XIIcorps
Donator
 Posts: 2558
|
|
« Reply #20 on: October 06, 2013, 11:04:34 pm » |
|
Wirblewind  not a tank it was a dedicated anti air/inf self propelled gun. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
some of My kids i work with shower me  |
|
|
| Spartan_Marine88
|
|
« Reply #21 on: October 06, 2013, 11:24:16 pm » |
|
not a tank it was a dedicated anti air/inf self propelled gun.
Based on the P4 chassis. So in other words, a TANK. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Yes that's me, the special snowflake.
|
|
|
XIIcorps
Donator
Posts: 2558
|
|
« Reply #22 on: October 07, 2013, 12:22:10 am » |
|
Based on the P4 chassis.
So in other words, a TANK.
the stug is based on the panzer 3 chassis yet its a spg/assault gun. Tank doesn't necessarily imply its an enclosed fighting vehicle mounting a cannon |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| Spartan_Marine88
|
|
« Reply #23 on: October 07, 2013, 01:01:37 am » |
|
the stug is based on the panzer 3 chassis yet its a spg/assault gun.
Tank doesn't necessarily imply its an enclosed fighting vehicle mounting a cannon
A stug is still a tank, (which is slang for armor) however spg, assault gun, light, medium, heavy, super heavy, self-propelled anti air, Tank Destroyer (tank chassis based) are all more sub categories and often assigned to things to help designate specific targets and how to engage (or not too). Lots of things follow this pattern of naming, its like saying a semi-detached isn't a house because you its 'semi-detached'.  Also while the skink wasn't really needed by the time it entered service its combat records were shown to be favorable. however due to the Luftwaffe being mainly destroyed more weren't needed |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 07, 2013, 01:04:11 am by Spartan_Marine88 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| PonySlaystation
|
|
« Reply #24 on: October 07, 2013, 04:11:33 am » |
|
A stug is still a tank, (which is slang for armor) however spg, assault gun, light, medium, heavy, super heavy, self-propelled anti air, Tank Destroyer (tank chassis based) are all more sub categories and often assigned to things to help designate specific targets and how to engage (or not too).
The WW2 definition of a tank is: (1) continuous tracks for all-terrain mobility; and (2) a rotating turret; and (3) overall armor protection. Self-propelled artillery, Assault Guns and Tank Destroyers had (1) but lacked one or both of (2) and (3). Collectively, these three types can be called "self-propelled guns" instead of tanks. It's still irrelevant to the discussion because World of Tanks is a name to give a general view of what the game is about which is tank and vehicular combat. It doesn't limit the game to the strict definition of tank. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Sharks are not monsters Henley, they are cute, cuddly and misunderstood. They love humans. sometimes they love TOO much. They love people so much that sometimes their kisses separate people into two flailing pieces which are consumed by other sharks in a frenzy of peace and joy.
|
|
|
brn4meplz
Misinformation Officer
 Posts: 6952
|
|
« Reply #25 on: October 07, 2013, 12:40:01 pm » |
|
Stick to the term AFV and be done with this nonsensical back and forth argument.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
He thinks Tactics is a breath mint Wow I think that was the nicest thing brn ever posted!  the pussy of a prostitute is not tight enough for destroy a condom |
|
|
| Spartan_Marine88
|
|
« Reply #26 on: October 07, 2013, 12:42:54 pm » |
|
Stick to the term AFV and be done with this nonsensical back and forth argument.
Agreed. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| PonySlaystation
|
|
« Reply #27 on: October 07, 2013, 01:17:42 pm » |
|
It's not a back and forth argument, I just presented you with the cold hard facts.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
nikomas
Shameless Perv
 Posts: 4286
|
|
« Reply #28 on: October 07, 2013, 01:31:10 pm » |
|
And I'm telling you this, the S-Tank is quite clearly a tank, it's in the name, totally not an assault gun  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing—after they've tried everything else." The officer is considerably better than a riflemen squad at carrying weapons. Officers have good accuracy so they will hit most targets. |
|
|
| Spartan_Marine88
|
|
« Reply #29 on: October 07, 2013, 01:47:12 pm » |
|
And I'm telling you this, the S-Tank is quite clearly a tank, it's in the name, totally not an assault gun Pony said its not, so the military is clearly wrong. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| PonySlaystation
|
|
« Reply #30 on: October 07, 2013, 02:12:37 pm » |
|
I haven't heard of any WW2 tank called the S-tank.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
nikomas
Shameless Perv
Posts: 4286
|
|
« Reply #31 on: October 07, 2013, 02:20:24 pm » |
|
I haven't heard of any WW2 tank called the S-tank.
And I haven't heard of all countries in WWII defining a tank as the same thing, why in germany they were called panzerkampfwagens even! Incidentally, armored fighting vehicles |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| Spartan_Marine88
|
|
« Reply #32 on: October 07, 2013, 02:29:59 pm » |
|
The WW2 definition of a tank is: (1) continuous tracks for all-terrain mobility; and (2) a rotating turret; and (3) overall armor protection. Self-propelled artillery, Assault Guns and Tank Destroyers had (1) but lacked one or both of (2) and (3). Collectively, these three types can be called "self-propelled guns" instead of tanks.
 So this wasn't a tank then? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
XIIcorps
Donator
Posts: 2558
|
|
« Reply #33 on: October 07, 2013, 02:34:44 pm » |
|
Im sure were all aware that in the history of the armoured fighting vehicle the misnomer "tank" was used by the British first to describe them by their likeness to metal water tanks.
This name then was retained by the landships committee
to keep the secrecy of the project in check.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| DarkSoldierX
|
|
« Reply #34 on: October 07, 2013, 04:19:56 pm » |
|
LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE BEGUN
GOD FORGIVE ME OF MY SINS
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
two words
atgs and fireflies
Looks who's butthurt |
|
|
| Sachaztan
|
|
« Reply #35 on: October 08, 2013, 01:44:19 am » |
|
Well in WW2 the definition of a tank was exactly what Pony said.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Demon posession is real and it's not funny, it's the creepiest thing you will ever experience.
I would also like to add I watch fox news everyday all day and will continue to watch it while being proud of that fact. I'm sure you enjoy your communist news network just as much.
|
|
|
GrayWolf
Development
Posts: 1590
|
|
« Reply #36 on: October 08, 2013, 07:27:33 am » |
|
Well in WW2 the definition of a tank was exactly what Pony said.
Even I must agree. SPG and Tank Destroyers don't have tank in the name for a reason. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| NightRain
|
|
« Reply #37 on: October 08, 2013, 07:36:00 am » |
|
the reason tanks are called tanks is because British Project Water tank which was a codename for the armor production. Germans got the intel of it and were all "IMPROVED WATER TANKS ACH JA no problem" then they were released as tanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Because a forum post should be like a woman's skirt. Long enough to cover the subject material, but short enough to keep things interesting.
 |
|
|
nikomas
Shameless Perv
Posts: 4286
|
|
« Reply #38 on: October 08, 2013, 09:03:26 am » |
|
Well I think everyone knows that rain, my point was that it's fucking hilarious watching people argue semantics. Again, the S-Tank is totally not a tank, I think pony missed my point there  (The point was that people tend to get in arguments around if it should actually be called a tank or not due to the lack of a turret. But it was shown that it was perfectly capable of filling need for a defensive tank and a turret wasn't actually needed. Something like that anyway, basically it's silly argument as it fills the same role that a turreted tank would have done for Sweden back then anyway.) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
| Spartan_Marine88
|
|
« Reply #39 on: October 08, 2013, 10:46:37 am » |
|
I think what everyone should take from this is that while wargaming has made 2 games world of tanks and world of warplanes. Gaijin is making 1 game, the second part aptly named ground forces.
I want a 50mm puma
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
