WT; some armor values!

The place if you want to talk about historical facts. No politics allowed!
User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3143
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

WT; some armor values!

Postby Tiger1996 » 13 Sep 2015, 23:24

Previewing the Armor values of the Tiger E, the KT, the Panther G and the Jumbo...

If u just quickly observe.. u would then discover out that the Jumbo's frontal upper hull part is very weak and so easy to penetrate by almost any AT weapon at any range as well as at any possible angle!
Attachments
Untitled.png
Untitled 6.png
Untitled 5.png
Untitled 4.png
Untitled 3.png
Untitled 2.png
Untitled 1.png

Armacalic
Posts: 125
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 02:04

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Armacalic » 14 Sep 2015, 06:00

What a moronic thing to say, that's armor strapped on top of the sherman's normal armor, you idiot. The jumbo basically had some armor bolted on, which is what you're looking at.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3143
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Tiger1996 » 14 Sep 2015, 08:30

Oh really; So... How much more thickness is under this plate? I mean, what is the additional armor thickness of the normal part behind this one then?? Actually.. I almost always succeeded in penetrating this area using my Pz4's 75mm gun in WT!

Armacalic
Posts: 125
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 02:04

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Armacalic » 14 Sep 2015, 12:33

The frontal armor is 63 mm plus the 38.1 mm slab of armor at the front. That's how the jumbo ends up with 101 mm of armor. But you'd never check that.

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3143
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Tiger1996 » 14 Sep 2015, 12:50

And that's what I am saying.. or u think I am blind?? These kind of info is already written on the left side window provided by the game of each screenshot!! But now what I am saying is that this 101mm Armor is yet too easy to penetrate using the basic AP shells of 88s for sure or by even most of the 75mm AT guns, as it's not that much slopped; this also explains why I could often penetrate them through this part using my Pz4s in WT. Which is the exact situation in Bk mod :)

SO it's actually not like those persons claiming that the Tiger can't penetrate the Jumbo's frontal armor at all... Unless if it hits the turret of the Jumbo or the lower part of the hull. However that as I said it's more likely that the 88's basic shell is gonna easily push through this part of the hull most of the times at a distance of around 500m which is not short range anyhow.

The Tiger's frontal armor as it shows on the screen too, is obviously much more tougher than this unlike many people do believe.. specifically with the Zimmerit, not to mention about this 30mm lower frontal hull metal plates!

Armacalic
Posts: 125
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 02:04

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Armacalic » 14 Sep 2015, 13:37

I don't think you're blind, I think you're just desperate to prove something that's false. You have the camera at an angle, the armor inspector in wt takes the position on the camera into account when showing slopes. The actual sloping of the jumbo is of 60 degrees, still making the armor 150mm effective, while the tiger sloping is barely 5 degrees or soe. The jumbo's effective armor is still enough to bounce tigers at 500m, admittedly with some luck. I do play war thunder too, the only times I've penetrate a jumbo with a 75mm gun is from the side.

User avatar
Butterkeks
Posts: 492
Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 17:42
Location: Germany

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Butterkeks » 14 Sep 2015, 14:39

Armacalic wrote:I don't think you're blind, I think you're just desperate to prove something that's false. You have the camera at an angle, the armor inspector in wt takes the position on the camera into account when showing slopes. The actual sloping of the jumbo is of 60 degrees, still making the armor 150mm effective, while the tiger sloping is barely 5 degrees or soe. The jumbo's effective armor is still enough to bounce tigers at 500m, admittedly with some luck. I do play war thunder too, the only times I've penetrate a jumbo with a 75mm gun is from the side.


Playing it too, can confirm what Armacalic says.

Tor
Posts: 163
Joined: 24 Feb 2015, 22:19
Location: Saint-Peterburg

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Tor » 14 Sep 2015, 17:35

I play a lot WT.
Jumbo have something around 140mm armor, but if you use rhombus your armor can be 160-170, and Tiger APCR with 220mm penetration ricochet vs this armor, angle armor with rhombus angle work good.
All shells make a turn to the armor after hit, reducing the angle of the armor, idk this at 100% but its look like AP eat 4-5 angle, old APCR 1, i think tiger APCR worse vs hull than standart AP, but vs turret better + AP have bigger calibre and weight than APCR, this also work VS armor with angle.
rhombus for tiger-1 much worse, because he dont have good armor angle and rhombus give 10mm, APCR work good vs Tiger-1 with rhombus.
This mean in WT 76mm sherman gun with APCR can penetrate tiger from 2km, tiger have problems vs Jumbo, 170mm turret problem vs AP, hull problem vs APCR and can be problem vs AP.
Sorry for my ENG.

Armacalic
Posts: 125
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 02:04

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Armacalic » 14 Sep 2015, 18:06

Tor wrote:I play a lot WT.
Jumbo have something around 140mm armor, but if you use rhombus your armor can be 160-170, and Tiger APCR with 220mm penetration ricochet vs this armor, angle armor with rhombus angle work good.
All shells make a turn to the armor after hit, reducing the angle of the armor, idk this at 100% but its look like AP eat 4-5 angle, old APCR 1, i think tiger APCR worse vs hull than standart AP, but vs turret better + AP have bigger calibre and weight than APCR, this also work VS armor with angle.
rhombus for tiger-1 much worse, because he dont have good armor angle and rhombus give 10mm, APCR work good vs Tiger-1 with rhombus.
This mean in WT 76mm sherman gun with APCR can penetrate tiger from 2km, tiger have problems vs Jumbo, 170mm turret problem vs AP, hull problem vs APCR and can be problem vs AP.
Sorry for my ENG.


Sorry tor, but your assessment is wrong, you're getting the numbers from world of tanks, and while the top gun on the tiger was real, the tiger didn't use it. The maximum penetration with the historical 88mm with its best ammo was 171mm at 100 meters.

Tor
Posts: 163
Joined: 24 Feb 2015, 22:19
Location: Saint-Peterburg

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Tor » 14 Sep 2015, 18:07

Armacalic wrote:
Tor wrote:I play a lot WT.
Jumbo have something around 140mm armor, but if you use rhombus your armor can be 160-170, and Tiger APCR with 220mm penetration ricochet vs this armor, angle armor with rhombus angle work good.
All shells make a turn to the armor after hit, reducing the angle of the armor, idk this at 100% but its look like AP eat 4-5 angle, old APCR 1, i think tiger APCR worse vs hull than standart AP, but vs turret better + AP have bigger calibre and weight than APCR, this also work VS armor with angle.
rhombus for tiger-1 much worse, because he dont have good armor angle and rhombus give 10mm, APCR work good vs Tiger-1 with rhombus.
This mean in WT 76mm sherman gun with APCR can penetrate tiger from 2km, tiger have problems vs Jumbo, 170mm turret problem vs AP, hull problem vs APCR and can be problem vs AP.
Sorry for my ENG.


Sorry tor, but your assessment is wrong, you're getting the numbers from world of tanks, and while the top gun on the tiger was real, the tiger didn't use it. The maximum penetration with the historical 88mm with its best ammo was 171mm at 100 meters.

From War Thunder (WT) earlier they have real but later they changed numerals, in game nothing changed.
Real problem no one know real penetrate stats, because usa have one method, brits second, rus third.
Maybe 220mm pen means realy low damage witout real penetration, only small after armor effect.
Last edited by Tor on 14 Sep 2015, 19:23, edited 1 time in total.

Armacalic
Posts: 125
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 02:04

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Armacalic » 14 Sep 2015, 19:16

Tor wrote:From War Thunder (WT) earlier they have real but later they changed numerals, in game nothing changed.


Yes, but Tiger here is trying to make ingame information pass for real information, and though War Thunder has correct numbers, he's also trying to manipulate the information to back up his case about Tiger I superiority in real life.

Here, this is the gun that the Panzerkampfwagen VI "Tiger I" uses. There they have a table with the penetration abilities of the actual 88mm 36/L56. Still no where as high as you claim, and the next gun that fits, the 88mm 43 kwk has more penetration, but it wasn't used by the Tiger I, but by the Tiger II.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2482
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Warhawks97 » 14 Sep 2015, 20:47

I gave up using warthunder as realistic source for anything. At the moment when i saw how BF109 E3 and Fw190 are behaving when using joystick when compared to lets say Hurricanes.


Fuck... just look the Buffalo airplanes which is sooooo wrong and OP.
Fuck... Just look the Spitfires, The MK I has finally MK V engine performence and Horse power. The MK V has better far overboosted climb rate (5 meter per sec to much). Its better than the Fw190 although the FW190 was better in everything but turn rate untill the Spit Mk IV arrived.


And you still come with WT as realistic source:D

Also these 38 mm are added to the normal one which is 63-64 mm thick for the M4A3 series.

check your sources next time...

http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m4sherman.html

This is one. Shall i had many more?


And you know what? Later shermans ( all with W for wet storage in their name and M4A3) had up to 100 mm (or more) at the lower hull part.

Tiger1996 wrote:SO it's actually not like those persons claiming that the Tiger can't penetrate the Jumbo's frontal armor at all... Unless if it hits the turret of the Jumbo or the lower part of the hull. However that as I said it's more likely that the 88's basic shell is gonna easily push through this part of the hull most of the times at a distance of around 500m which is not short range anyhow.


Nobody ever claimed it. And in BK we once had the "range discussion". And there it was considered as close: 100 meter, mid: - 500 meter, Long: -1000 meter and distant: 1400-1500 meters. The "long range shot" should be one of the famous "3-4 km distant kills" which mostly occured at eastern fronts.

Tiger1996 wrote:The Tiger's frontal armor as it shows on the screen too, is obviously much more tougher than this unlike many people do believe.. specifically with the Zimmerit, not to mention about this 30mm lower frontal hull metal plates!



Zimmerit. LOL. Zimmerit was anti magnetic coat. It was used to avoid that Magnetic mines and stuff can be used against tanks. But in mid 44 the axis removed the axis coats or at least didnt used them on new tanks anymore as it was considered as highly flameable (idk if its true) and so it was considered more as a risk as tanks would tend to catch fire more often as without. Did you really.... i mean REALLY belive that Zimmerit is anyhow an armor buff?

Also the "effective armor" of 158 mm is because of the slight slopp and because of what armaralic says that the game uses the cameras angeld view to calculate armor, but also because axis steel was Harder (had higher BHN scale). So an axis 80 mm armor plate could be as strong as an allied 90 mm steel plate. The downside: A lot more shrappnels when a tank is being penetrated. Axis mortality rate among tanks that got penetrated had been higher than US one.


And the 30 mm plates. Jeez.... i visited my greatest WW2 friends which have tons of ww2 books at home but also about tigers. But event there we couldnt find anything regarding this extra plates. And you didnt gave any source yet claiming that. Ive been reading the "Wehrmacht Lexikon" but nothing.

There had been two tiger Prototypes. The Henschel and Porscher. The porsche really had a 200 mm armor plate but never went into production.
Also a 30 mm additional armor plate would have added a lot of weight to the already overstrained gear box etc. I mean jumbo shermans did receive modifications so that the additional weight doesnt cause breakdowns. So i can hardly belive that axis added the 30 mm armor plate.

Armacalic wrote:Yes, but Tiger here is trying to make ingame information pass for real information, and though War Thunder has correct numbers, he's also trying to manipulate the information to back up his case about Tiger I superiority in real life.

Here, this is the gun that the Panzerkampfwagen VI "Tiger I" uses. There they have a table with the penetration abilities of the actual 88mm 36/L56. Still no where as high as you claim, and the next gun that fits, the 88mm 43 kwk has more penetration, but it wasn't used by the Tiger I, but by the Tiger II.


https://archive.is/CW2CM

Interested in that one? ;)

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3143
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Tiger1996 » 14 Sep 2015, 21:10

Warhawks97 wrote:And the 30 mm plates. Jeez.... i visited my greatest WW2 friends which have tons of ww2 books at home but also about tigers. But event there we couldnt find anything regarding this extra plates. And you didnt gave any source yet claiming that. Ive been reading the "Wehrmacht Lexikon" but nothing.

There had been two tiger Prototypes. The Henschel and Porscher. The porsche really had a 200 mm armor plate but never went into production.
Also a 30 mm additional armor plate would have added a lot of weight to the already overstrained gear box etc. I mean jumbo shermans did receive modifications so that the additional weight doesnt cause breakdowns. So i can hardly belive that axis added the 30 mm armor plate.


U really can't see the 30mm frontal lower hull extra armor plates on the Tiger E?? Go wear some glasses then!! :shock:

Also;
If the Zimmerit was really not buffing the actual armor as u r claiming, then why the first picture I uploaded is showing 158mm effective thickness on the E version while here on the Tiger H it's showing only 145mm on the other hand???!!!
Attachments
Untitled 3.png
Tiger E lower frontal hull > additional 30mm metal plates
Untitled.png
Tiger H lower frontal hull
Untitled 2.png
Tiger H upper frontal hull
Last edited by Tiger1996 on 14 Sep 2015, 21:18, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2482
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Warhawks97 » 14 Sep 2015, 21:18

They have mounted tracks on their tanks, yes. But iirc that was mainly against Hollow charge rounds. Similiar as armor skirts and sandbags got added to reduce or neutralize hollow charge round before they hit the armor. You can see pictures of Tigers and Panthers having these tracks everywhere on the tank (front, turret sides etc).

But tracks generally arent really armor against AP rounds that rely on kinetic power. You need to see the different how kinetic and hollow charge rounds to work. Both are countered differently.

Anti hollow charge things doesnt need to be thick, just there need to be some space between the real actual armor. The tracks here might be 30 mm thick, but are not an entire armor plate. It would maybe add effectively like 5-10 mm more armor against kinetic rounds.

US btw did the same: You wanna also call it extra armor "plates"?

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/23 ... 4ed180.jpg
http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/vehicle ... hermanpics.

More extra armor "plates"

http://hsfeatures.com/images/panzeriv_icr05.jpg


Not sure but i also think, besides the protection against hollow charge rounds, that these can be used also as "spare parts" so that repairs in the field can be done easier. But idk. The main reason really seem to be the protection agaisnt hollow charge weapons and that they had been as a kind of quick field improvisation.


https://www.google.de/imgres?imgurl=htt ... kUCh05cQFw

so yeah, it buffed armor a bit. But 30 mm tracks are not close as effective as 30 mm of a real armor plate.

On KT turret sides:
http://www-d0.fnal.gov/~turcot/Armour/p ... ig2_kr.jpg

User avatar
Jalis
Posts: 274
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 04:55
Location: Canada

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Jalis » 15 Sep 2015, 17:33

Hi

Interresting. Always trying to use history to make loobying :roll:

Jumbo is a generic word. Some were standardized built, some were handmade craft, alnost directly on frontline. Even for standardized models made in USA factory, changes occured during production.

WT sources about seems different form mine about the jumbo. WT for exemple claim jumbo weight in 37 tons, differents data and sources I have are over 42 t. Could I presume other WT data are accurate ?

For your game : BK like it is, is supposed to be a PVP mod. That means first goals would be to balance the game. By the way historical accuracy is not important. If it was Playing axis would be a suicide. At time the game occurs Axis had no hope to win the war.

A single example in game. Everybody accept fallschirmjagers can be paradrop and reinforce like paratroopers. It s obviously ludicrous, FJ were at this time elite ground troops. Even you would be able to find veterans with paradrop training, germans airbornes operation in 1944-45 is just utopic.

some pictures.

Have a good day

PS ; if not obvious, pictures are here for you look at sloped frontal plate tickness
Attachments
M4A3E2_03.jpg
Look carefully sloped frontal plate tickness. This one seems a regular made in usa Jumbo
M4A3E2_02.jpg
M4A3E2_01.jpg
handcraft

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2482
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Warhawks97 » 15 Sep 2015, 18:13

Jalis wrote:Hi. A single example in game. Everybody accept fallschirmjagers can be paradrop and reinforce like paratroopers. It s obviously ludicrous, FJ were at this time elite ground troops. Even you would be able to find veterans with paradrop training, germans airbornes operation in 1944-45 is just utopic.



German soldiers that joined the Fallschirmjäger later in 43 and 44 did not even receive a Parachute training. Or not all of them. They were normal ground forces actually using STGs. Thats why Fg42 production stopped as there was no more need to have a universal weapon and Fallschirmjäger used then stgs and lmgs like normal soldiers. They just carried the name Fallschirmjäger which meant nothing more than being a elite solider actually (in 44-45).

The Gebirgs also never dropped over enemie ground. Actually they used just once parachutes in Italy but over friendly ground only.

User avatar
Butterkeks
Posts: 492
Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 17:42
Location: Germany

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Butterkeks » 16 Sep 2015, 14:47

Tiger1996 wrote:
Warhawks97 wrote:Also;
If the Zimmerit was really not buffing the actual armor as u r claiming, then why the first picture I uploaded is showing 158mm effective thickness on the E version while here on the Tiger H it's showing only 145mm on the other hand???!!!


LOL. Just LOL. And this is the point why I always say that you aren't a reliable source at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimmerit

Read yourself if you want to. Zimmerit is only vs magnetical stickies and has no effect on the armor.

@Warhawks:
Zimmerit catching fire is only a myth. The Wehrmacht also tried to convince the soldiers by shooting the tanks (which didn't catch fire), but the soldiers still had too much fear of the Zimmerit.
That's why it wasn't used after September 1944.

"Zimmerit was discontinued from factory application on 9 September 1944 and from field application on 7 October 1944.[4] This was due to concerns that projectile impacts could ignite it. These proved false, but the order was never rescinded.[3][4] Applying and drying the paste added days to the production of each vehicle,[2] which was unacceptable as there was a shortage of tanks."

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3143
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Tiger1996 » 16 Sep 2015, 16:05

But this doesn't answer the question;
Why is it showing 145mm effective thickness on the H, but 158mm on the E?! Although it's the same part of the hull Armor as well as the exact same angle actually...

User avatar
Jalis
Posts: 274
Joined: 25 Nov 2014, 04:55
Location: Canada

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Jalis » 16 Sep 2015, 17:33

Answer is, imo, Lateral angle. You probably were not exactly at the same place. It something coh dont care, but WT does.

Point there is no real E and H model at WT both are Early tiger production. Identification can be made with binocular optic and big cupolla. However at WT stat could change from one to the other even the same graphic mdel is used for both.

I added picture to illustrate. Click to enlarge.

Point the skin is not historical, it s an home made fantaisy autumn skin.


Have a good day

Edit translation : epaisseur is tickness.
Attachments
tiger_102.jpg
just in front 0 angle. best position.
tiger_455.jpg
Very bad angle to score a kill
tiger_early.jpg
Tiger model identification

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2482
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Warhawks97 » 16 Sep 2015, 18:59

Tiger1996 wrote:But this doesn't answer the question;
Why is it showing 145mm effective thickness on the H, but 158mm on the E?! Although it's the same part of the hull Armor as well as the exact same angle actually...


Maybe read what others said already......


Armacalic wrote:I don't think you're blind, I think you're just desperate to prove something that's false. You have the camera at an angle, the armor inspector in wt takes the position on the camera into account when showing slopes. The actual sloping of the jumbo is of 60 degrees, still making the armor 150mm effective, while the tiger sloping is barely 5 degrees or soe. The jumbo's effective armor is still enough to bounce tigers at 500m, admittedly with some luck. I do play war thunder too, the only times I've penetrate a jumbo with a 75mm gun is from the side.



@Jalis. Thx to make it clearly again.




It somehow seems that Tiger is searching and searching for sources and is even willing to quickly belive false informations and missunderstandings just in order that the Tiger looks like a Imba super instant win Tank..... Which it wasnt apparently. It had some aspects that are fearfull. But when looking closer at this tank it delivered more problems to the (own) forces (esspecially repair shops and logistics and recovery units) as it offered solutions to deal properly with threats.

The greatest enemie of the Tiger was the Tiger itself..... awesome tank (for the allied).

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3143
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Tiger1996 » 16 Sep 2015, 19:24

Warhawks97 wrote:The greatest enemie of the Tiger was the Tiger itself..... awesome tank (for the allied).

Ya, in remembrance of Villers Bocage.. and again; Wittmann! :D Just mentioning his name is probably enough to describe how mighty this tank actually was... Specifically since that he wasn't the only Tiger Ace btw ^^ Yet just the most famous one perhaps.
We are already talking about such a legendary kind of achievements with this tank in reality!!

Armacalic
Posts: 125
Joined: 09 Dec 2014, 02:04

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Armacalic » 16 Sep 2015, 20:19

Nice try but no, the aces were already aces before they got in a Tiger. At best we're talking of people who could make a bad tank work well, nothing more. So stop it with Wittman, mentioning him isn't even helping your case anyways.
Last edited by Armacalic on 16 Sep 2015, 20:44, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Warhawks97
Posts: 2482
Joined: 23 Nov 2014, 21:45
Location: Germany

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Warhawks97 » 16 Sep 2015, 20:23

But such high success was mainly awarded to the crew which got provided with an adequate tool to achieve their goals.

But in general, and that saying all sources, Tigers did play a minor role during war. Most of axis super tanks had no real impacts on the end of any battle.

Also it was very common among the german propaganda to give actions of single soliders a very high reputation. They used such heroes to claim that the "Endsieg" is still possible and that their "race" is so much superior to any other.


But it was usually the skill that made the difference. The allied (esspecially US) very often withdrawn their first aces to make the own population to join the army or to by war bonds. The Axis aces had to fight throughout the entire war and so axis had till the end capable commanders that could teach others and which boosted the efficency of combat groups. So they had a lot more time during war and a lot more combats to gain experience that enabled them to achive sometimes high success.


but in a general look most axis "super units" played a very minor role but single actions like this one became famous by purpose for the propaganda. But the real success for the axis forces should be contributed to other "weak units" and experienced soldiers.

Also the best soldiers and crews received special units. Means that most tiger crews had already lots of experience in tank IV´s. So Tigers would have been just half as successfull when they had been used by standard soldiers.

One good example for this "Only aces get special equipment" is the Jagdverband 44. All axis fighter aces together in one squadron flying the Me262.


I think the fact that the tank was handeld by Wittmann and his crew was from greater importance than the fact that it was a Tiger.

User avatar
Butterkeks
Posts: 492
Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 17:42
Location: Germany

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Butterkeks » 17 Sep 2015, 11:48

Well at least the Proaganda worked for Tiger1996 :D

User avatar
Tiger1996
Posts: 3143
Joined: 06 Dec 2014, 15:53
Location: I'm from Egypt, but I live in Qatar.
Contact:

Re: WT; some armor values!

Postby Tiger1996 » 17 Sep 2015, 12:14

Actually all the 'propaganda' video documentaries of which I have always seen that is greatly praising on the Tiger tank in such a way.. are English ones in fact! I mean American or specifically British sourced and not just translations :P So it might have worked for them too and not just me only... :D
Last edited by Tiger1996 on 17 Sep 2015, 12:19, edited 1 time in total.


Return to “History/Realism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest