Comments on: Chinese Stars

By: Madner Kami

Madner Kami — Wed, 28 May 2014 18:04:14 +0000

Yup. Sounds like the kind of stuff that I do in my beloved 59-16 day by day :D

By: MrTretiak

MrTretiak — Wed, 28 May 2014 14:18:18 +0000

Well, if they spent all day in or around their tank, at around 1.5 kms from the American position, not moving and just calculating, you could spend a -lot- of time making sure you got the mathematics right for a pre-set attack on static positions. If you’re on a hill, you’re going to be taking in as much of the field in front of you as you can, sweeping the area for major signs of activity. If you have a lone apparently immobilized tank in a crater, are you really going to keep watching it all day long to make sure it’s still dead? especially if you have other concerns, like Chinese infantry or other tanks in the area? And spotting things at that range, like small movements or slow, deliberate ones would require more concentration from the people on the hill than might be considered fully reasonable. How long were they on the hill? Were they fresh to the front or been fighting for weeks on end? etc, etc. Lots of variables to account for.

If the tanks were outright destroyed, or crippled and abandoned is more difficult to ascertain without corresponding information from the UN/US forces side of things. And if you have 300m gaps between you, at night, a smaller tank could possibly try to fit in halfway and seem like it was a larger vehicle still 300m away. All you would need is a point where there was a break in the line of sight between the vehicles to insert yourself, lights off, before the LOS was likely re-established. Add in incredulity at the possibility of a lone enemy vehicle behind your lines joining a patrol out of nowhere, a probably tired and worn out crew (at night)… it’s not implausible at all. I think there was likely more than a bit of embellishment in there, but again without a corresponding set of information from the UN/US forces at the same time, it’s hard to say where that might be.

By: Cpt_Jarem

Cpt_Jarem — Wed, 28 May 2014 11:30:22 +0000

It is still hard to believe that T-35/85 would knock-out two Pattons in hulldown position that easily.

By: Cpt_Jarem

Cpt_Jarem — Wed, 28 May 2014 11:29:10 +0000

Even they didn’t pull stunts like that one.

By: Cpt_Jarem

Cpt_Jarem — Wed, 28 May 2014 11:27:20 +0000

Not to be rude, but do Americans even know about it?

By: AesBinz

AesBinz — Tue, 27 May 2014 20:01:26 +0000

I agree, plausible but I doubt about t-34 joining the platoon. US as based on stories accounted during their battles/war, have a tendency to be over confident about their equipments, so yeah, maybe they thought old tanks won’t damage their modern tonks.

By: ComradeHX

ComradeHX — Tue, 27 May 2014 17:18:20 +0000

Maybe if Germany had more percentage of total player base.

By: ComradeHX

ComradeHX — Tue, 27 May 2014 17:16:56 +0000

Those are your delusions…

Red Cliff was based on weather prediction(Cao Cao’s navy wasn’t experienced); not weather “summoning.”

By: ComradeHX

ComradeHX — Tue, 27 May 2014 17:15:50 +0000

Back in the day they didn’t have thermals and Patton tanks were not all that good.

Story is plausible; if Pattons drove past T-34-85, side/rear armour would not be able to stop 85mm rounds.
And HE rounds IRL is a lot more usable than they are in WoT.

By: CoolBreeze541

CoolBreeze541 — Tue, 27 May 2014 17:04:28 +0000

Am sure there is some truth about the vehicle getting stuck but the rest is clearly all bull.