the front, 128mm still neees the TRAPSHOT to kill a 7.3 Heavy when it's AB 8.0 and RB 7.7, hell, even the US 6.7 Heavy T30 can tank a frontal hit), plus the ridiculous fact it takes 30 seconda at minimum to repair a barrel, when 20 seconds is what i saw IS7 do. Coelian was already niche with the NERF TO 37mm FlaK guns, removing it is stupid. 1) EVERYTHING the Coelian was gonna be equiped with had clear data and proven performance data, this makes it a Obj 685 case (the Prototype was using existing tech, proven data, never assembled so data only represents the components performance and theoretical estimated guess), a Panther hull woth all it's existing performance plus a turret with EVERYTHING known about it's specs being part of the equipment, i don't see ANY difference, turret was even said to have been technically done, just not fitted in the hull. Panther II and 105 KT WOULD be ok, but the Panther would have to be FULLY REPLACED AS SOON AS IT'S REMOVED, Panther II is the ONLY 6.7 mobility (everything else is uptiering the weaker Panthers or Puma armored car) based option for players in the TT. Removing an essential component of a linup WITHOUT REPLACING IT AT THE SAME TIME A REMOVAL HAPPENS is BS. Tl; DR, Panther II removal SHOULDN'T BEEN DONE unless an adequate substitute was ready for implementation in the SAME UPDATE.

@@andrehashimoto8056 Just a quick thing about the maus. I do think 7.3, could be good, but think about 6.3 tanks it may face. The russian 6.3 T 44 wont be able to penetrate it unless using APCR, and the IS 2 also has to ve lucky to get a flat shot to kill it from the front. But a comparison i would like to make, say the maus should be st 7.3, is simply the T 32. I would say effectivly, the T 32 has more effective front armour then the maus (yee the maus has stupid thicc upper plate, but thats it) i would prefer to face a maus in my T 44 at 6.3 then a T 32, just because the T 32 has a better or equal gun to the maus, has better effective armour profile.(pretty much impossible to go through) and has better mobility, plus iys AA ablility with a 50cal.

There's a clear indicative difference between a paper design and a blatant fabrication.

@@xaiber16 Yea usually fabricated tanks are stupid good becuase they usually have the best of the best equipment for at the time, because they dont have access to the historical and realistic restrictions that you would usually see in a production model

To be fair, that kind of happens to everyone until you reach the 8.7 premium spam. Then there's top tier, which just doesn't sound all that fun to me.

Sad, Gajin was (kind?) to me and gave me 10 days to my streak, I dont know why, but They make me Wait next days to open huge trophy with 0% chance of calliOP

Oof.

@@SaltySwede and no response from Gaijin what so ever

@@Birb_of_Judge OOF

actually, the real Panther II design never planned to use Schmalturm, as it was designed and cancelled before the Schmalturm was designed

1. Panther 2 is more of a Frankenstein combination of parts that were all actually built separately for their own purposes, but never fully assembled for this particular design. 2. I wouldn't call the T-54s prototypes, but in the context of 1945-1947, I guess the term fits. Either way... media.giphy.com/media/1Z02vuppxP1Pa/giphy.gif

@@SaltySwede some Wehraboo: "Oh boy! Look at these cool panzer designs that surely would have single-handedly turned the tide for the Germans, extending the war into 1946- *Reality* Berlin gets nuked, since that was the plan all along.

@@Soundwave3591 Yep, lmao.

Yes, unfortunately, I couldn't get enough people for the skit to show *all* of the vehicles with the long 88.

@@Marta-se5do Yes. It is a very meme-able scream.

@@Marta-se5do No. And I don't plan on seeing it ever.

Better than what original?

@@SaltySwede ManyMilesAway's Super Unicorn Reviews, I think this is better than the SUR

@@alessandrodelpezzo Ah, thank you! 😊

From what I read, the Schmalturm was an independent project with the objective of deleting the shot-trap of the original turret, decreasing the silhouette, and increasing the protection all the while keeping the weight within the same margins as the initial design. It was being developed at the same time as Panther 2, among other projects. Panther 2 was abandoned after the Allies captured the facility where the prototype was being built, iirc. The Schmalturm being on Panther 2 is mostly an assumption that was made since it is a better turret design.

@@SaltySwede Panther II was dropped very early on (Feb-Mar 1944) but the factory went ahead and finished the prototype hull but on low priority, a little bit like the E-100, and tinkering with it every now and then until it was captured The turret was a totally seperate project, Schmalturm was designed only after the demise of the Panther II project (and its turret) however due to their similarity I think the Panther II turret had some at least minor influence on the Schmalturms design as a lot of the elements of Panther II were altered slightly and implemented on the Panther Ausf G like the redesigned engine deck and side armour

@@STHV_ I see.

Schmale Blendenausführung happend also after cancelation of Panther II project, but could be resoult of delays before Man send info to others. after cancelation hull was used as test mule for futher concepts (with of course raises question if Schmale Blendenausführung was really for Panther II or it was really intended on mainline Panther while concepting was done on Panther II hull) durining offical development no turret was chosen outside hinting at existing Panther turret with modifed rear plate in order to fit on to tank.

--Drat, foiled again!--

Matchmaking in this game is fucky.

I think he did. IIrc, it involves keeping a copy of a non-updated version of War Thunder saved on another part of your PC.

@@SaltySwede big oof

Did you check the muffin factory?

The Panther 2 does have steel roadwheels, specifically the same ones used on the Tiger 2. It was planned to use as many parts that the Tiger 2 did as possible for ease of production and repair. This then evolved into the Entwicklung program in '44 and then died when Germany was pretty much beat in early '45.

@Hans Blitzkrieg --It's as overused as a Tiger 2's transmission! XD--

@Hans Blitzkrieg Ok Wehraboo