Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Greatest/Best Tank - Balance of Firepower/Mobility/Protection

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Greatest/Best Tank - Balance of Firepower/Mobility/Protection

    Tips for Participants

    If you have not already done so, for an outline explanation of what is going on and how the polling and scoring processes will work please consult the Master Thread (Mega-Poll - Greatest/Best Tank of WW2 - Master Thread) and read the first three posts I have placed there, before beginning your participation in the 12 polls:

    http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forum...d.php?t=122093

    After you've read those first three posts (or if you've already done so), you are ready to start on the 12 poll threads.

    When you enter the poll threads, don't forget to read the Criteria Information (post #2 on each thread) for information on what's covered by that particular criterion; and precise details you'll need to register your score for all 21 of the tanks.
    45
    Matilda II
    0.00%
    0
    Crusader
    0.00%
    0
    Churchill
    2.22%
    1
    Valentine
    0.00%
    0
    Cromwell
    0.00%
    0
    Somua S-35
    0.00%
    0
    Char B-1 bis
    0.00%
    0
    PzKpfw 38(t)
    0.00%
    0
    PzKpfw III
    2.22%
    1
    PzKpfw IV (short & long guns combined)
    2.22%
    1
    Tiger I
    8.89%
    4
    Panther
    28.89%
    13
    Tiger II
    0.00%
    0
    M 13-40/14-41/15-32
    0.00%
    0
    Type 97 Chi-Ha
    0.00%
    0
    BT-5/7
    0.00%
    0
    T-34 (76 and 85 combined)
    33.33%
    15
    KV-1
    0.00%
    0
    IS-2
    2.22%
    1
    M3 Medium
    0.00%
    0
    M4 Medium (all versions combined)
    20.00%
    9

    The poll is expired.

    Last edited by panther3485; 23 Apr 12, 04:45.
    "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

  • #2
    Criteria Information


    Welcome to the Balance of Firepower/Mobility/Protection Poll; one of twelve polls where you will have the opportunity to help decide the greatest/best tank of WW2, as determined by our ACG membership.
    You are also invited to discuss/debate the balance of firepower/mobility/protection of all 21 tanks in this particular thread.


    4. Balance of Firepower/Mobility/Protection (max 30 points)

    One general 'measure' often used to judge the excellence of a tank is the degree to which it is thought to have successfully balanced the fundamental attributes of firepower, mobility and protection for the most effective and flexible overall package.
    Was too much emphasis placed on one or two of these attributes, to the detriment of the other one or two? (Bearing in mind to some extent of course, the intended battlefield role set/classification of the tank.)
    If so, how much did it matter?
    Or did the designers get the balance just about right; or even perfect?


    All Participants

    If you have not already done so, please vote for the one tank that you believe measures up best against this criterion.

    Level 2 Participants Only

    Brackets

    Please rate the remaining 20 tanks by placing each of them into one of the brackets below:

    In your opinion, was the balance of firepower, mobility and protection of the tank ...

    Excellent (27)
    Good (18)
    OK (9)
    Poor (0)
    Last edited by panther3485; 27 Apr 12, 11:12.
    "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

    Comment


    • #3
      Went T34, although any of the excellents could have been first (bar the Souma as let down by its 1 man turret).

      Excellent (27) - Churchill, Panther, Tiger 1, Somua S-35

      Good (18) - Cromwell, M4, PzIV

      OK (9) - M 13-40/14-41/15-42, Matilda II, Valentine, IS-2, PzKpfw 38(t), PzIII, Char B-1 bis, Type 97 Chi-Ha, BT-5/7, M3 Medium

      Poor (0) - Crusader, Tiger 2, KV-1
      How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
      Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

      Comment


      • #4
        Benchmark: T-34 (76 and 85 combined)

        Excellent: M4 Medium (all versions combined), Churchill, Cromwell, Valentine, M3 Medium, IS-2

        Good: Tiger I, Crusader, Somua S-35, Char B1 bis, PzKpfw 38(t), PzKpfw III, PzKpfw IV, M 13-40/14-41/15-32, Type 97 Chi-Ha, BT-5/7

        OK: Panther, Tiger II, Matilda II,

        Poor: KV-1

        Again, I'm taking this to be relative to anything produced at the time. So the BT-5/7 are being compared to other early '30s designs and so forth.

        The T-34 was the mobility paradigm in 1940. That's two years catch up for any other design.

        The "Excellent" class were designed just a little too late to be the benchmark, or showed a disadvantage on soft ground/snow. Same with the "Good", only more problems (this really is subjective).

        "OK" had some definite problems, like bad final drives, slow speed or other failings.

        "Poor" - well, it was better than the T-35, but so was the Edsel.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by broderickwells View Post
          Benchmark: T-34 (76 and 85 combined)

          Excellent: M4 Medium (all versions combined), Churchill, Cromwell, Valentine, M3 Medium, IS-2

          Good: Tiger I, Crusader, Somua S-35, Char B1 bis, PzKpfw 38(t), PzKpfw III, PzKpfw IV, M 13-40/14-41/15-32, Type 97 Chi-Ha, BT-5/7

          OK: Panther, Tiger II, Matilda II,

          Poor: KV-1

          Again, I'm taking this to be relative to anything produced at the time. So the BT-5/7 are being compared to other early '30s designs and so forth.

          The T-34 was the mobility paradigm in 1940. That's two years catch up for any other design.

          The "Excellent" class were designed just a little too late to be the benchmark, or showed a disadvantage on soft ground/snow. Same with the "Good", only more problems (this really is subjective).

          "OK" had some definite problems, like bad final drives, slow speed or other failings.

          "Poor" - well, it was better than the T-35, but so was the Edsel.
          I think I'd be inclined to agree on your 'benchmark' ('champion') tank here although I reckon the M4 would give it a decent nudge.

          As for the part I highlighted in dark red, for this particular poll it's pretty much OK to compare across the different 'periods' of WW2 (e.g 'early war', 'mid war' and 'late war').
          Balance of fundamental attributes (firepower, mobility and protection combined at similar levels) is - unlike some of the 'raw' criteria such as firepower or protection taken on their own - relatively much less affected by the period of war being looked at.
          Or, to use a number analogy, 2+2+2 is just as well balanced as 5+5+5.
          Last edited by panther3485; 24 Apr 12, 04:49.
          "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

          Comment


          • #6
            The M4 is not a good benchmark .

            It had great operational mobility, and reasonable tactical mobility as well. It also had plenty of useful weapon options. What it lacked was armour, which was only designed to protect said M4 from 37mm rounds according to our old friend S Zaloga. Not many 37mm used by the Germans late 42 when the M4 arrived.
            How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
            Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
              The M4 is not a good benchmark .

              It had great operational mobility, and reasonable tactical mobility as well. It also had plenty of useful weapon options. What it lacked was armour, which was only designed to protect said M4 from 37mm rounds according to our old friend S Zaloga. Not many 37mm used by the Germans late 42 when the M4 arrived.
              You are entitled to your opinion. I disagree somewhat; i.e. I wouldn't see the M4 as outright 'champion' here but I would nevertheless place it very high for balance of fundamental attributes. Not far at all behind the T-34, which is what a reasonable portion of members seem to be going for as the #1 here, if the opening trend is any indication. If we choose to 'downgrade' the Sherman primarily for its supposed 'lack' of armour then we'd need to downgrade the T-34 almost as much because its armour wasn't much better than the Sherman's IMO.

              Or, to look at it another way, if I ask myself which of all the major WW2 tanks might reasonably have been seen as having a better balance of attributes than the M4 Medium the answer, IMO, is that they are relatively few indeed and the T-34 is among them. Indeed, in my estimation it's the outright best (so now I've given away my 'champion' for this particular criterion ).

              So we would appear to agree on the 'champion' (or 'benchmark') tank here but it's in the positioning of the others that we'll find our disagreement.
              But then, you and I have been exchanging opinions on tanks for long enough now to know up front what we are likely to disagree on.
              Last edited by panther3485; 24 Apr 12, 22:59.
              "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

              Comment


              • #8
                I chose the M4. When introduced its armament and armor were well matched to the opposition. It had reasonable tactical mobility and excellent operational mobility.
                Over the course of WW 2 it proved capable of being modified and upgraded to meet conditions as they changed. It went from a short 75mm to the 17pdr, to a 90mm (M36B1 and the not produced M26 turret version), to a 105mm howitzer.
                Armor could be upgraded, as the M4A3E2 Jumbo proves, to a point where it was as well armored as virtually any tank on the battlefield.
                The suspension was improved over its life and more than adequite for the range of speed it had to handle. Operationally, it would be hard to beat on a long road march for economy, reliability, and ease of maintenance.

                In the good category: The Tiger I, Panther, Pz III, Pz IV, Cromwell, Churchill, and T34. All have a very reasonable mix of the three elements but, all also have some issues that unbalance them to a degree.

                Average:
                Pz 38t decent gun, reliable, mobile
                M13/40 decent gun, diesel. let down by poor armor.
                KV I and Is II Good gun and armor. Mobility issues
                M3 let down by poor layout.

                Poor: Everything else.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I voted the M4 as the top dog. In terms of firepower we have 75mm tossing out a very good HE round, the 76mm beefing up the AP and the 17pdr going even further. The 105mm tops it off with both HE and AT performance. This tank is very mobile, especially when you include not breaking down in the equation. Problems with flotation were corrected. Protection was an adequate balance for the tank and in the Jumbo was thickened beyond what any comparable mediums possessed.

                  Excellent-T-34, PzIV

                  Good- Tiger I, Churchill, Cromwell, M3, IS-2

                  OK-Panther, PzIII, Pz38, KV-1,Matilda II,
                  Crusader,Valentine,Somua, Char B-1, M 13-4097, BT-5/7

                  Poor-Tiger II
                  John

                  Play La Marseillaise. Play it!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by panther3485 View Post
                    You are entitled to your opinion. I disagree somewhat; i.e. I wouldn't see the M4 as outright 'champion' here but I would nevertheless place it very high for balance of fundamental attributes. Not far at all behind the T-34, which is what a reasonable portion of members seem to be going for as the #1 here, if the opening trend is any indication. If we choose to 'downgrade' the Sherman primarily for its supposed 'lack' of armour then we'd need to downgrade the T-34 almost as much because its armour wasn't much better than the Sherman's IMO.

                    Or, to look at it another way, if I ask myself which of all the major WW2 tanks might reasonably have been seen as having a better balance of attributes than the M4 Medium the answer, IMO, is that they are relatively few indeed and the T-34 is among them. Indeed, in my estimation it's the outright best (so now I've given away my 'champion' for this particular criterion ).

                    So we would appear to agree on the 'champion' (or 'benchmark') tank here but it's in the positioning of the others that we'll find our disagreement.
                    But then, you and I have been exchanging opinions on tanks for long enough now to know up front what we are likely to disagree on.
                    Except I did actually vote the M4 as good, not best .
                    How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: http://grist.org/series/skeptics/
                    Global Warming & Climate Change Myths: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                      Went T34, although any of the excellents could have been first (bar the Souma as let down by its 1 man turret).

                      Excellent (27) - Churchill, Panther, Tiger 1, Somua S-35

                      Good (18) - Cromwell, M4, PzIV

                      OK (9) - M 13-40/14-41/15-42, Matilda II, Valentine, IS-2, PzKpfw 38(t), PzIII, Char B-1 bis, Type 97 Chi-Ha, BT-5/7, M3 Medium

                      Poor (0) - Crusader, Tiger 2, KV-1
                      Thanks Nick. Registered.
                      "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by broderickwells View Post
                        Benchmark: T-34 (76 and 85 combined)

                        Excellent: M4 Medium (all versions combined), Churchill, Cromwell, Valentine, M3 Medium, IS-2

                        Good: Tiger I, Crusader, Somua S-35, Char B1 bis, PzKpfw 38(t), PzKpfw III, PzKpfw IV, M 13-40/14-41/15-32, Type 97 Chi-Ha, BT-5/7

                        OK: Panther, Tiger II, Matilda II,

                        Poor: KV-1

                        Again, I'm taking this to be relative to anything produced at the time. So the BT-5/7 are being compared to other early '30s designs and so forth.

                        The T-34 was the mobility paradigm in 1940. That's two years catch up for any other design.

                        The "Excellent" class were designed just a little too late to be the benchmark, or showed a disadvantage on soft ground/snow. Same with the "Good", only more problems (this really is subjective).

                        "OK" had some definite problems, like bad final drives, slow speed or other failings.

                        "Poor" - well, it was better than the T-35, but so was the Edsel.
                        Thanks brod. It's on the spreadsheet.
                        "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                          I chose the M4. When introduced its armament and armor were well matched to the opposition. It had reasonable tactical mobility and excellent operational mobility.
                          Over the course of WW 2 it proved capable of being modified and upgraded to meet conditions as they changed. It went from a short 75mm to the 17pdr, to a 90mm (M36B1 and the not produced M26 turret version), to a 105mm howitzer.
                          Armor could be upgraded, as the M4A3E2 Jumbo proves, to a point where it was as well armored as virtually any tank on the battlefield.
                          The suspension was improved over its life and more than adequite for the range of speed it had to handle. Operationally, it would be hard to beat on a long road march for economy, reliability, and ease of maintenance.

                          In the good category: The Tiger I, Panther, Pz III, Pz IV, Cromwell, Churchill, and T34. All have a very reasonable mix of the three elements but, all also have some issues that unbalance them to a degree.

                          Average:
                          Pz 38t decent gun, reliable, mobile
                          M13/40 decent gun, diesel. let down by poor armor.
                          KV I and Is II Good gun and armor. Mobility issues
                          M3 let down by poor layout.

                          Poor: Everything else.
                          Just checking here, but you have nothing in the 'Excellent' bracket (27 points)? You want everything to go into the 'Good' bracket (18 points) or lower?

                          For the moment, I've entered on the spreadsheet exactly as you posted but please let me know if you want to change anything.
                          "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Nick the Noodle View Post
                            Except I did actually vote the M4 as good, not best .
                            Yeah, I know, but I'd put it in between those two. Excellent. Our differences are not great here though, I must admit.
                            "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by JBark View Post
                              I voted the M4 as the top dog. In terms of firepower we have 75mm tossing out a very good HE round, the 76mm beefing up the AP and the 17pdr going even further. The 105mm tops it off with both HE and AT performance. This tank is very mobile, especially when you include not breaking down in the equation. Problems with flotation were corrected. Protection was an adequate balance for the tank and in the Jumbo was thickened beyond what any comparable mediums possessed.

                              Excellent-T-34, PzIV

                              Good- Tiger I, Churchill, Cromwell, M3, IS-2

                              OK-Panther, PzIII, Pz38, KV-1,Matilda II,
                              Crusader,Valentine,Somua, Char B-1, M 13-4097, BT-5/7

                              Poor-Tiger II
                              Thanks John. All on the sheet now.
                              "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X