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.

The Centurion's one of the better tanks of the post-war world, and if we consider it was issued at the end of WWII, then maybe the best tank "issued" in the war (though on the same note the T-44/100 was a WWII tank, but didn't see any service). The Merkava largely started out as a Centurion just to show how well it performed in Israeli service.

Discounting the Centurion and Merkava, specifically for WWII I'd go in with the Panther II.



Of course it never made it out of the prototype stage as swapping over manufacture to Tiger II parts was seen to be too costly. Instead they were for simpler upgrades for the Panther series. One was built, without its turret and captured by the Americans - who still have it. The one I made was a speculative version, with the simplified turret the Germans were going to move over near the end of the war (the British captured it then used it as a ranged target, post-war you can see the design on German vehicles though), the improved front armour found on the E-50/75 and infra-red sights which were being issued across the Eastern Front (though didn't see much use in all armoured units besides Tiger I/IIs).

If we're considering Tank Destroyers as well then honourable mention goes to the Jagdpanzer 38 (d).



Another prototype, as well what ifs are cool. The Jagdpanzer 38 (t) "Hetzer" was a pretty good tank destroyer throughout the war, but showing its age. Plans were drawn to upgrade its gun to the one from the Panther, but the chassis was found to be too light to carry it (even when mounted at the rear). Tangentially the Germans had also instigated a project to unify and simply their tank production called the E-series. The 38(d) (D for German, rather than T for Czech) was their solution. A 38(t) built to have commonality with German instead of Czech tanks, and with a larger gun. The idea was then to use the chassis for multiple variants, much like how the Japanese built most of their tanks on just 2 chassis (they just kept lengthening them), though plans were cancelled in favour of simplifying the E-series even further (by that point the Germans had fully invested in the MBT concept and were about to start putting out simplified Tiger IIs called E-75s. Post-war all the E-series work went on to become the AMX series in France).

That 38(d) just looks so cool to me. Close enough to the Hetzer that it could be mistaken, but different enough to make you think someone had made a Hetzer model just from memory or something. Oddly the 38 (t)s made post-war were based on the 38(t) rather than the improved (and cheaper) 38(d).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 sebster wrote:

KTG17 wrote:
Actually it was cheaper and easier to build. I think by the end of the war, Germany produced more assault gun style tanks than turreted tanks because it was faster to get them out the door.

Yeah, the Stug IV was cheaper and actually a little lighter, while carrying the same gun and basically the same armour. The lack of a turret would be a big drawback in offensive operations, but like all assault guns the Stug IV was a originally specialist design not expected to lead a blitz. Then by the end of the war Germany was basically on the defence everywhere, which made the Stug IV's drawback not matter any more, so why not crank them out continuously.

If you look at Late-War prototypes there was a fair few with casements rather than turrets. The last models of Panzer IV to come off the production line had no assisted turrets to save on costs, something which wouldn't be an issue with a casement. Out of the E-series off the top of my head at lest half of the vehicles had casements - the E-15, 25, 38 (d) and Rutscher, not to mention that there would likely have been Hunting variants of the E-75 and (possibly - in the world of sticking naval guns on everything) E-100. Post-war the idea was still around, though fell out of favour. Still Germany was still making StuG style vehicles post-war, and the Soviets made one on the T-54 chassis. I believe the Swedes had something similar as their MBT for a while too (though the gun can't move at all like it can in a traditional casement mount).

KTG17 wrote:

omg! That was the worst mini they released for Epic! You are the first I have ever met who liked that thing. You get an award.

Asks for opinions on a topic, then derides and insults based on other's...opinions.

Well done!

At the risk of a repeat performance, I'm a fan of this tank too:

M26 Pershing


and it's evolutions.

 Alpharius wrote:
At the risk of a repeat performance, I'm a fan of this tank too: M26 Pershing.

This is I think the prototypical tank I think of when I imagine a tank in my head. I wonder if younger people imagine the Abrams.

And finally, the humble M48.

The Bundeswehr was pretty glad when the Leo1 was ready so we could ditch those, mostly because of the stupid fuel consumption. The Leo 1 consumed about 1/10th of the fuel per 100km. 80 Liters of diesel fuel vs over 800 of gasoline.

Also his review of the Panther is somewhat scathing

Haven't watched it, but since the Panther was basically a copy of the T-34, there's really no reason for it to have been particularly good.

Since we are allowing fictional tanks, I'll add one from the best series on television: the amazing Planet Express Ship, from the Saturday Morning Fun Pit episode

 Ouze wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
At the risk of a repeat performance, I'm a fan of this tank too: M26 Pershing.

This is I think the prototypical tank I think of when I imagine a tank in my head. I wonder if younger people imagine the Abrams.

I imagine a T-34. Probably because I grew up very close to one.

Also, if we are talking fictional tanks:

This one please.

You're not wrong there - anything with a Vulcan Mega-bolter is A-OK in my book!

 Alpharius wrote:
Asks for opinions on a topic, then derides and insults based on other's...opinions.

Well done!

Don't get your panties all up in a bunch, man. . . you didn't pick a good tank. Just the way that it is.

The M26 is a solid choice tho.

KTG17 wrote:
Don't get your panties all up in a bunch, man. . . you didn't pick a good tank. Just the way that it is.

The M26 is a solid choice tho.

I think the point Alph is making is that bashing his opinion on that tank in a thread where you're asking for people's favourite tanks, in their opinion, isn't very smart.


I kinda like it too actually - I wasn't around at the time of Epic, but double turret tanks seem pretty suitable for the exaggerated nature of 40k. Cool stuff!

 General Annoyance wrote:
I think the point Alph is making is that bashing his opinion on that tank in a thread where you're asking for people's favourite tanks, in their opinion, isn't very smart.

I kinda like it too actually - I wasn't around at the time of Epic, but double turret tanks seem pretty suitable for the exaggerated nature of 40k. Cool stuff!

Who are you? His Dad?!?! Gotta call it like I see it man. There are good tanks out there, and there are bad ones.

Like these two here:



Very nice.

This one not so much:

When you are patrolling the mean streets of Port City, Napoleon will be your favourite.

Oh, I almost forgot a tank that really needs to be mentioned:
Meet the Antonov A-40, history's only tank capable of flight:

Unfortunately it never made it past the prototype stage, and only one photograph of it still exists.

This one is Semple-y the best:

Grot tanks have checks, so they are my favorite.

Really like tanks. World of Tanks has to be one of my favorite MMOs because of all the different types of tanks you can play as.

But if I were to narrow down to one tank...that's hard.
I would have to say I liked the tanks out of America during WWII.

They went modular with their tanks and it made it easy for the military to produce role specific tanks to handle the tanks coming out of Germany.

Yes! Man, I have to admit I and a huge fan of the Grot Mega Tank.



I've never built a model like this from Forgeworld, but if I was still in my hardcore gaming days, I would try to build a force of this and a bunch of those grot tanks.

I've never seen these played. Has anyone? I am sure everything is easy to blow up, but at least brings some comedy to the game. I would hope.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Avatar 720 wrote:
This one is Semple-y the best:

I had to google that guy. I am sure the Japanese would have been frozen, mouths opened wide, in disbelief of that thing. Then again, many of the early war Japanese tanks looked just as capable.

Let us also consider this:



Who doesn't want to ride that into combat? Bowler hat and all?!?

KTG17 wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
Asks for opinions on a topic, then derides and insults based on other's...opinions.

Well done!

Don't get your panties all up in a bunch, man. . . you didn't pick a good tank. Just the way that it is.

No worries there bro - I mean it is VERY easy to ignore someone who thinks opinions in this type of thread can be 'wrong'.

Anyway, here's another good one:



Forge World's HH stuff is usually pretty good - if not always the most fun to put together.

IMO, putting them together has always been the most fun. It's painting them I can't stand. I think I'm an outlier though. I've honestly never really enjoyed painting models, but I do anyway because I like how they look when they're done.

 Alpharius wrote:
Anyway, here's another good one:



Forge World's HH stuff is usually pretty good - if not always the most fun to put together.

Umm. . . ehh. . . no. Sorry. That's a really messy looking tank.

You are 1 for 3 now.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Oh, I almost forgot a tank that really needs to be mentioned:
Meet the Antonov A-40, history's only tank capable of flight:

Unfortunately it never made it past the prototype stage, and only one photograph of it still exists.

Well, being capable of flight on paper isn't the same as a *working* prototype. That "photograph" of it in flight was just a drawing (and Wikipedia's article on the subject is suspect). I believe that they did manage to get lighter tanks in an air droppable format, though they had the unfortunate habit of smashing into bits when they hit the ground.

Meanwhile the British at the same time developed the Tetrarch, a much more practical idea which fulfilled a similar purpose. The Germans as well had similar ideas to provide to their paratroopers (though the A40 wasn't intended for that role, instead being dropped to support existing positions), though those never made it out of the planning stages.

I'm a fan of this for morning and evening traffic:

KTG17 wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
Anyway, here's another good one:



Forge World's HH stuff is usually pretty good - if not always the most fun to put together.

Umm. . . ehh. . . no. Sorry. That's a really messy looking tank.

You are 1 for 3 now.

Elevation and Depression of the main gun seems next to non-existent on that tank. Great job Forgeworld! "How do we hit enemies that're above us? Drive up a hill of course!".

KTG17 wrote:

 Alpharius wrote:
Anyway, here's another good one:



Forge World's HH stuff is usually pretty good - if not always the most fun to put together.

Umm. . . ehh. . . no. Sorry. That's a really messy looking tank.

You are 1 for 3 now.

Good lord - give it a rest!

Oh, the Tsar Tank. Don't know what I was thinking when I was suggesting the Sherman. Why drive through when I can drive OVER?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Avatar 720 wrote:
This one is Semple-y the best:

I had to google that guy. I am sure the Japanese would have been frozen, mouths opened wide, in disbelief of that thing. Then again, many of the early war Japanese tanks looked just as capable.

KTG17 wrote:
Oh, the Tsar Tank. Don't know what I was thinking when I was suggesting the Sherman. Why drive through when I can drive OVER?

Wow!

Now there's an awful choice - number one with a bullet in fact!

 Alpharius wrote:

Good lord - give it a rest!

Don't make me get a moderator!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alpharius wrote:

Wow!

Now there's an awful choice - number one with a bullet in fact!

You don't criticize my choices. Only I get to do that. That's going to cost you a point. Now you're 1 of 4.

Not even sure you can find enough tanks to get you out of this hole now.

I'm not worried about it - and don't sell yourself short here - you managed to pick the worst one yet - nothing's even close!

 Wyrmalla wrote:
And well, its not like many of the improvised fighting vehicles which came out in Europe at the same time were much better. Those did see combat however (admittedly against better tanks than the Japanese had as well).

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I appreciate it's character. That's what I do love about the early tanks - they certainly have a lot of character. Now everyone's tanks look and perform pretty much the same. Back then peeps were still trying to figure it out with whatever tech was available, and some of the results are pretty fun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Alpharius wrote:
I'm not worried about it - and don't sell yourself short here - you managed to pick the worst one yet - nothing's even close!

You picked a blue tank, that's all rusted out. And can't elevate its main gun. I am sorry I am just not impressed.

 Wyrmalla wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Oh, I almost forgot a tank that really needs to be mentioned:
Meet the Antonov A-40, history's only tank capable of flight:

Unfortunately it never made it past the prototype stage, and only one photograph of it still exists.

Well, being capable of flight on paper isn't the same as a *working* prototype. That "photograph" of it in flight was just a drawing (and Wikipedia's article on the subject is suspect). I believe that they did manage to get lighter tanks in an air droppable format, though they had the unfortunate habit of smashing into bits when they hit the ground.

Meanwhile the British at the same time developed the Tetrarch, a much more practical idea which fulfilled a similar purpose. The Germans as well had similar ideas to provide to their paratroopers (though the A40 wasn't intended for that role, instead being dropped to support existing positions), though those never made it out of the planning stages.

Yeah. It was not really a feasible thing, which is why it never advanced past a single prototype that made only one flight. While that flight was a succes, it was only barely so. The tank was too heavy for the aircraft towing it to get it up to speed, and the test pilot had real trouble landing it successfully. If the tank had been fully loaded with fuel, ammo and crew as in a combat situation, it would have surely crashed. And so the design was scrapped. But fly it did.
The Soviets did a lot of experiments with airdropping tanks, some of them really successful leading eventually to the development of vehicles like the ASU-57 and the BMD which can be dropped complete with ammo and crew and everything onboard.
Also, I believe the image is not actually a drawing, but rather a photograph of the designer's model. There are versions where you can see it sitting on a flight stand.
Unfortenately, it is the only image of the complete vehicle there is. There is a few more images of just the wing frame, but not with the modified T-60 tank.