I did clarify this in the post. I don’t think it needs to be a tech tree vehicle for either nation.
To each their own. But I will say, I don’t quite see how what I said was incorrect. Did Germany have plans to stick an Ausf G turret on the Panther II? If so, then I’d be perfectly fine with it going to Germany along with the Schmale Blende version.
But as it is, according to current information, it’s a modification carried out only by the US. It’s a similar situation to the Panzer III/Panzer II hybrid the French did. Both are built using predominantly German components, but neither were built by the Germans. So in both cases I’d say the U.S. and the French ought to get them being that they’re modifications carried out by those countries exclusively. Just my two cents though.
so should russia get a maus since they mated the MAUS V1 and V2 hull and turret together ?
calling it a modification itself is so disingenuous
its a museum peice. they just plopped it on for show. its not functional nor is it done by the military.
but regardless, once the panther II program got cancelled, only a standardturm would have been mounted if any at all. meaning it couldve been an A, D, G or even F turm
That’s not quite correct; the turret was added to the tank by the US Army in 1945 for official evaluation. So yes, the modification is, in fact, an official modification performed by the US Army. Interestingly, the tank itself has never left the custodianship of the US Army since it was captured in 45’. It was also used into the 1970s as a training aid for the Armor School until the engine randomly and quite literally blew up.
Once the Panther II program was cancelled in 43’, there were never any plans to use the hull as anything other than a test mule, as it offered little to no improvements over late production Panthers equipped with Schürzen. So it’s very unlikely the Germans would have mounted a turret on the thing. Especially when you consider all focus had turned to the E50 Post-1943.
That’s a hard no, and a completely different situation from what I mentioned above.
Sim players probably do, but these days we are so far and few between
As someone who plays sim this would be a no, although if I knew it wouldn’t be added to the br bracket rotation then I would give it and absolute yes. but I could also get behind it being a event vehicle or BP vehicle so it doesn’t run absolutly rampant in sim
Cool to see, yet tired of the endless copy paste we’ve been force fed recently
thats the wrong word
the correct word is tests. while eval is somewhat correct it implies that it was considered for introduction, which it was not.
modification implies that something was changed to some standard/state not of the norm. no part of the GTurm nor the Panther II hull was changed. the turret wasnt even functional. the
nothing is random. the silly testers drove it past its limits without proper maintainance and caused the failure. obv not something that you let happen on a legit eval vehicle. it was left at a test range for a long time.
theres even a picture of it next to like… idk 5 other panthers in american custody
should USA get 5 panthers in WT?
nyet.
nein.
nahi.
thats why i said
eh, hardly, E50 itsel was abandoned as you can see with the status of every other Entwicklung series except the E-100 never got past the drawing board. even the 100 got so far because of hitlers fascination with wunderwaffe.
or that you BETTER read Panther II: King Panther (Schmale Blendenausführung)
because thats an under estimation
1 Like
Absolutely
How are you getting this idea done
It would be absolutely hilarious, that’s all
Also that wasn’t done by the soviets the Maus was put together by Germany and did go through tests the soviets might of taken it apart for transport but they found it together
The turret and hull were put together by the Soviets
Then the troops leaving took it apart 🤷♀️ it was together during German tests
There were two Prototypes made
They used the turret from V1 and hull from V2 because Germany blew up the first vehicle before they retreated but the Soviets salvaged it.
Also they transported it whole by rail
2 Likes
It’s the word the U.S. Army uses when describing what they did with the Panther II, figured they’re at least somewhat of an authoritative source. Jentz and Doyle have also used “evaluation” in the past as well.
Aye, it’s in effect, a similar situation to the French Panzer III/II Hybrid as I’ve said. As for the turret not being functional, it’s capable to being rotated and does physically function. Armor and Cavalry Collection has even showcased it on occasion whenever they move the thing between storage and the Tankodrome (cool name for a Display building imho).
Happens when you test vehicles, I mean, for example, even the second T28 had its engine blow up during testing which resulted in the loss of the vehicle. I’d hardly call the testers silly, in either scenario. That said, the Panther IIs engine lasted into the 70s at least so that’s something.
Hardly saying the U.S. should get all five Panthers (which coincidentally do still exist, the Armor and Cavalry Collection is the only place in the world you can see all the mainline production Panther’s on display. I’ve heard there’s a lot of Museums that are quite jealous of the fact). Just saying there’s an argument to be made for the U.S. to get a tank in a configuration they created, just like the French Panzer III/II.
E-Series got abandoned late in the war due to the worsening war situation. If I remember correctly there were claims that at least three to five E-25s were under construction by the time the war ended and were destroyed in May 1945. E50 was still being designed as of late 44 as far as we know.
Perhaps, I’ll admit that was just me quickly quoting Jentz and Doyle who made the argument that the development of Schürzen for the Panther I ultimately killed the Panther II project.
regardless, better to use test. less connotations.
in a way also similar to the swedish tiger.
irl it was nothing more than a gunnery target. in game its a service vehicle.
captured vehicles just shouldnt be added in game. its a stance i hold for all nations
manually, or if you prefer the extra manual method (literally turning from the outside),
except the functions dependent upon the hull connections such as electric drives and what not
agreed
the west likes to hold these sort of tank conventions. theyre still driving shermans around. even tigers.
they hardly created anything. they did exactly what the russians did. plop one turret onto a hull.
claims which are quoted by doyle or jentz from late war documents however remain unsubstantiated
only thing ive heard regarding E-50 is its roadwheels being real and used on an experimental panther hull
I’d personally say unmodified captured vehicles so the game can still get cool and unique additions
If so then the more historical and special vehicles that scream a certain country shouldn’t be given to any other than that country.