Fallenkezef

Member
  • Content count

    4,457
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5
medal

Fallenkezef last won the day on November 6 2016

Fallenkezef had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,623 Outstanding

6 Followers

About Fallenkezef

  • Rank
    Tea and banjo specialist
  • Birthday

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    UK
  • Interests
    Theologian, amateur historian and Teaboy

Recent Profile Visitors

2,905 profile views
  1. There are some who have convinced themselves German tech was invulnerable. I wonder if they even accept Germany lost the war.
  2. Sometimes I think Gaijin are deliberately trying to make the British tanks underperform
  3. The problem is too many people have a bested interest in keeping APHE and solid shot as it is. I remember the great wailing and gnashing if teeth when Brits came out and solid shot was competitive with APHE. The following nerf was devastating. Basicly a vocal minority are convinced that German and Soviet tanks where invulnerable death machines thay blew up British and American tanks with every shot
  4. Nothing in WT is "realistic"
  5. How many times do I need to post the figures proving that APHE did not wipe out whole crews with every shot? That Cromwell crew was not lucky, it was the norm for most crew to survive. Especialy the Cromwell as it had a bulkhead between the driver and fighting compartment.
  6. To be honest the HE on the 128mm was useless. The kinetic force wrecked most tanks it hit anyway. Always with the tiger examples. How many tigers actualy built? The VAST majority of German tanks took one or two pens and the surviving crew did a runner. Same with British tanks, shell would come in, kill the driver or machine gunner and the crew would run for it. Wittman put an 88 into a Cromwell at pointblank during the villers debacle, killed the driver, rest of the crew where in a new tank two days later
  7. The reason Brits perform poorly is because this gamevis NOT historicly accurate! In WW2 British tanks knocked out German tanks with one or two shots and APHE was NOT a crew killing nuke. On average only one man per tank died
  8. Death by fire is quite rare, you need a clean birning fuel source. most of the time you are unconsious from smoke/toxic fume inhalation before you start to cook.
  9. Come to mention it, not seen one of those on over a month
  10. Poppycock I'm a manc, we don't have milk, we have tea from mother's breast!
  11. If we had a tank from 1987 I'd be inclined to agree with you. Japanese are getting an SPAA with no greater capabilities than the German Gepard.
  12. Couldn't agree more
  13. Tried it a few times, was just really boring camping untill one side dominates spawn then just spawn camping
  14. Fair enough, rb bores me too much
  15. Several tanks with REAL issues such as the Challenger and the German fanboys are whining that they want to sealclub with the mouse
  16. I'm curious about the people who whined about the IS2 time travel shell now wanting time travel for Leos
  17. Last I checked there was no T64.....
  18. All the focus seems to be on GF and fishing boats
  19. Probably the A4 If HEAT-FS is so good, why is APFSDS needed for the L7's?
  20. Better not get those rounds before we get the Mk5/4 Chieftsin and L23. Also you can not just give a Leo A1 APFSDS. What model Leo and Patton recieved them? IS2 just lost time travel ammo, good luck getting Tardis ammo for the Leo A1
  21. Swedes had them, not sure if they ever upgraded to APFSDS.
  22. Basicly it's perfectly balanced at 6.7 Chieftain can be penned from the side by T1 tanks, you can't balance or judge a tank by side armour.
  23. Nah, I don't believe any Centurions had it. Israel had the Merkava MK1's with the L7 when they got thier hands on APFDS
  24. Gaijin cherrypicks realism too often
  25. No ASPSFS for Centurion please, I like it's br as it is
  26. HESH isn't even modeled properly. Ingame it's basicly a HE shell with a pen of 150 which makes them bounce when they shouldn't. The heavier the armour, the more damage HESH will do in the crew compartment. 120mm L31 would ruin a Maus for instance
  27. Centurion MK3 APDS through the side is a oneshot. the biggest issue, for me, is KT's holding chokepoints where they can take on enemies frontaly and then my team sacrifice themselves one by one. If I see a camped KT I find another direction to go in.
  28. Even with more tanks, who'd use it? KT is a good tank and people spam it because it's good.
  29. You provide an unsupported, personal view of your opinion and pass it off as fact? Ok We can play this game all day, I can dismiss all your arguments based on my many games facing the Maus.
  30. Gaijin just invents tank rounds
  31. Some people are so desperate to make their fave tanks club
  32. The L31 HESH is still in service so data is hard to find. The L37 shell is a red marker round used by the 105mm Abbot.
  33. Hyperbole much?
  34. Type87 is SPAA not a SAM, you do not know the difference?
  35. I'd settle for a realistic HESH shell for the MK3
  36. With respect Pacifica, the fake HESH shell used by the Chieftain ingame is proof that Gaijin DOES put in words/scripts/numbers without factual data. Several members of this orum have PROVEN the shell Gaijin has given to the Chieftain is fake and the designation was used for the 105mm Abbot.
  37. The Centurion AVRE is not a spigot launcher, it's a fully functional gun, loaded and fired from inside the turret and a closed breech.
  38. Stated reason was that AVRE's where for taking out fortifications, not tanks.
  39. Gaijin said no to AVRE because it's anti-fortifications *looks at KV2 and Brummbar* Gaijin hypocrisy at work
  40. Ok, King Tigers. Aim at the centre of their UFP, dead centre. Walk your aim up so the shell will land at the top of the UFP, be careful as too high and you'll just hit turret. Laugh as the HESH kills the whole crew. Yup, KT's can one shot them through the face easily enough.
  41. Yeah, it sucks on most ab maps
  42. Had a few good games but so many times I just do minor damage while AT1 and the not-a-jaguar-honest are one shot machines
  43. Also this "allies had more men myth". Certainly the Russians and maybe the Americans. But the British? We had ONE army group in North Africa and wasted the best of it trying to hold Crete. In the Battle of Britain the Luftwaffe had numerical superiority. During operation Market Garden we had ONE armoured division running the gauntlet, one of the reasons it failed as the Germans had an SS panzer corps to mop up the paras and stop the armoured thrust. Yet the Brits got all but one bridge. For much of the war the British and Axis had local numerical equality or the Axis had superior numbers. Best examples being BofB and operation compass. Russia and America had men and resources to spare, Britain certainly didn't since our best troops where fighting the Japanese
  44. No British tank fought in isolation after 1941. Comparing tank to tank is just fluffing Germany. Britain was the worst of the allies for combined arms but still beat Rommel out of Africa. 17pdrs holed Panthers and we had one Firefly for every 3 tanks, later that ratio increased to 2. We had air support on tap, the fastest artillery response times and the most effective counter battery fire. Britain held it's own and later took on the Germans on equal footing. The Guards Armoured division even outdid the Germans for combined arms after Normandy. Nobody can claim the Germans had good kit but these David Irving style claims that the Germans where all-powerful and the allies didn't have a chance are clearly bs.
  45. Yup, when Brits came out solid shot had decent post pen. Wehraboos whined and the nerfs crippled Brits. Gaijin claims realism but there is none
  46. Yeah, British killed over 2000 axis tanks in North Africa with wishful thinking
  47. You do know Germany lost right?
  48. T64's backed up by AT1's. Best way to finaly kill T5
  49. Gaijin is annoying me. Not only do they put the Canadian kit in the Yan branch, now the T14? It was built for the BRITISH, while we didn't adopt it, the damn thing was still a British project. Yanks developed the M6 for themselves.
  50. There was no real difference in capabilities between APHE and solid shot basicly. Few penetrating abilities remained? 6pdr was very effective at taking out tanks, the problem is it had no HE round for taking out anti-tank guns. German tanks where never the biggest threat to the British, we could take them out. It was their gun emplacements,
  51. british

    I just did this screenshot, 14:56 GMT 21/02/17 How accurate it is? Another matter, not sure how much the stats match ingame performance sometimes
  52. british

    what part of WT GF is realistic?
  53. Every game, with every nation produces the Ace zerg rush. Americans are not special in this.
  54. Right here is what I found. Now there is a caveat, these numbers are ideal "paper" numbers, what each military planned for their tanks to go to war with. Once the shooting starts supplies get real interesting as crews load up based partly on personal preference and partly on what they can get hold of. This info applies to 1970 Britain Centurion MK11: 35 Sabot, 35 HESH Chieftain MK3: 24 Sabot, 20 HESH No surprise here, rough 50/50 mix as Britain would use HESH where anyone else would use either HE or HEAT USA M48 Patton: 18 HE, 20 Sabot, 25 HEAT M60 Patton: 20 HE, 17 Sabot, 25 HEAT Interesting that the preference was for HEAT rounds over Sabot, but the doctrine was (despite other claims) to open engagements with HEAT. Germany Leo: 10 HE, 25 Sabot, 20 HEAT Germans relied slightly more on their APDS it seems USSR T64 (115mm): 20 HE, 10 Sabot, 10 HEAT T64A (125mm): 16 HE, 13 Sabot, 8 HEAT T62: 22 HE, 12 Sabot, 6 HEAT T55: 21 HE, 8 AP, 4 Sabot, 10 HEAT Israel Sh'ot Kal Centurion: 24 HE, 15 Sabot, 25 HEAT or a mix of HEAT and HESH Mag'ach Patton: 18HE, 15 Sabot, 30 HEAT Info is confusing for the Sho't Kal's. It seems the Israelis had HESH when they upgunned to the 105mm but slowly phased it out in favour of HEAT. it was used in the Yom Kippur war on the Golan heights.
  55. Wasn't just external layouts. APHE was pretty pointless against the Cromwell series for instance as there was a bulkhead between the driver's compartment and the fighting compartment. The way APHE works in WT is pure nonsense and continues this overblown myth that APHE was superior. Britain knew how to make reliable fuses, our artillery and bunker-busting bombs are good examples. If APHE was dramaticly superior to solid shot, the British would of mass produced APHE
  56. Not in practice. Tanks are not empty shells, there is just too much kit inside a tank for the fragments to travel and kill more than one or two men
  57. Half the world? South America was neutral, most of Africa and the middle east stayed out of it and 3 quarters of the Indian army and the ANZACs (after 1942) fought the Japanese
  58. APHE was more effective against the earlier, bigger and more cramped designs. Nobody fought a tank war between 1914 and 1939 so it was all down to theory. In practice APHE didn't perform much better than solid shot and sub-calibre solid shot and chemical warheads proved more reliable and effective so APHE died out
  59. The Germans did it too. When your supply line starts in Cairo and ends in Ben Ghazi it pays to stock up on ammo and fuel.
  60. Back in topic. Manager to find some lists of ammo loadouts for the 70's, will post them after work. The soviet/arab ones may need Choogleblitz to confirm but I'm pretty certain of the Israeli and NATO ones. Can't find a thing on the Iran/Iraq war or thier paper issue loadouts
  61. Excuse me? Solid shot hit a tank and killed one or two people, crew bailed out. Dead tank APHE hit a tank and killed one or two people. Crew bailed out. Dead tank. In WT, APHE kills ALL crew. Dead Tank. Solid shot hits a tan, kills one or two crew. Tank lives. THIS is the problem
  62. Your surrender is accepted
  63. You have not provided proof and want me to admit I'm wrong? All you have is some reports from German crews and you claim the enemy confirmed it, with no proof of it.
  64. You accept crew reports on face value? Who taught you history, David Irving?
  65. So no supporting evidence. What reason would the tan crews have to embellish their stories? Suppose this means we have to take pilot kill counts at face value aswell........
  66. Israel Tal was a legend, won't see his like again
  67. Quote you sources please including collaboration.
  68. Show me a documented 2km WW2 kill
  69. Must be only a German thing, my Centurion has not seen an 8,0 in two weeks
  70. I think my most treasured was when I killed two AT1's with my Centurion MK10. I play it as my secondary in the 8.0 lineup as it's better than the conq. Two rank does mot matter in one game
  71. You are blatantly lying about it meeting 8.0's often
  72. Yeah, roomy and with spare crew. Take ammo out of the turret and it's a zombie. Only reliable way to kill is side shots under the turret with APDS
  73. What are you smoking? Any pre-80's MBT hitting a target with APDSFS over 1.5km? Without the modern FCS that is not going to happen. I love it when people countet actual historical facts with theorycrafting and using MODERN doctrine in discussions about how tanks fought in the 60's and 70's
  74. I've never had any problems HESHing an IS4, just need a frontal shot US tanks are stupidly over-br'd in many cases
  75. Clearly you have never seen the terrain the British where allocated to operate on in Germany. British post war armour was drama? Tell that to the Jordanians, Syrians and Egyptians. Pakistanis had a blunt education aswell
  76. Aye 6.3 to 7.0 is one of the best and most balanced ranges. The massive AT1 spam draws 7.7+ into 8.3 games
  77. Yeah so I can recreate operation compass and roflstomp the pastatanks
  78. WT is like WoT, fail concepts work because the elements that made them fail are not modeled. Same with historicly good concepts. Take British solid shot, in reality it was effective and the British knocked out Panzers reliably. Ingame APHE is overperforming and game mechanics penalise solid shot.
  79. You are creating a flawed strawman. The 88mm was never an SPAA, even in it's mobile forms it was fixed into position. The 88mm was AAA for use at high altitude against bomber fornations and, like the American 3inch AAA could be adapted in a TD role. The SPAA's where a different breed and where never adapted as anti-tank weapons.
  80. Wrong People think that because Leo went into service first, chally copied it. Chally, in the form of the Shir2 was developed first. Germany and America where able to use the British developments faster because the UK was a bit skint.
  81. Conway, like the Maus was a failure before it left the drawing board. Rapidly developed stop-gap due to panic over soviet heavies and it never even saw service.
  82. The uptier argument is pure bs. My Centurion MK10 has not seen an 8.0 tank in two weeks
  83. Clearly you have no experience with the Challenger Maus: One prototype built by a regime that had already lost the war. Chieftain: Mass produced, exported and was the primogenitor to Western MBT's
  84. Worked? It broke down! Whole project was a waste of time
  85. Shouldn't of been in the game to start with
  86. Comparing the 88 to 30mm cannons? Stupid strawman is stupid
  87. I have to remove Avenger from this list. At 4.7 it's not what I'd call good but is no longer useless. It gets into mostly 4.0 to 4.7 games where the 17pdr works
  88. Centurion MK10, hell any Centurion, the tank that won the cold war
  89. T34-85's Russian players shrug thier shoulders and get on with it. Panther II gets raised, it's suddenly useless, German players whine
  90. Self Propelled Anti Air Tank Destroyer Clue is in the name, one is for shooting planes, one is for shooting tanks
  91. Shaped charge wsrheads like HEAT and HESH do not care how far away the target is, range does not negatively impact the warhead performance. Relying on kinetic force, APDS and APDSFS rounds lose effectiveness over distance and the cold war rounds where not as reliable as the modern designs. Knocking out an MBT at 2km with APDSFS was not an option in the 60's and 70's. Common practice was to open the engagement with HEAT/HESH untill the range decreased to make APDS and APDSFS solid kill shots. The reports I read indicated that HESH was highly effective in the Golan heights, the balistic arc combined with the elevation advantage meant that the HESH rounds landed dead on the hulls and upper turrets of the Syrian tanks, allowing the rounds to be highly effective. During the knifefights, especialy at night, APDS and HEAT where better options.
  92. That's odd, the accounts I read indicate they used HESH at range and then switched to APDS
  93. It's a valid question. The Israelis preferred HESH during the Arab-Israeli wars and most tank kills in both Iraq wars where APDSFS. Not sure what the Iraqis used during the Iran-Iraq war. On that subject, anybody know if Iranian Chieftains used HESH or the export HEATFS?
  94. I shelved my BP along time ago, constantly found it in 6.7 games where it's armour is useless and it's a tank that relies on armour.
  95. Poor Tiger driver Show me on the dolly where the bad T29 touched you
  96. i have weird moments when the blackhole hatch eats shells
  97. Does make sense if they want to take the game further. I think they would be better served putting brakes on escalation to fine tune the br balance
  98. Yeah it's tricky, you need to land it on the top of the UFP. Too high and you hit turret for nothing, too low and transmission eats it, The MK1 Cent should be a nice Panther hunter.
  99. You just broke me
  100. Yup, folk have rather run off with that one littke bit of text
  101. I find HESH does it nicely. Allot of Panthers get uptiered to 7.0 and suffer
  102. Hush Timmy, the grown ups are talking
  103. We have a Sweedish Centurion, precedent is set. All your Centurions are belong to us! Not sure how universal or what conditions but thosectracks will come off
  104. Gotta catch 'em all!
  105. They are, noticed it on my MKVII Chirchill Only good for one hit, but will be fun
  106. And Gaijin have never made silly decisions before?
  107. Well the ablative track upgrades to certain tanks can be argued as a first step on this path
  108. Stillbrew is just ablative armour so is equatable to ERA. Israeli Centurion mods maybe? They tried ERA on some Centurions I believe
  109. ERA is not an entirely bad idea but how will that work for British and German tanks? ERA is a post 90's thing for these nations.
  110. Random stuff posted online is a credential? These kids and thier crazy ideas
  111. Yeah Bovi aint cheap at all.
  112. If you are looking for a date, post your bio on e-harmony. This isn't the place
  113. Yeah and I'm George Clooney. Ok....,
  114. Either way it's hesh bait
  115. It will not be T5.....
  116. What?
  117. I do feel sorry for US tanks
  118. So British tree basicly
  119. People picknand choose realism. Take Chieftain, realisticly it is impossible to blow up ammo in a Chieftain's turret. All ammo in the turret are solid chunks of metal, APDS shells. The propellant and HESH are under the turrey ring
  120. Yeah, Churchy is better as a mid-range damage sponge
  121. What's that nuclear tank from the 50s called that u posted in "ugliest tank of WWII"? Thanks

  122. Corvettes and DD's could work
  123. The Leo is apparently regarded as the best tank for it's mobility. Brits are crippled because we don't have regenerative steering implemented
  124. Very poor strawman. The change in capabilities between the composite armour era and non-composite is just too great. Even with different tiers you'll have them clubbing the current 8.0's and 8.3's or forcing them to play in isolation
  125. A tier with ONE tank per nation? Boring. You want 80's kit? Play AW
  126. Introducing T64's or Abrahms will NOT balance the game, it will dramaticly UNBALANCE it. Take the T64, only an 80's era tank firing advanced APDSFS can effectively deal with it so you'll have a few T64's dominating the map and farming anyone not driving an Abrahms, Chally or Leo 2.
  127. Free speech, deal with it. All this fuss over a Japanese Gepard clone. Type87 will not be immune to any tank gun it is likely to face. It may possibly handle 30mm fire but I have no sympathy for SPAA on tank hunting rambo runs. The SDF wherd behind everyone in introducing kit, ingame the Type87 will be comparable to all the other T5 SPAA's. It is not the herald of T64/Abrahms apocalypse
  128. I've always maintained a German bias in this game
  129. So? Every tank ingame will kill it
  130. Driving my H1 and E Tiggers if they see me first I am dead, if I see them first they are dead. My 17pdr tanks still gut them bow to stern.
  131. WT is balanced by caoability not service date. The Type87 was late to the party but ingame is no better than a gepard
  132. Here you go
  133. What amazes me is these people who defend Gaijin's overpowered APHE ignoring the basic facts. British crews did not go boom when hit by German shells. On average ONE crewman died.
  134. british

    You dont like Brits? Fine, but when someone asks for constructive advice, telling them not to play is trollish.
  135. Tigers seem more balanced, my H1 and E tend to be in 5.7/6.0 games exclusively. I may start playing my British 6.0 lineup
  136. Yup and "honey" was a common word in British slang right up to the 60's. Nobody knows exactly how the Stuart came to be called "honey", rather like the Matilda. However there are many contemporary sources, including first hand accounts and war diaries.
  137. I'll pay for an AVRE happily
  138. Yup, Centurion AVRE was denied aswell
  139. british

    Do you prefer AB or RB?
  140. Gaijin, in a stunning act of hypocrisy, shot down the AVREs on grounds they where anti-fortification tanks. KV2 and Brumbar are ok however......
  141. MK1 Cent was designed to fight Panthers so 5.7/6.0 makes sense
  142. Actualy it is not.
  143. You are aware the Stuarts used by the British where known as "honey" in North Africa right?
  144. Dont rely on it
  145. My 3.7 lineup is quite effective. The Chaffee is a very underestimated tank
  146. Eh?
  147. No Chieftain MK5?
  148. I enjoy my honey tanks