Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Still, the Panther. I want someone to make a Company of Heroes mod that puts a Russ alongside those sexy German tanks, just to see a side by side comparison.

Its difficult because all of GW's vehicle models are of a distorted scale.

The body of the LRBT should be much wider than it is on the model. The turret also needs to be larger, but not nearly as much as the body.


A true scale LRBT would be roughly the size of a Landraider model.

You'd probably end up with the LRBT looking something like a more angular T-34

 Grey Templar wrote:
Its difficult because all of GW's vehicle models are of a distorted scale.

The body of the LRBT should be much wider than it is on the model. The turret also needs to be larger, but not nearly as much as the body.


A true scale LRBT would be roughly the size of a Landraider model.

You'd probably end up with the LRBT looking something like a more angular T-34

That would actually be a really cool conversion. I saw that double wide Rhino chassis on the front page. I wonder how well that would work for a Russ conversion.

Not double wide, just an extension.


You would need to cut the sides of the Lemun Russ's hull to stretch them out. Width is easy as doing the same with the central pieces.

I meant double wide tracks. But a larger hull on the Russ couldn't hurt.

Now to find a hundred bucks for all the bitz I'll need.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:
If only the Leman Russ were as sexy as a Panther...

If only the Panther was as badass as a Leman Russ...

The Panther is supposed to be a nice looking tank?

 Melissia wrote:
The Panther is supposed to be a nice looking tank?

Ya I dont like the way it ilooks

How could you hate a tank like that? It's a 'medium' tank that can take out Russian Super heavies.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:

How could you hate a tank like that? It's a 'medium' tank that can take out Russian Super heavies.

You could hate it for being an over-engineered fuel hog that costs as much as four Russian super-heavies, perhaps?

One well engineered tank taking out four tanks meant for battlefield superiority is a fair tradeoff I find. There's the quality/quantity debate sure, but in terms of performance and in general aesthetic, it's a sexy beast.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:
One well engineered tank taking out four tanks meant for battlefield superiority is a fair tradeoff I find.

Except the big Russian heavies could take out the Panther relatively well too, meaning it rarely got the chance to kill the four that it was worth.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:
There's the quality/quantity debate sure,

The conquest of Berlin pretty much decisively solved this debate, actually.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:
but in terms of performance and in general aesthetic, it's a sexy beast.

Only when it's ridiculously complex engine wasn't broken and the tank wasn't wallowing in a pool of oil and sprung multi-layered suspension.

The same arguments could be levied at the shoddy craftsmanship of russian tanks.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:
The same arguments could be levied at the shoddy craftsmanship of russian tanks.

Except for the part about losing the war, largely yes. But that's not the design's fault.

And the design flaws of the Panther and Tiger were fixed within a year of their deployment, after which the only real flaws were limited numbers and Germany's insistence on spending ridiculous amounts on experimental weapons that bled their resources dry for no gain.

In answer to the Q - I have a pair of 1:35 Panzer IIs built as Russes and they are only barely smaller than a Chimera in every dimension but height, height wise they are taller.

So a Panther would be quite a bit smaller than a Russ if they were both 28mm scale, the II's I am using are acutally very small tanks, in a larger scale hence they work out quite nicely. (AFAIK, 28mm work out @ 1:60??). I did park a 1:35 Churchill I had alongside a Russ and the Churchill looked titanic!

The issue with GW isnt the size of the Russ, its the size of the weapons - its 120mm cannon works out at something like 600mm if it was to scale, if you were to do it to scale the autocannons from the Exterminator are actually more correct in terms of bore size, but then they are supposed to be 40mm!!

Bascially the only Imperial medium tank is the Predator or the Razorback, the Guard dont have one unless you call the APDS-6 thats mentioned in the Armageddon fluff a "medium tank" (more of a medium tank destroyer).

Just a side by side shot of a Chimera chasis vs my LRBT built from a Tamiya italian tank.



As seen here a real world tank ends up being longer by narrower than GW monstruosities, plus the LRBT has a very high siluette that screams "shoot me" to AT gunners
M.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:
http://www.peachmountain.com/5star/images/AberdeenProvingGrounds/20060509_2154_NSengupta_AberdeenProvingGroundss.jpg

How could you hate a tank like that? It's a 'medium' tank that can take out Russian Super heavies.

It's kind of boring.

 Miguelsan wrote:


As seen here a real world tank ends up being longer by narrower than GW monstruosities, plus the LRBT has a very high siluette that screams "shoot me" to AT gunners
M.

To be fair, so did the Sherman. And it was a highly effective vehicle, easily competing with the Panzer IV and Panther(once it got a weapon upgrade)

Well keep in mind that, as far as its use by the Imperium goes, the Leman Russ is something of a cross between a WWI infantry tank with sponsons, the Sherman in terms of cost and ease of use, and the Abrams in terms of general-purpose capabilities.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:
One well engineered tank taking out four tanks meant for battlefield superiority is a fair tradeoff I find. There's the quality/quantity debate sure, but in terms of performance and in general aesthetic, it's a sexy beast.

Agreed, Panther is a sexy beast.

The StuG was better looking.

 Melissia wrote:
The StuG was better looking.

The Stug was compensating for something. It's a box on treads with a big gun.

 Arcsquad12 wrote:
It's a box on treads with a big gun.

Yes, it's a Tank. It's just that I dislike the general shape of the box on treads with a big gun called the "Panther", it's just nowhere near as good looking as other kinds of boxes on treads with big guns, like, say, anything from Supreme Commander or Total Annihilation. Or the StuG. Or the Sherman. Or the Leman Russ.

The Panther had a very nice streamlined design.

Its hardly a box on treads, that title definitly goes to the StuG.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Its hardly a box on treads

It's a tank. You can argue that its box is in a more pleasing shape, but it is wrong to try to dismiss one design over the other because it is a "box on treads with a big gun"; given that ALL tanks are "boxes on treads with big guns", because in doing so you're dismissing all tank shapes including the Panther... which is just a box with a slightly different shape, on treads, with a big gun.

 Grey Templar wrote:
The Panther had a very nice streamlined design.

Its hardly a box on treads, that title definitly goes to the StuG.

That damn turret barely screams "STREAMLINED" to me. More like "COPY THE RUSSIANS HARDER"

@Mellissia Can't believe you like the Sherman. That's the worst one imo. It's got this high profile "shoot me" look to it.

At least it doesn't look dorky like the Panther

Panther's are not dorky.