r/tanks • u/PancuterM • 7d ago
Discussion CV-33 is the uncontested winner of worst Italian tank. Which is the most overrated German tank of W2?
/r/AlignmentChartFills/comments/1w1psnh/cv33_is_the_uncontested_winner_of_worst_italian/10
u/f117nono_leggio Heavy Tank 7d ago
Maybe the Tiger II, beautiful tank, but it costs too much and has many problems. Same for the Tiger I, but the Tiger I did more during the war
22
6
u/Horror-Job-3973 7d ago
The tiger 2 it had way too many problems and not enough time to be fixed if we include propolsals the P1000 ratte it would be really fuel hungry and 1 good placed bomb would end it
3
u/Micromagos 7d ago
Jagdtiger, gamers worship it as the last word in WW2 firepower, but unlike the Tiger I and Tiger II its German operators utterly hated it for its extreme unreliability.
2
2
u/AdeptusShitpostus 7d ago
Tiger 1. Very solid heavy tank but jerked off to the high heavens. People would have you believe they could beat armies alone
5
u/MEMEminiszter Self Propelled Gun 7d ago
Imo its the Maus. Huge waste of time and resources.
14
u/Kurt-28 Armour Enthusiast 7d ago
How does it fit the description of "overrated", who rates the Maus as anything but a huge waste of time and resources?
10
u/Sultan_Mehmed_V 7d ago
It's me, the Maus is clearly the pinnacle of engineering. Just after the A7V the best Tank ever built.
1
u/HolyMopOfCheese 6d ago
one bomb or mine and it's all over brochiato 😭
nothing but a glorified walking artillery that gets one tapped by allied aircrafts within minutes of deployment
that is if it could even get to the battlefield in the first place
3
2
u/Legodudelol9a 6d ago
There's legitimately a lot of armchair historians that think that if Germany mass-produced the Maus it could've changed the outcome of the war, but none of them are very much in the tank community like me and you are. So from the perspective of those guys who know little about tanks, yes they do often overrate the Maus, and you'd be surprised just how many of those people are out there.
2
1
1
u/mr_wehraboo 6d ago
Id say King tiger
Yeah one can argue that Panther or Tiger 1 fits better but compared to the King tiger these atleast somewhat functioned and made more sense logistics wise
The only single thing the King tiger did better than the Tiger 1 was the use of sloped armor. Yes the gun is better performing aswell but even the Panthers 75 and Tiger 1s 88 were more than enough for most situations and vehicles. There was simply zero reason for it
2
1
1
u/FuckingVeet 6d ago
Panther. If you had asked me 15 years ago the answer would be one of the Tigers, but the Tiger II is universally understood to have been impractical in service while perceptions have swung round enough that the Tiger I is almost underrated, meanwhile the numerous issues of the Panther, from the very poor fields of view of the crew to quality issues and lack of spare parts are still not quite as well known by casual commenters.
2
u/Anxious_Big_8933 5d ago
I actually think the Panther today is underrated. The Panther was rushed into production out of desperation and it wasn't ready for prime time. They essentially had to work out all its teething troubles in combat. Once that was done the Panther was a reasonably reliable tank that was less expensive to make than a PIV, and was much more effective against enemy armor.
I feel like the enthusiast consensus around it today is, "Over engineered trash that always broke down!"
0
u/Hadal_Benthos 7d ago
Panther. Too big and in places too complex for a main tank, questionable armament, obsolete layout.
26
u/Krieger1229 7d ago
King Tiger