• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

IS 2 greatest tank of ww2

IS 2 is the best tank of WW2 it has much better and thicker armor than the panther in reality unlike in ro where their armor is about the same. IS 2 can penetrate panthers frontal hull armor plate from 1200 meters virtualy every time while the panther may penetrate the IS 2 frontal armor plate from only 600-700 meters thats huge tactical advantage for IS 2. An IS 2 may be able to penetrate a tiger 1 frontal armor plate from 1500+ meters and its slightly worse optics whould not make much differnce at all espesialy for skilled gunner. IS optics allow for engagemant of targets up to 3000 yards plus effectively.while the tigers prospects are very poor and unlikely at that range versus IS 2. IS 2 armor is much better tha tiger 1 which has 100mm max front hull and turret armor thickness at 0degress slope while IS 2 is 132 mm sloped frontal hull and well sloped 162 mm turret front. IS 2 versus Tiger 2 are about equal at all ranges except IS 2 can get turret on target much quicker giving CQB atvantage and tiger 2 is extremely ineficicient to produce 1 tiger 2 for 5 IS 2 thats just plain stupid and mere 400+ were built and tiger 2 cant go 400 yards without breaking down or getting stuck in mud hehe. IS 2 is clear winner!!! IF you dont belive check out site The Russian Battlefield.ru heavy tanks section
:IS2::IS2::IS2::IS2::IS2: Holy :IS2::IS2::IS2::IS2::IS2:
 
Upvote 0
Just spreading the faith. :IS2:

2011-07-31_00005.jpg


2011-07-31_00004.jpg


2011-07-31_00002.jpg

I demand transparency and animated muzzle flash :D
 
Upvote 0
oh i forgot, didn't Churchill fail to inform the US of certain u-boat threats to it's shipping in order to hasten it's entrance into the war?
i stand somewhat corrected by myself i guess.

As far as I know that is incorrect - if anything Churchill was banging on about the UBoat threat but to no avail - even though a lot of American ships were lost. The cold hard fact is, losing a few ships in the Atlantic helping the British, seeing Europe in flames and British cities being bombed to near-oblivion wasn't enough to persuade the American government to go to war. Pearl Harbour changed that though.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
As far as I know that is incorrect - if anything Churchill was banging on about the UBoat threat but to no avail - even though a lot of American ships were lost. The cold hard fact is, losing a few ships in the Atlantic helping the British, seeing Europe in flames and British cities being bombed to near-oblivion wasn't enough to persuade the American government to go to war. Pearl Harbour changed that though.
The horrors of the Soviet and Nazi regimes wasn't enough to persuade Switzerland to join a side, either. Every country stays neutral for their own reasons. ;)
 
Upvote 0
Jesus stoically accepted his fate at the hands of the Almighty and He accepted him in his arms.
Not only did He not tear Jesus to shreds the day of the Last Supper, He also accepted him in His Kingdom when he was crucified!
Jesus, that tactless *****, made it a +1 invitation of course, because he just had to invite his fellow crucifee-buddy to meet him in the kingdom of The Lord, but the :IS2: is as forgiving as he is vigilant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peter.Steele
Upvote 0
Whilst carrying out my duty to the party, burning hundreds of bibles and clerical paraphernalia i noticed something that i hadn't before.
2jagviq.png


Now we know really why it was their LAST supper.
Such an enlightening discovery my brother! Something tells me the Vatican has more :IS2: related secrets that may yet see the light of day!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arete and Uurastaja
Upvote 0
As far as I know that is incorrect - if anything Churchill was banging on about the UBoat threat but to no avail - even though a lot of American ships were lost. The cold hard fact is, losing a few ships in the Atlantic helping the British, seeing Europe in flames and British cities being bombed to near-oblivion wasn't enough to persuade the American government to go to war. Pearl Harbour changed that though.
yes he i understand he was vocal about the U-boat peril and believed it to be probably the greatest threat of the war.
but what i talk of is the deliberate failure to warn US shipping of specific threats by withholding information about U boat positions, in the belief that losses to it's own shipping and civilians would help bring them into the war.(as the US didn't seem bothered enough about what was happening to it's 'allies' or anyone else)
It's certain that Churchill would consider increasing the chances of direct US involvement as more important than a few ships and a few thousand sailors.

Now as you point out US shipping losses were indeed not enough - at least up to the time of pearl harbour but remember of course Churchill would have been unaware that attack was going to happen and work in Britain's favour - however let's not forget even then it was still Germany, as Japan's ally, that declared war on the US not the other way round.

However id be happy to hear this conspiratorial rumour is completely untrue, as i only raised it to question my own favourable appraisal of Britain's war record.

Unfortunately this has strayed way off-topic now;
Within the context of this thread the greatest wartime atrocity is probably the King Tiger's reliability.
 
Upvote 0
iIS Thetoad wrong,,.But...

iIS Thetoad wrong,,.But...

Did not your ,,,OH..so beloved IS11,have a manually traversed turret,which was notorious for it's constant breakdowns.

I can only imagine the difficulties involved,if the soviet's attempted to put in a D.C. Motor in it...

When did they fit an F.M. Radio in each,,,,,April 1945 ??
 
Upvote 0