A Tank Enthusiast Reacts: Battlefield V (ALL TANKS)

[@eta320]

Hey all! Yes, I am alive, and yes, I still love tanks! This is a video I've been working on for WAY too long, but I'm super proud of the results, and I hope you all enjoy watching it as much as I did making it. The next few uploads on this channel will come quickly I promise, but definitely stick around for the "2023 Year In Review" live stream I'll be doing on THIS channel around the turn of the new year. More info on that in the coming weeks. Subscribe and join the discord to stay up to date on all that stuff! Join my discord: discord.gg/n9bMyt4uKM I Live Stream: kzbin.info/door/B1iMnyrIYMz9Ft06pWOQVA I have a podcast: kzbin.info/door/sYlkjyhtSHXuEsyZRExPpQ

[@gatoxd7544]

Also just a little correction in 9:49 it isn't necessarly a G, because the panzer 4 was refereed as Ausf G (version G) when it had an additional 30mm armor on the front of the hull which would make it 80mm thicc, if you just add a long 75mm to a Panzer 4 Ausf F1 it would make it a F2 because the armor thiccness was 50mm soo you also needed to add the extra armor to make it a G.

[@gatoxd7544]

10:28 The sandbags were actually pretty more effective than what people thought, because against heat shells or the ammunation used by bazookas and the panzerfaust which used heat warheads it would make soo that the explosion that resulted in the pentration happened when it hit the sandbags before hitting the armor, soo when it hit the armor it would be slowed down and could result in a non penetration.

[@eta320]

@@gatoxd7544 Ausf G designation wasn't specific to the armor layout of the vehicle. The Panzer IV with the long 75 went by a few nicknames confusingly within the German army. To boil it down, the F2 and the G are pretty much the same vehicle just the Germans calling it something different. I usually go the War Thunder route and if I see a long 75 Pz IV with the more rounded muzzle break I call it an F2. But I will admit that it really doesn't matter.

[@gatoxd7544]

@@eta320 I mean in some posts and documentarys you can see it being called F2/G but idk.

[@eta320]

@@gatoxd7544 Even the Germans were confused with the naming. Considering they also kept calling the StuG a StuG even after turning it into a TD (it should have been switched to a Jagdpanzer). And the stupidity with the Panther… Germany has had a history of changing names and being confusing just because they can lol

[@righty5890]

Sandbags weren't really there to stop tank shells... It was useful against infantry-carried AT weapons (for example: magnetic mines don't work on sandbags, and something like the panzerfaust would most likely lose most of it's penetrating power against sandbags)

[@ODST_Parker]

HE and HEAT (shaped charge) rounds tend to lose a bit of bite, the more shit you throw in front of it before anything hits the armor. Not much, but it was the best they could do in the field. More extensive upgrades, like welded track segments and armor skirts, were also somewhat effective.

[@F4Wildcat]

The sandbags did protect well versus the older "faustpatrone klein" but the later "gross" models as we all know them, the panzerfaust 30 and so on had little issues with sandbags. BUT one discovered thing is that sandbags Could help when the panzerfaust was fired at an offset angle. But in general, the downsides outweighed the advantages. The sandbags added weight and this reduced mobility. And it also worn down compoments faster, especially the transmission on the M4 (wich is why Patton forbade the usage of this armor) Magnetic mines were indeed affected by sandbags, and Hafthohlladung anti tank charges aswel, wich relied on magnets to properly angle the charge.

[@hellohelloington9442]

well, there's actually a bit of a deeper reason why it was there other than for stopping anti-tank shells i commented already on what they're for, but i'll just summarise here the americans and germans both conducted studies on what things like sandbags, tracks, logs, etc. did when they were put on tanks, and found they often made the problem worse rather than helped. however, they let crews put them on the tanks anyway because it gave the crew peace of mind - obviously the crews didn't know that was the case. so they weren't really there for functionality, but moreso for the psychological aspect, since the mental states of your crew is important if you want them to perform well, hence why tank designers care about the comfort of the crew.

[@ODST_Parker]

@@hellohelloington9442 I've heard about that aspect of it too. Kinda funny how nowadays, there's jokes about the Russian MBT "cope cages" to stop ATGMs or RPGs fired from above, when the armor used by most nations back then wasn't very useful either. If you put extra crap on a tank, and it makes the crew fight better because they feel safer, that's an improvement nonetheless. It reminds me of the exaggerated stories of air support in WWII. In stories, movies, games, it's extremely effective and often turns the tide of a battle. In reality, most planes missed or didn't do much damage, because the majority were fighters pressed into ground attack, and it's really hard to hit targets on the ground from the air with such basic aircraft and ordnance. The biggest advantage was the morale boost it gave their own troops (when they weren't being accidently targeted) and the near equal drain on the enemy's morale.

[@hellohelloington9442]

@@ODST_Parker yeah, all of those stories are funny that reminded me of how those assigned to ground attack documented their kills. they didn't really have any way to tell if they destroyed a tank (or damaged or even hit it in the first place), so when they had to return to the airfield, they often just claimed "yeah we killed it", which led to a lot of bloated and exaggerated numbers on the tanks destroyed by aircraft. it's really funny, and totally explains why the amount of tanks that were lost in the war often didn't add up to the amount of tanks that were destroyed. but that's sort of what happens when you trust someone with that sort of thing, i guess. though, about cope cages, it is important to note that the cope cages do /sort of/ work. when people think of the cope cage they act like it's meant for javelins, but it's not. the cope cage was installed because of the russians' experience in the chechen war, where there was a lot more handheld rocket launchers, not atgm launchers. most people forget that and use it as an excuse to shit on the cope cage, when, in reality, not only does the cope cage give the crew peace of mind (like you said), but it can protect the top of the tank from unguided rockets like the RPG-7, which is what it's meant for. it makes even more sense when you consider the Russians thought they'd be in Kiev/Kyiv pretty much instantly, where there are a lot of buildings that provide vantage points on a tank like that. i'd say it's definitely better to have a cope cage than not to, just in case, because it's just a bit of steel that barely adds any weight to the tank anyway, but has at least a chance of saving you from something.

[@NoMoreCrumbs]

As a quibble, "panzer" literally translates to "armor" in German, and their tanks are called "panzerkampfwagen," which means "armored fighting vehicle." Nobody wants to say all that, so panzer is the slang term for tanks. In essence you were correct

[@ilikeships9333]

Not to be rude but i think at this point everyone knows German tank designations that likes ww2 history it’s such a mainstream thing and the mainstream loves glorifying the Germans in ww2 so they talk about their tanks in heavier detail ect some of the first tank facts I learned were German naming conventions.

[@awacsrazgriz967]

@@ilikeships9333 No, No they dont. Tons of people dont know the definition and still get it wrong. Dont make assumptions just because you know that stuff.

[@kataranu5695]

Bro. I’m German. Panzer means tank. And panzerkampfwagen means armored car.

[@hohenstaufen2345]

A Panzer is not armor in german. Its more translated to rüstpanzer or armored chestplate. But in german we often use one Word for two things. And Panzer is very much an independent Word. It just means Tank in that case

[@josefstalin6931]

i speak german and i can tell you panzer really just means tank you got panzerung which is a word like armor but armor in german is "rüstung" and to panzerkapfwagen its really werid because you are right its literally translates but i think nobody calls them panzerkampfwagen only kampfwagen which means "fighting car" or called them short names like puma and if you know germans you know make everything more complicated then it should

[@theeggman1199]

They probably realized it was faster to modify the panzer 4 model then make a panzer 3 model for the stüg

[@eta320]

Bingo. I also reckon that’s why the entire British tree consists of the Valentine and the Churchill. And the US is missing all of its iconic TD’s and light tanks.

[@ALousyRotary]

​@@eta320 should add that ingame there is a Bishop artillery modeled but only as destroyed tank, plus a Marder 3 H(I think) for the trailer but also never introduced in game.

[@GoodlyData86596]

@@eta320 they had to prioritize, they probably knew at that point that the game’s time was short, because ea has a habit of putting games/series “out behind the shed” if they do very poorly for too long

[@bensonfitch6697]

This is interesting because it’s almost the reason the the StuG III was so prominent, the found that modifying the Panzer III chassis was better in certain circumstances than building another Panzer IV, but I’m sure most people have heard this history.

[@stephennelson9212]

You mention the Japanese air force at 25:04, Japan actually didn't have an air force in the interwar/ww2 period. Air power was split between the army and the navy with the allocation of aviation resources and responsibilities being one of the many things the army and navy liked to squabble over.

[@IJN_Guy]

It was more akin to how the U.S had operated their "Air Force" by making it a branch of the army. They did have planes in the inter-war period, but a good number of them were foreign designs, most of which were by German or British engineers. Takeo Doi (a student of German aeronautical engineer Richard Vogt), Takao Yoshida, and Jiro Horikoshi were some of the first Japanese engineers to create a more mass-produced domestic design, with some of their designs being the Ki-10, A2N, and the 1MF10 (experimental; failed due to crash). All three were very good planes in their own respects and contributed to Japanese aviation design. But, yes. The IJN and IJA were very competitive for funds, and we can clearly see who won most of the time. *Cough* Two floating hotels *Cough* and a carrier-based fighter in land operations *Cough*.

[@robertharris6092]

How is that different than the united states army airforce?

[@MS-qx9uw]

@@robertharris6092USN and USAAF weren’t so hostile toward each other that the Army had to procure its own carriers

[@meatballg8655]

As per usual, the stug 4 being an absolute historical abomination in game is down to large companies keeping their teams apart like the plague. You have the art and design team who do insane amounts of research on all their vehicles and decide on using some more under-represented vehicles of the war, most likely designing them with full intention of them going into the game as a standard form. Then the dev team comes over and says “hey we’re actually putting a tech tree system into the game for the vehicles so players have something to work towards while playing”. This of course makes the art team throw an absolute hissy fit and now they have to shoe horn some cursed designs into their beautiful historically accurate tank for the sake of gameplay

[@ALaughingWolf2188]

For Germany you forgot about the Panzer 38t and the Puma, overall as a battlefield V player and avid tank fan I actually really enjoyed this! It’s very well done, you know way more than I ever could lol, Hope good things come for you! This channel has a very cool concept I’m sure people will like!

[@AH64Gunship]

Although technically pumas and greyhounds were considered more ad armored cars than tanks

[@spookyengie735]

@@AH64Gunship Wheeled Tank you could say.

[@monkey357.2]

Sturmtiger also

[@priestoffrogsandfatherofam8659]

I'm guessing, the reason why they added the Stug IV is because they wanted to add the Stug III and maybe didn't have the time due to a schedule or budget to make a whole new Model for it. Also no Panzer 38t no sdkfz 234?

[@eta320]

I had to cut out a LOT of stuff. I rambled for well into 3 hours reviewing every tank in the game. The Pz 38(t), the AA Valentine, and the Wirblewind/Ostwind. The amphibious tanks also had to be cut. Maybe I'll make a part 2 :)

[@priestoffrogsandfatherofam8659]

@@eta320 The video was pretty cool, hope for more!

[@Lukyn1501]

@@eta320 Then why does it say all tanks in the title?

[@eta320]

@@Lukyn1501 well I did review every tank in the game, I just cut out some of them 😊

[@gatoxd7544]

ngl with that suspension and that drives i think its more like a stug 3 because it looks more with the suspension of a panzerkampfwagen 3 instead of a 4.

[@JohnCoyoteLee]

Boy, when I seen the Stug. "Holly Jesus, WHAT IS THAT WHAT THE HECK IS THAT!"

[@josephjoestar7112]

Im gonna be honest i didnt even know the stug was in battlefield 5 because no one used it

[@Ezra411st]

Yea because it looks like that sht

[@yourcasualfinn2213]

@@josephjoestar7112 Its literally my best tank in the game

[@The_Faceless_No_Name_Stranger]

@@yourcasualfinn2213 it was ok, not the best if you were doing solo and having an MG gunner made it much better

[@yourcasualfinn2213]

@@The_Faceless_No_Name_Stranger Yeah, also those mine lauchers made more usable solo

[@k.f.m6901]

i think that foxhole is the closest game to actually give you the sensation that you are in a war, more specifically that you are in some conflict of the inter wars/ww2 despite being a fictional setting. yea the grafics are not the best but the feeling of you being this small cog in the larger machine that is unmatched

[@eta320]

I have a video on Foxhole! Check it out its one of my personal favorites

[@eskeline]

god everytime i hear about foxhole i remember that one review with the furry pfp saying "NOT THE GAME I EXPECTED" or something

[@Pickle_guy15]

@@eskelineit took me a second to register what you just said

[@twu1909]

@@Pickle_guy15 same lmao

[@paper2061]

Try call to arms gates of hell ostfront. If you press e to direct control and then t you go first person.

[@endlesswaffles6504]

Back in Battlefield 2142 I remember vehicles having limited ammo, it's interesting to see it come back.

[@joaonagae]

i think all BF that used the refractor engine had limited ammo, but BF2 and 2142 had infinite coax

[@Lt_Voss]

Friendly reminder that BF 1942 had finite ammo for land and air vehicles, machine gun overheating, and sluggish turret traverses on vehicles that weren't just tied to your mouse sensitivity, from tanks all the way up to battleships (seeing battleships in BF1 whip their turrets around at 10000 dpi always irked me).

[@Silverswitch1]

I assume they used the StuG 4 because they already had a P IV chassis so it was cheaper to reuse that than create a P III chassis.

[@MarImpObsc]

You forgot that there's actually a Churchill crocodile in game and the Sturmtiger (as well as some gun carrier vehicles)

[@derpmeister652]

The Armory doesn’t actually show them but each faction actually has their own specific “super tank” that can be summoned with squad points. Germany gets the Sturmtiger, UK gets the Churchill Croc, USA gets the Calliope Sherman, and Japan gets a HaChi. (Also if you can I’d like to see you review the anime Girls Und Panzer)

[@Cbrmkn98xs]

Hes gonna do a Potential History and Yukari is def gonna be his spirit animal

[@thedigitaldummy3098]

He’s already a fan. You can see the emblem of Bonple High School from Girls und Panzer Ribbon Warrior and uses a panel from the manga in this video.

[@obamnaprismus]

I don't know if I know what this one is about, and I can't figure how the US gets a Calliope when Germany gets the Sturmtiger. I mean, what about the armor values on the thing?! How do you want a Callio to kill a Sturmtiger?

[@derpmeister652]

@@thedigitaldummy3098 I know the symbol was in the background, but it doesn't hurt to hear more people talk about the show, especially if they are enthusiasts of the craft lol

[@simselmore5625]

@@obamnaprismus The Sturmmöser (Sturmtiger if you want to go by BFV) is balanced out by it's reload. And you can't forget that this is BFV and not something like War Thunder, Hell Let Loose, or Enlisted. Armour values don't mean much if your survival is dependent almost purely on a hit point pool

[@invictusangelica]

I find it kinda funny that you didn't react at all to the "Valentine AA Mk I" considering IT WAS LITERALLY FICTIONAL. Yes it was a turret from the Crusader AA slapped on the Valentine hull.

[@stepanokhrimenko9189]

Really shows how much they rushed some aspects of the game, although i do wonder if this particular thing was technically possible irl

[@Hans_Owner_of_da_Franks]

Ah yes. The tank version of Brandon Herrera.

[@justsomeguy2781]

Why is this so true

[@South_China_Sea_Yacht_Club]

Tank Herrera

[@caelodevorago608]

Ima be honest on the Sherman sprocket From my great-grandfather... The people fixing the tank did NOT give an absolute shit where the sprocket came from. Just if it fit. He swapped a .30 cal coax with a .50 once, because they figured out a mounting system. The issue was more the ammo handling. They also mounted an MG42 in the hull, through some careful welding and cutting. The one thing he was most proud of doing, was in one tank, they put in a lot of shooting ports to take M3 grease guns. So imagine a Sherman... but any angle you attack it from, you get fucking shot at from an SMG out the ass end of the turret, or the side of it.

[@galladesamurai2380]

You should have seen the LVT in game, it can have a M24 Chaffee turret on it, a AA turret, and the only as far as I know real turret variant, a Howitzer turret from a M8 Scott

[@simselmore5625]

Iirc the French had a 40mm design but they pretty much overhauled the entire chassis

[@galladesamurai2380]

@@simselmore5625 I think there was even a Chinese version with a Soviet ZIS-2 gun on it

[@again5t.your53lf6]

You look like a guy who plays warthunder

[@FMHikari]

A quick note about the UK line: The Valentine is a Mk.3 unless you use a 6Pdr on it, as the Mk.3 had a redesigned turret to fit a loader so the commander can focus. The Archer, as you said, is quite literally backwards. It was used mainly as artillery and not as a tank hunter, which might be why BFV adapts it to drive as the game intends it to be used. The Churchill 3-inch Gun Carrier was never deployed, and it sucked so badly they'd rather stuff a 76mm gun on the sherman and cromwell variants than use that. The Cromwell is missing for some reason, perhaps because it would be too mobile, and able to hunt tanks and infantry with ease due to being able to access extra armor, and switch between the 6Pdr and the 75mm QF for taking down defenses and infantry. The damn thing's only flaw was not being on the early landings due to its low fording capabilities, and lost equipment at Dunkirk causing a major hiccup on the UK's logistics.

[@basedengineer4962]

bro really trying to be Jonathan Ferguson

[@Altima_Energy]

Make a pt2 with the “light vehicles” of the game ie Staghound, 38(t), Greyhound. Also include the exclusive faction tanks you can earn throughout the match.

[@Konigsmorder_dp]

I missed that he didn't cover those

[@Dangerousbuzz934]

Hello Eita320, this is the first video I've ever watched from you, courtesy of KZbin recommending it to me. You mention that the Japanese naming scheme is confusing, hopefully this will get your foot into the door for how their naming system works. The Japanese had long & short designation for each vehicle type, the long names would be for example Type 97 Medium Tank, while the short name would be Chi-Ha. Now a days people will just refer to the tank as "Type 97 Chi-Ha" as seen here in Battlefield V. The "Type" in the name is about equivalent to "Model" for US naming comparisons, and is always accompanied by two numbers; these two numbers are the two last digits in the year of acceptance into service. The Japanese at the time used the Japanese Imperial Calendar, and has the starting year on the founding of Japan in 660 BC. The Gregorian calendar year for 1937 would be the Japanese Imperial year 2597, which is where the Type 97 Chi-Ha gets the "97" from in its name. This system is still used to this day by the JGSDF, however the numbers are now based around the Gregorian calendar, so a Type 90 Main Battle Tank is named on the acceptance into service year, 1990. The second portion is the names such a Ha-Go, or Chi-Ha etc. So there are two name systems the Imperial Japanese used; originally you had vehicles like the I-Go, Ro-Go, and Ha-Go. This system is basically denoting that these are the First, Second, and Third vehicles by using the Iroha musical notes. With "I" being the first thing pronounced in the Iroha poem, followed by "Ro", and then "Ha". These directly translated would be A, B, and C. "Go" on the other hand doesn't translate as nicely directly, and would be "Issue" if translated from 号. This would mean that Ha-Go is A-Issue/First Issue, Ro-Go is B-Issue/Second Issue.... This system was quickly scrapped for splitting each short name into vehicle types; Ke denotes light, Chi is medium, and Ho is Gun tank for example. The Iroha naming system was kept, so whenever you see Type 97 Chi-Ha, what it literally means is that the vehicle is the C/Third Medium and its from 2597 (1937). It should be noted that the dash is important, since there are vehicles that use roman numerals such as the Ho-Ni I, II, and III (Gun Tank - D/Fourth (One, Two , Three). This distinction must be made as vehicles like the Ho-I, the "I" isn't denoting that its the first iteration of the "Ho" as its own vehicle, but in fact the first Gun Tank program (If you can understand what I'm saying). It should also be noted that the year given to a vehicle and the vehicle short designations may not line up, as the Type 2 Ho-I, and the Type 1 Ho-Ni seem to contradict one another, however short names are given upon the start of a program, where as the numbers are usually given on acceptance into service. The Ho-I program for example started prior to the Ho-Ni, but the Ho-Ni was adopted at an earlier service year than the Ho-I. Finally, if you ever see "Kai" attached on to a name, like the Type 97 Chi-Ha Kai, it simply means "Improved". Hopefully that is a helpful, if wordy crash course into Japanese tank designation convention. I enjoyed the video by the way, look forward to more.

[@kingkrab3856]

Quality content. Definitely deserve a ton more subscribers. Keep it up, b

[@eta320live4]

WOWEE! !

[@Narcrate140]

i expected this video to have like 50k views and i see its only 600. great video, hope you gain popularity more :D subscribed

[@jeepfirefly3567]

The reason they used the Stug IV is most likely to reuse the Pz IV model. Same with Valintine and Chrurchill. As for why the short 75 gun, gameplay, so everything had these upgrades.

[@SSgtJ0hns0n]

Regarding the limited ammo capacity in Battlefield games, most recent games until BFV were remembered for having a sort of infinite, cooldown-based ammo system like BF3/BF4, but we can recall that the older games like BF1942, BF Vietnam and even BF2 actually had limited ammo for all its combat vehicles and specifically required their crews to return to base/checkpoints to designated resupply/repair points. Pilots in particular had to learn how to land their damn planes safely in order to refit and rearm; at least heli pilots only needed to hover as close to the ground to do the same, but you might as well land and rest your mouse-hand for a bit.

[@Minotaur4005]

churchill 7 with square hatch, that's just as bad as the stuff with the sherman

[@stuglife5514]

When BFV released the StuG I was so so excited. I then cried when it was a StuG4. The Jagdpanzer 38 machinegun turret was nice tho, and my buddies always made sure to crew it while I drove. Either way, was my favorite AFV to use, and it’s extremely good if upgraded properly

[@RiddSann]

Those videos are still so, so interesting, I love them. Really fun and informative work, keep it up man !

[@abolinu]

I really love your chanel, im from Brazil and I don't ever meet someone here that also likes tanks like me... some friends says that I have "tank fetish" because in every game that have a tank... this will be the first thing that I'm gonna rush to have/buy/steal...

[@lukeb1663]

36:00 as a WoT player, I have to wonder if you’ve played WoT. Modules exist in WoT almost the same as how I understand them in BFV (I haven’t played the game so idk for sure) where your tank has HP but getting hit in a certain spot can cause damage to modules and crew. In WoT, for the modules, you have tracks, engine, viewports, gun, turret ring, ammo rack, and fuel tanks.

[@Litterbugtaylor]

Britain had actually 4 tank roles, infantry, cruiser, light and assault, the tortoise, a33 excelsior and t14 being the most notable assault tanks

[@fastestfail2645]

Bf5 was supposed to have the Soviets front but EA ended that for 2042 they also ended battlefront 2 for it.

[@maybeblakemclemore]

i think the reason they chose the StuG 4 is the "getting in the tank" animation is him opening a hatch to the driver's seat, which the StuG 3 didn't have (at least as visually prominent)

[@a.b.3455]

When I played this game I was actually surprised just how many japanes tanks are represented in this game

[@m.t.fguard8309]

Something that would have been completely broken is if they had the chi-ha LG Just drop a Navy gun onto a chi-ha haul make the whole double the size and give it a I think double engine and nothing survives

[@tmonkey3323]

Why did you not present the semi aquatic tanks? I forgot their names i think lvt and ka-mi And also the churchil crocodile, sturmtiger And at that point you could have shown the other vehicles too, puma, greyhound

[@deanmckellar619]

I get the feeling you and Johnathan Ferguson will get on very well xD

[@CompleteRobot]

The Stug 4 was added later in the life cycle of the game, when the Panzer 4 already existed. That way they managed to reuse assets instead of having to remodel the entire vehicle ground up

[@anttitheinternetguy3213]

So. Basically dice had The same situation as germany in late war: "dont stop thinking just do The cheapest decision, nobody Will care"

[@Journey_to_who_knows]

@@anttitheinternetguy3213wasn’t their problem making the most expensive solutions for everyone to notice - Maus, Tiger

[@Basket_Propellors]

0:01 is that a Bonple emblem on the wall?

[@man7912]

This is the first video I've seen by this guy and I think he's pretty dang cool already!

[@HeRRydeRR]

simply amazing

[@HerrZhukov]

Eastern Front was gonna be added, but it got canceled. This makes me so sad. I imagine something like Stalingrad, Kursk (Prokhorovka), Kiev, and Smolensk, using the Mosin, PPSh-41, DP-27, the T-34, T-26, KV-1, or IS-2 with the BFV mechanics. Could’ve been some of the best shit ever.

[@crazywarriorscatfan9061]

Due to the fact that both of us enjoy tanks, I shall be subscribing to this channel

[@G.O._MEDIA]

i love the idea of jonathan ferguson type videos but focused on tanks

[@Ty-bp1nl]

Great Video! As a virgin tank enthusiast, I'm really glad to have stumbled upon this video. I think you missed a couple tanks though... Subbed 👍

[@ikarus.74]

Isn't the churchill depicted as a mark V because of the square sidedoor? I could be wrong tho.

[@eta320]

I’ll admit I didn’t notice it during the recording, but yes, the tank in BFV seems to have the body of a Mk III or V, and the turret of the VII. Actually quite cursed

[@peterpeterson4800]

Sand bags should work against HEAT grenades, like from the Bazooka or Panzerfaust. The Germans put the side skirts onto some of their tanks primarily to protect the weak sides against anti tank rifles, but again, they also work against HEAT.

[@passiveagrsivesmeerschwein2320]

pst he donest know about the tanks in game that the sqaud leader has like the caliopie or the churchel krokodille and the brummtiger

[@panzerjagertigerporsche]

If you ever do Enlisted, you will find that all tanks have some kind of Anti-Tank round or Anti-Infantry round, some tanks can get AP and HE others can get HEAT and HE, the game has Germans, Russians, Americans, Italians, and the British as playable factions, and I do believe that the game has the Lee Einfield No. 4. It has 6 campaigns: Battle of Moscow, Battle of Tunisia, Battle of Stalingrad, Pacific War, Battle of Normandy, and Battle of Berlin.

[@3pAcsJs]

I find it hilarious and saddening that this is still one of their most player games yet they abandoned it. Total ea move

[@gatoxd7544]

Valentine wasn't underrated in my opinion it was pretty slow, getting up to 22-24 of top speed, which was kinda needed for a infantry tank, just like the churchill but, for the purpose that the soviets used it for example, wasn't nearly good, his gun wasn't very good, low penetration and low caliber, his armor was about 50mm frontally which could be penetrated even by the old panzers 4 with the 75mm short gun, his side was obviously even thinner which meant a panzer 2 at low distance could penetrate it with no problem, it also had a little problem for the drivers view. For the time it was introduced in service there were aldready some better choices.

[@KiritoEnoWT]

Subscribed,I hope You'll have more subs as soon as possible,godspeed.

[@Mildcat743]

Not gonna lie, that No.4 of yours looks sharp with an American sling on it.

[@ISAFMobius18]

So the reason for all the re-used hulls and chassis' was cause DICE just wanted to save money on making lots of unique vehicle models, so they basically recycled as many as they could. This is why we have so many variants of the same chassis or tank hull in game. This is why they chose the StuG-IV cause it has the same chassis as the Panzer IV, and thus saved them money (i mean if you're gonna use a Panzer IV hull, use the Jagdpanzer IV if anything!). And even created some non-realistic hybrids like the Valentine AA (which is literally a Crusader AA Turret on top of a valentine hull).

[@t.e.sprocketeering]

Dude your into is so slick, I know I talk about it all the time but… I just can’t help myself. Also you started with the British first so you get my thumbs up! ;)

[@eta320]

Thanks man, I'm pretty proud of the into format I've got for this series too. And I hope I did British tankery proud!

[@t.e.sprocketeering]

@@eta320 You certainly did, and I appreciate it, despite the frankly bizarre selection of vehicles on offer here! I actually also really enjoyed the Enfield section, it was a great little change of pace to break up the video. Well done sir!

[@Nugcon]

Kinda refreshing hearing someone talk positively about Battlefield V, it's FAR from perfect. But it's still a fun game, and retains that cinematic battlefield energy in it somewhere despite all its flaws.

[@Masmith55439]

my fav sherman will always be the M4A3E2 jumbo

[@hellohelloington9442]

very cool video, and pretty interesting to listen to; enjoy the sub. i have a single gripe that i wanted to comment on: you mentioned that the german and american armies frowned upon shoving random stuff on the tank, but that's kind of semi-untrue from what I know both the germans and americans independently conducted studies on what happened when you strapped things like logs, sandbags and tracks to your tanks for 'additional protection', and it was found that they didn't do anything at all, and sometimes even made the problem worse (in the case of tracks), as you said. however, in the case of americans (idk about the germans, but i assume it'd be the same), they didn't really tell the crews that, and allowed them to put things like logs, sandbags and tracks on their tanks like that because it gave the crews peace of mind. they didn't tell them that it was useless, but it made the crews feel better about being in those tanks, so they allowed them to have it just so they'd perform better. i believe the british /did/ frown upon it though. so, it wasn't exactly frowned upon for the sole reason that it helped the crews mentally with how they felt about being in that tank. of course, they didn't tell the tank crews it wasn't helpful, and the average infantryman on either side wouldn't have known either, so when they see this tank covered in sandbags, they're probably going to shit themselves a little bit more - tank enthusiasts weren't really a thing back then, so noone knew this stuff. it's pretty interesting to delve into nicher topics like this in regards of tanks in my opinion, which is why i know this. might be inaccurate here and there, in which case, someone correct me please

[@ianboyd9827]

10:36 yeah but sand bags did stop things like panzerfausts

[@G31M1]

Hello kind sir, may I interest you in joining my little secte called tankology?

[@T_34_85_]

I love battlefield 5 it’s just that I’m disappointed because they didn’t add somethings such as the Panzer 3, the Crusader, the M3 Grant (for the UK) and the M3 Lee (for the US), the Hummel, the M7 Priest, the M8 (the tank not the wheeled armoured car), a French faction or even an Italian faction, maybe more maps like Caen, Operation Torch, Sicily, Anzio (because there are tank camouflages named Anzio), a map in the Ardennes, Burma, Guadalcanal, the Type 1 Medium tank “Che-He”, Saipan, maybe Aircraft Carrier battles like in Battlefield 4, and more…

[@eta320]

Considering your name I’m surprised you didn’t mention the lack of any USSR tanks. I also share your dissatisfaction with the small choice of tanks in this game. But as I asked myself what other tanks I wanted to see I also realized I was asking for every tank that’s ever existed. I had to promptly remind myself that this isn’t War Thunder.

[@T_34_85_]

@@eta320 Well I didn’t name anything of the USSR because it would be too cliché, I also really doubt that Dice and EA would want to add the Eastern Front to one of their WW2 games, I mean they did it with Bf 1942 but they mainly used the British equipment in that game and due to the fact it was a very brutal front in the war where there was little mercy shown to the enemy. And it may have started a controversy about if the Nazis we’re better than the Soviets or vice versa… But I would also appreciate it if they did add the Eastern Front because for me it is very interesting. But considering the fact that Dice and EA are really big companies and that Battlefield is know to have a lot of DLCs which I wouldn’t mind to buy if they included stuff like that. And since EA is a multibillionaire company they could have funded a little bit more money for the game. But nonetheless I still love Battlefield 5 for it is a good battlefield experience, sure there are some inaccuracies and more but I think it was all worth for the gameplay.

[@History_Nurd]

@@T_34_85_ WAW did the eastern front perfectly, why worry if co troversy is started between if Nazis or Soviets are morally better than each other.

[@T_34_85_]

@@History_Nurd I do agree CoD WaW made the best depictions of the Eastern Front which I really liked but I doubt EA would make it a good depiction out of it.

[@wolfgang_h3t]

Thanksgiving vid on the day after Christmas let's fucking gooooooooo

[@barnykirashi]

I love the fact that japan designed stuff in the Interwar period that were really ahead of their time. I mean there was the Kaga and the Akagi aircraft carriers, completely finished in 1936, and their carriying capacity was comparable to the american's Essex class. I am not sure if it's counted with American vs Japanese planes (Since Japanese planes, especially the ones used on said carriers, lacked proper foldable wings, they took up more space than American planes, despite the size difference), because if that is the case, Kaga could get have an even better capacity. Like, Kaga was laid down in 1921, and if she was to survive, in an optional scenario, she could pretty much end up serving in the '50s. She also had better armor, torpedo protection and armament than contemporary carriers, and her speed, while not good, it was sufficient. I'm pretty sure she could not be upgraded like the Essex class, due to her high superstructure, an angled flight deck would make her top heavy and unstable. Anyways, there was the Shokaku class too, which was designed to literally be better than Kaga and faster than Hiryu (Hiryu was relatively smaller in all aspects, but she was very speedy, even faster than her sister, Soryu).........That did not happen. the first ship to actually majorly outclass her could have been Yamato-class Shinano. a 69 Thousand Ton Aircraft Carrier built from an unfinished Yamato-class hull, Shinano was too finished as a Battleship to actually be rebuilt properly in time (Since by that point Kaga has been sunk in Midway, and Japan was on the defensive). She was nearly finished, when she was moved out to be completely finished in another port, while carrying 47 suicide craft as cargo, but on the way she was sunk by a submarine, USS Archerfish. Since she was never properly finished, most sources will say that her full capacity was 47 aircraft, but that is pretty much falsified by her sheer size. I would say a 100 planes could be carried on her, and nearly 150-160 if she was properly rebuilt. All I'm trying to say, is that If only Japanese tank production went as well as their ships, then god damn, maybe the Weeabos would be a force to reckon with the Wehraboos.

[@springfield197]

When it comes to the sand bags, i have always heard the same from the elders, the shell goes right through, but the sand bags we’re just to stop any ricocheting machine gun rounds or fragmentation into the troops on, to the side, back or front of the tank.

[@lonelyone69]

I think they also used them to try and stop machine gun fire from being loud af and also effecting the electronics. Something rarer in Shermans but still very much possible. The electronics issues would however massively effect panzers more..

[@WraithOfMan]

Two games you should definitely check out which give a much more realistic experience of WW2 tanking are Hell Let Loose and Post Scriptum.

[@mdkd99]

I think BFV does a neat job with the models and maps. As for not having different tank ammo, like AP and HE, its to make things more simple. Shoot and kill. Rather than having to reload the gun and keep track of what ammo type you use, like in War Thunder. I also think they should've made the StuG 3 rather than the emergency StuG. StuG 4 was not as rare as a jagdtiger would've been, but it's still much rarer than a StuG 3. Also, I remember armored cars being in the game. Did you take a look at those too? I think the germans had either the Sd Kfz 222 or the french AMD 35 Panhard, but it's been a long time, so IDK. One thing I noticed with most of the models, is that they have features from different models. Notice how the Tiger has the later all steel road wheels, but early binocular gun sight and early commander cupola. I think that happens when you find different drawings online, and mismatch the features. It happens. ^^ Also love the short section with the Lee Enfield Mk IV.

[@Journey_to_who_knows]

As the only fan of the Churchill gun carrier in existence, I must admit to nobody in particular that I was very excited to see it in a mainstream game spotlight.

[@future_guardian5_gaming]

Stug 4 is one of my fav tanks lol

[@rc59191]

I wish more games had the Polish 7TP tank which is my favorite tank of World War II. Only ones I've seen that have it are Theater of War 1, Hearts of Iron IV, and Steel Division but you have to play as the Germans to use them and you only get 1 platoon.

[@richie_0740]

cant wait till this guy reviews war thunder or post scriptum tanks

[@tablesizeproductions4360]

Honestly the Tiger 1 model is really cursed. It's an amalgamation of the early production and late production Tiger 1 and just ends up looking like the Tigers used by Kampfgruppe Fehrmann.

[@sinisterisrandom8537]

Bit of historical context, When it comes down to Japan adding more armor would have left their tanks being suck in soft terrain, which is often why they were lightly armored, most tanks in engagements were usually the Stuart at best. You did see some M24 and Shermans weren't as common as the Stuart were. So as they years go bye, there later war tanks were designed to engage at range rather than closer quarters like there Infantry support tanks.

[@Steve-mx9rr]

Could you make a video about the tanks in *Forgotten Hope 2*? :) This is a fan mod based on Battlefield 2 that tries to make the game as authentic as possible in a WW2 setting

[@couchgaming1259]

It would be nice if you would look at IL2 tank crew and its portrayal of tanks it is a very small tank community tho but I think that they are pretty well represented (From what I have seen you haven't looked at it yet)

[@spinningsquare1325]

You forgot the call-in tanks (churchill crocodile, sturmtiger, t34 calliope). You also I assume on purpose omited the wheeled armour.

[@eta320]

Armored cars cringe. I wanted to mention the specialty vehicles but sadly didn’t have the time and also couldn’t get enough footage of them. If I ever do a part 2 I’ll certainly include them. The Sturmtiger is a tank I have some choice words for…

[@Thekakarote96]

Just discovered this channel, looks like you have some great content going, I hope you'll grow more subs in the future mate !

[@tomhelcon6331]

great now can u review Cursed tank sim on roblox

[@merajmasuk]

20:35 except one case where the french refurbished all their m4a4 shermans, swapped them mutlibanks with radial aircraft engines

[@ThomasF4u]

Weren't the sandbags on tanks mostly to combat heat round like from panzerschreck and panzerfaust which fires heat

[@PeterMuskrat6968]

I had so much fun playing BFV with some of my friends. The amount of time I've spent on Iwo Jima is ridiculous. Also, I like how some of the maps that was originally Britain v Germany were swapped to US v Germany when the US was added. (I am still mad that we never got an M1/M1A1 Thompson... they are my favorites)

[@i_like_trains7600]

@eta320 sees the BF5 Stug 4 Whilst I appreciate the attempt I rather you did not at all if this is the F****G RESULT

[@nohamski1629]

He wanna be Jonathan Furguson so bad

[@hydrolistconlanka4729]

im not sure bfv but in bf1 you had some explosive rounds and some just AT rounds that didnt explode

[@lol-un6nl]

Large hatch direct vision port shermans never even existed as they were eliminated from small hatch m4 sherman in the first few months of production

[@panzerjagertigerporsche]

You better do Enlisted in this series

[@DigitalinDaniel]

BF5 is the best! The only thing they implemented really poorly is the Assignments, so tedious and clunky. (Thankfully I don't use weapon skins despite unlocking almost all the Gold) Personally though, I dislike the unrealistic weapon-sights and the upgrade trees... I wish they didn't have the upgrades especially for firearms, feels like Oprah is handing out Recoil Buffers. -.- When everything has it what the heck is the point? The vehicles could have had unique default loadouts. I just feel like when every vehicle has access to the same abilities and stuff it kinda ruins the fun... unique gameplay that they bring to a game. They forgot to set each vehicle aside and ask themselves their old rock-paper-scissors motto... "Why should a player pick a Panzer 4 over a Tiger?" Like nobody ever plays the Panzer 4, nor the Stug, because the Tiger is just statistically better ingame in every way. Everybody abuses the fighter plane with 8xHMGs because it kills in 2secs and all the other fighters are useless. There are a lot of really cool vehicle weapons/abilities that are just rendered useless by power-creep because of the variety of choices. It's stupid how durable the amphibious tanks can get for a "tin can" :') Just like Gunsmith :^) why have an M10 Wolverine or an M3 Stuart when Sherman is ALL tanks? :^^^) Hundreds of Japanese aircraft to choose from? Nope, Zero does it all :') Probably not the best examples as those were added at the "end" of the game's life. But the Pacific vehicles launched with a huge influx of oversaturated specializations over the other vehicles so I hope I'm making sense.

[@merobo5066]

I could see the StuG IV being chosen because they could reuse parts of the Pz IV model, but at that point imho the Jagdpanzer IV/48 and IV/70(V) would've been the more interesting choice, starting with the L48 7.5cm gun and having the L70 as an upgrade. Even the combined production number of these two variants is higher from what I found than that of the StuG IV. I explicitly excluded the Jagdpanzer IV/70 (A) because including that as an upgrade is more effort than it is worth imo and makes the vehicle ugly

[@damienchapron8606]

Here lie the forgotten tank in this vidéo. Churchill crocodile Staghound Valentine AA Panzer 38t Puma Sturmtiger Flakpanzer LVA M8 greyhound Sherman calliope Ka-mi Hachi

[@matfhju]

Bf5 issent realy a baad game. EA just realy fucked up the marketing and had some questioneble game design desitions espechially when it comes historical accuratchy. I am still maad hove they compleatly FUCKED the compain. Bf1 compains had me crying several times. They did an amazing job in capturing the apsolute HELL of ww1

[@RedShocktrooperRST]

I think thr StuG IV choice was to cut down on game dev time. They can just recycle the Panzer IV hull and suspension

[@rayotoxi1509]

you should absolutly play or test GHPC if your a tank enthusiast you will like it jeah the game is not done but the small dev team is amazing 2 jears ago the game looked completly diffrent

[@giftigeswasser8973]

Yea fuck that game's story bullshit though, literally some of the worst historic research on tanks I have ever seen.

[@JackTheNoober]

@10:25 Im not sure if Germans really put extra armour to protect from tank shells, think they knew that it wouldn't help against large calibre tank shells. They were more interested in stopping the Russian Anti-tank rifles, namely PTRS-41. Almost all German tanks were vulnerable from the sides by this thing, that's why they came up with the schurzen (side skirts in hull/turret) and fitted almost all of their medium tanks with it, PZ IV's and Panthers mainly. Funny, most people have this misconception that the skirts were developed to stop HEAT type of shells which is wrong. Their only function was to give just enough protection to stop the AT rifle bullets. The small skirt was enough to absorb energy off the bullet and make it "tumble" so it wouldn't pen the main armour.

[@musicalbiohazard3207]

15:42 As cool as it would be to think that they did their research for a largely unknown model of the StuG, I have to say that I think it was an attempt at streamlining production of the model for the game based on how the British tanks are just Valentine and Churchill variants.(Except for the Staghound of course)

[@tomherbert8858]

Issues with the British tanks immediately. 6pdr never had a muzzle break. That's a 75mm from the mark IX Valentine. Wrong shaped side escape hatch on the Churchill if it's meant to be a MK7. MK7s had round side escape hatches. Plus the turret looks way too small. The other two look alright other than some weird armour plates from the AVRE on the Gun Carrier.

[@MrMagyarHunter]

Please correct me if i'm wrong @eta320 but you didn't talk mutch about the upgrades for the Tiger H1, and i'm curious if you just didn't notice or if it was actually a thing, but there is a HEAT-FS shell for it in the upgrade tree (Left Bottom).

[@jerryudonneedtoknow3903]

11:11, that is a modified early war variant fit for mid-late war standardization. The use of the all steel-roadwheels indicate this. This removes the two outer layers making from what was once interleaved roadwheels to now overlapped (2 layers). It most likely an early-mid production retrofitted with the later roadwheels 10:24 This feels horrid to look at, firstly the germans never slapped on these weird racks for the snadbags, secondly, this includes the Sherman and other vehicles as well, that puts huge strain on the suspension, transmission, and engine. The germans IF they put sandbags, did mostly the front and mabye like 1-4 bags on the side. The Americans had it banned somewhere in 1944. This Panzer IV sandbag setup at 10:24 would mess with the already shit suspensions the Panzer IV had with the addition of not being at all realistic on how the Germans actually used sandbag armor up. They took a sherman sandbag rack and slapped it on a Gemran tank. Anyway, the sandbags were mostly meant to stop AT infantry. if a tanks or AT guns get on your sides, you are fucked, you may as well be dead. AT infantry are more survivable in a sense because they have to get close, Panzerfausts, Panzerschrecks, and the Hafthohlladung are possibly going to be less effective. The sandbags possibly reducing the penetrative effect of the shaped charge, and the sandbags blocking a flat metal surface to attach the Hafthohlladung. Also if you are looking for something more realistic, BFV is trash, go for either Red Orchestra 2, Post Scriptum, or Hell Let Loose, hell all of them have much more spot on tank combat and functionalities such as multi-crewed tanks, (Gunner, Commander, Driver, and for some hull gunner, or course being a loader would be boring as hell.)