I'm glad you mentioned PSRM's tank interiors, only the Tiger, Panther, StuG, and Panzer 3 L have them at the moment since there's only one guy working on it. The devs of the main game were given the suggestion to add tank interiors but they complained that it would take around 7 months to do 1 meanwhile the modder who made the tank interiors had done those 4 in the last seven months ON HIS OWN
modding and developing are 2 different things. Generally the differences are quite small, but small differences can have huge and very annoying repercussions. The biggest one is optimization. If a mod has poor performance on some machines, those players will either go "eh, it's just a mod" and live with it, or move on. If a game has poor performance people complain, review bomb, refund ect. Another big difference is that when a mod has a lot of issues but does something cool, people focus on the cool and tend to ignore the issues. If a game adds that same feature people expect it to be polished. Basically expectations with a mod are a lot lower. Now, maybe this singular modder managed to make a perfect mod that works on most players machines and is well optimized with minimal or no bugs. But firstly Squad44 (and post scriptum prior to the purchase) have very few devs anyways, and secondly he managed to get interiors for 4 tanks, whereas the developers were likely saying it would take 7 months to get all of the tanks currently in the game done AND may effect the ability to put out new content of fix issues in that time, as developers are taken off one area of the game and put onto interiors. TL;DR, it's pretty useless to compare a game's feature to a mod. In most cases the mods are making sacrifices in areas that game devs aren't willing to or can't.
I like how the Americans refused to give up their slow M10s for M18s for the M18 had less armour, yet there was that cromwell crew who loved the speed of their training vehicle made out of soft steel looool
If you get the chance, I think you'd love to see Red Orchestra 2's tanks. There's technically only 6 armored vehicles in total, that being the T-34-76, Panzer IV, T-70, Panzer III, lend-lease Universal Carrier, and Sd.Kfz.251, but lemme tell ya, I think you'd LOVE to look them over.
When that BF1 soundtrack hit, I got the strongest mini-nostalgia I've felt for a long time. You *have* to cover BF1 in one of your future videos, I beg you, please!
oh, now this is gold, a tank nerd reacting to tanks, time to see if i can get it all right before he does, god i can't wait for A Guide to the Sherman Variants: The GMCs and HMCs (you can't escape it eta)
Hunnicutt is a pretty good source for that information, and he actually is an official source. I love Eta, but if you want stuff that only someone actually affiliated with the US Army would have access to, look at Hunnicutt. His book on the Shermans and Pershings is fantastic.
@@willliamnash4855 very arguably. By that time, Pz. III and IV were around, both featuring Radios, three men turrets and actual visibility from inside the tank. Also, the S-35s deployement didn't really Help them either.
@@harmdallmeyer6449 I'd say the SOMUA S35 was roughly equal to the 2nd generation Panzers, maybe even a little better in speed and effective firepower. Of course they were a lot less reliable and horrible to communicate with, which calls into question how good a tank is when it cannot be employed correctly... However, keep in mind that the amount of Panzer III's and IV's was minimal during the invasion of France. Most German tanks were either the terrible 1st generation tanks or the Czech tanks 'found' after the Munich betrayal. Against those tanks the SOMUA kicked ass.
@@harmdallmeyer6449 Well to be honest, seeing what the French generals did with the tanks and troops they were provided, it really wouldn't have mattered much how good the S-35 was.
Probably a little late to the party, but it wasn't the turbo that was removed on the Meteor but actually the supercharger seeing as though the tank wouldnt be operating at several thousand feet. It also had to have its rotation reversed via a completly redesigned cam shaft meaning that part had to be specialty made along side all of the tappets and valves, it was also derated to be able to work at much lower revs. They also fit the engine to a heavy recovery/transport truck know as the Antar, we really did try to make the most of the merlin.
Asi I Czech the fact about the souma surprised me, as I thought I knew pretty much all about the development of tanks in my country... Didn't know about that tho.. thanks for that eta!
There is actually Poland too in this game, but it's a part of british as Sosabowski's The 1st (Polish) Independent Parachute Brigade that fought in Operation Market Garden and did pretty nice job there.
For the Firefly the British had already received 2 years earlier how to mount a heavy calibre gun when doing so in the Firefly Something rarely mentioned and forgotten in it's history. The 17 pounder was successfully mounted in the Australian AC1 Sentinal tank during its development and prooving having engineered the turret and ring mounting to accept this gun along many other calibre guns also. The Tank was field tested with a turret housing twin 25 pound guns installed to simulate the 17 pounder firing and ets effects on the turret and hull which they found caused hull stress and fracturing. The Australians did not field this tank overseas in theatre's of war instead they were deployed in allied tanks. The Australians sent their findings and information including engineering design technical information to the British in 1942 on how to mount a 17 pounder in turret with a wider diameter traverse mount in hull for turret to rotate on.This is discussed by the review by the Bovington tank museum 2 part videos on the Sentinel AC1.
IIRC IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Stalingrad's got a pretty good in-depth tank system w/interiors like you described, but the actual high-fidelity armour's locked behind a £64 DLC and the loader's automatic (?).
Speaking of the naming as with "Renault R35", it's quite common for foreign vehicle names to incorporate the full word, primarily when it's abbreviated in the original version. Good examples are: Yakovlev Yak-1 (just Як-1 in Russian), Lavochkin La-5 (just Ла-5 in Russian) Messerschmitt Me.109 (Me.109 AND Bf.109 in both German and Soviet documentation) Sometimes they don't though, as with LaGG-3 (Lavochkin, Gorbunov, Gudkov), Ta.152 Sorry for examples being just aircraft, but these're the closest to the naming pattern like R35.
Say, did we both get tank pfp's from the same museum? Cause that funnily enough looks like Goofy, the Stuart, from the AAF tank museum Would've been weird running into you at one point, you'd have gotten a kick outta tanker's experience day, the Panzer IV looks nice on the inside...as nice as it could be. Was randomly trawling through a discord channel I moderate, and a clip of your StuG guide was there, and I saw the pfp.
We definitely did! I’ve only been down to AAF once and I’d love to go again on a day when I can get inside a tank, especially the Panzer IV that would be a dream come true!
You should cover the tanks of IL-2 Sturmovik: Tank Crew. Personally, I think that game has the best tanks I've ever seen in a video game. The attention to detail is incredible and it would take hours just to cover all the details just for 1 tank. My favourite detail is how when the engine is knocked out and if you fire the main gun a lot the crew can be knocked unconscious due to the smoke from the breech not being ventilated out from the vehicle. You could crew it alone but it does support multiple people in the same tank. It's not even a game anymore. It's a full simulation.
Australia ignored in intro !! 🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳 But yeah like you said in the outro, I feel the exact same way for HLL. In other tank games you're practically exclusively relegated to PVP tank combat which 1. didn't occur all too often and 2. wasn't the primary role of the vehicle. In HLL and PS, you actually get to both operate realistically and immersivity in a crew but also engage and operate the vehicle itself realistically. Your commander will hear radio reports about a position the infantry is having trouble assaulting, so you're commander orders the driver to move to that position and him with his bow mg and the gunner with his coax and HE shells soften up and weaken those defences for the infantry to take that position. Or in another scenario, you're on the defence and you hear reports from the command chat that the team is being pushed on an exposed flank, so you commander looks at the map and finds a chokepoint to plug that hole in the teams defences, the driver moves there, and the vehicle becomes that mobile bunker in the defence lines. And even whilst stationary the driver is looking for targets with the bow machine gun, the commander spotting targets, the gunner using his coax and HE. Or in a third scenario, you hear reports from infantry squad leaders about an enemy tank in a rough or exact position, and your commander orders you to move out and engage. If you were given good intel, and say your a Panther crew and that tank was a Stuart your commander can decide to move directly to engage. Or, if it was vice versa, you could plan a flanking route and take the enemy crew by surprise in the flanks. I've had plenty of situations where I've taken out a Medium tank in a heavy or a heavy tank in a medium by having better intel, and a superior and more effective crew working efficiently to coordinate and engage the enemy. Or a 4th scenario in a urban environment where because you're so exposed to infantry, your tank commander and a nearby squad leader agree to work in conjunction to mutually support, engage, and move up together, both tank and infantry covering each other and their weakness' to operate in that specific AO more effectively. You don't get that in a dedicated Tank game. Because a Tank is simply just one part of combined arms warfare, a cog in the machine. It has a symbiotic relationship with the infantry, both supporting each other to conduct operations. It's only in primarily infantry focused games with living, thinking player infantry in which the infantry operates semi-realistically like PS or HLL that you even have the OPPORTUNITY to conduct the combined arms warfare scenario's I explained, and all of that was organic and dynamic - it's not a once off mission you play and that's that. There's nothing more fun, immersive, or satisfying. And honestly? It kind of sucks. I want to get into a HLL game to play as a tank crewman, but I don't have anyone else to play it with so I can only crew with pubs, and that opportunity only presents itself once in a blue moon in those games. And for me in Aus PS is practically dead and I only have HLL. And I know I won't ever get this experience anywhere else either.
Biggest issue with IL-2 tank crew is the lack of infantry in that game. The tanks are INCREDIBLY well modeled but what's the point if you can never use them in the way they were actually used.
11:50 the reason why it's named H35/39 it's because in France old designation standards, the "/" mean "Updated" so H35/39 mean H35 tank updated to the 1939 version of it. I don't know if i'm clear but that's basically it. :)
What you're describing at the end could make for a interesting VR game. It could just be co-op game where each player is a crew member and has to physically interact with the equipment inside to complete a scenario. It's a great idea for VR since the crew don't have to move that much outside their position; while at the same time offering a good reason to have them travel in the virtual space without them moving IRL. In addition VR does tend to give claustrophobic vibes to players, which meshes great with the idea of a tank simulator. In addition getting hit with a HEAT shell in VR would be the mother of all jumpscares.
The Cromwell is the wrong variant in this game, it is the Cromwell 1 which was used mostly for training. It is obvious due to the 57mm 6 pounder instead of the accurate 75mm quick fire gun off of the Cromwell 4.
The Firefly in this game is not an M4a4 (known as the VC) it is rather a standard M4 (IC) you can tell as the hull is shorter and it has the radial engines of the early shermans
I do believe the Firefly in the game is built on the Sherman V, the gap in the VVSS bogies is there, it has the 3 piece transmission case, and the small hatch hull. All of these are tells of the M4A4. And to put the icing on top, it definitely has the A4’s engine deck.
I'm very much aware that people would call it normal for you to be historicly accurate about France WW2 but I just want to thank you about it since you're probably aware of the overdone jokes that are just not even funny anymore, great respect to you and ur channel, keep the good work going !
13:21 I’m sorry but I smiled because of your pronunciation which isn’t great at all x) Not your fault tho. I love french tanks from the 30s, probably my favorite ones. Especially the S35, this thing was a BEAST in 1936 and in 1939. Amazing speed, amazing armor, amazing gun, and overall very reliable. The B1 bis is the 1936 tiger, a mechanical nightmare to build, but actually more reliable than you’d think, and a monster on the battlefield. If only the French government had actually listened to De Gaulle, France would have won. But the French governement at the time was a bunch of old men still thinking they’re the best after the Great War victory (panzers on Paris go brrrr). Btw « Société d’outillage mécanique et d’usinage d’artillerie » means « Mechanical tooling and artillery machining company ».
It's hard to say with certainty that France would have won, but it's clear that it would have been very different if the French higher ups knew what they were doing...
Got to disagree that the S35 was a beast. Good armour, speed and gun, yes. But it's a one man turret, the commander not only has to command his tank , but also load and fire the gun. There's a reason that everyone transitioned to three turret crew, commander, loader and gunner. if you're the platoon/troop commander you also have to command the other tanks in your unit. You have a radio so higher levels of command can talk to you, but, for budgetary reasons the rest of the tanks in your unit don't, so you're reduced to waving flags at them or shouting. Visibility from the turret was also awful. So, if you're looking at the hard factors the S35 is good, looking at the soft factors it's awful. You need both to be good for a tank to be good.
Your idea of a multi crew vehicle control I have been looking for such games with tanks and even bombers I really wish they made more of that type of games
Gunner Heat PC is also a pretty cool tank game you should check out. It's the only game I can think of that has a ready rack style gameplay mechanic. After you've fired X amount of shells, you start reloading slower until you get out of combat and order your loader to reorganize/refill his ready rack, which prevents you from shooting for a while. That being said I think most games did it right by combining the loader with the gunner position. Even RO2 did this. Loader position would be just too boring since you can be basically afk until the fighting starts. IRL they had to scan for targets with their periscope, but that bleeds into the commander's role in the games. Same reason for combining the driver/bow gunner spots into one. Bow gunners don't have much to do until they are in the fight. Very boring gameplay. Coolest thing about RO2 is that they fully modelled the commanader's cupola, so instead of this boring binocular vision when you're buttoned down, you're actually peeping through the glass slits in the cupola.
16:00 Its also worth noting that both Czechs and Germans agreed that the LT-35´s suspension was an absolute shit in comparison to LT-38 and most German tanks.
Just a word of advise… HLL is gonna make u flip, in a bad way lol All tanks have the same speed, turrets move like a m10, and my god u don’t have the option to fine tune like in post scriptum. Also fun fact about post scriptum, AP-HE shells can be used on buildings to clear them out, so one a AP-HE shell penetrates a wall, or even hits the ground, it has that lethal HE blast, not as deadly as a full HE but as a last resort, or wanting to blow up some sneaky bots in the building, that’s a good way to do it, and yes hitting the group with even regular AP can be VEEEEERY deadly in this game, also, ricochet can kill too. Ps: I am 100% behind ur loader idea btw!!! My god that would be soooo cool, just imagine the screaming of the loader and the controlled chaos haha
ever heard of foxhole? tanks in game though fictional are very interesting to look at mechanicaly and there olso is multy person operation, and havving been in a tankers seat in that game before it does get quite stressfull like how you mention here
H35/39 mean that it's a H35 (designed in 1935) modified in 1939 Like for exemple the french LMG "MAC 24/29" => it's a weapon designed in 1924 and modified in 1929
I love the tanking in HLL because it mixes arcadey fun perfectly with relative realism. Tanks have a driver, (who also works as the bow gunner), gunner (who also loads the gun) and the spotter, the tank commander. I believe this is the optimal way to have multi-crewed tanks, I could see a loader in there, maybe, but I can't think of a decent reason to include a bow gunner.
I see your normally do older tanks but I would love to see a video regarding your opinion on the modern vehicles in Squad. It is very much similar to PS and HLL but modern combat.
I want to suggest a future T.E.R. video on the Vehicles of Foxhole. Granted, none of them are direct recreations of real vehicles, but they do borrow some features. Also, it's not that common of a subject on TH-cam, and there was some demand for it when Gamespot did a Firearms expert reaction video on the game's guns.
hey eta i got a question for you. where'd you buy your tanker jacket? you've been wearing it for quite some time so i assume it's good quality, and i wanna buy one myself that'll last a good while.
You shuld get PS for me its mor relistick and mor imersiv and greate saund greate moment that cen feel like you are in som movi or right ther and its allot of fun
So one thing you didn't mention and I myself don't fully know if its true but its what I have seen alot in different sources. The 17 pounders breech on the firefly was so big, that if they mounted it conventionally then the roof of the sherman would prevent it from being loaded so they mounted it sideways and because of the big breech now in the way, the loader would have a very hard time escaping the tank so that was another reason they added the loaders hatch so he wouldn't have to try to get around the massive breech.
So the Fireflies breech wasn’t mounted totally sideways, it was just at an angle, which actually isn’t too uncommon. The M18 Hellcat had its breech tilted as well, you can even see it later in the video. As far as the loaders hatch goes, it definitely makes sense that the larger breech of the Firefly made the already dubious lack of a loaders hatch even more of a problem. I always figured that the British were simply used to having loaders hatches on their tanks so they found the Sherman’s lack of one to be confusing, but it also makes sense that it was necessary on the Firefly because of the 17 pdr
@@eta320 I know about other tanks having tilted breeches, but the only one I heard given an excuse was the firefly, again didn't know if it was true just what I have heard here and there. But regardless great video, only recently found you hence why the late comment on this video and surprised at a reply.
The song is “Hole in One” from the Rhythm Heaven Fever sound track. Assuming you’re referring to the “How’s that Sherman” segment! Also glad to hear you enjoyed the video!
I noticed that in this video you talked about how the Cromwell was pretty good, but in your tank tier list video a couple years back, you noted that the Cromwell wasn't so good. I can certantly see that you have corrected what you believed, but what i am wondering now is: what made you believe that the Cromwell wasn't "up-to-scratch"? for lack of a better term.
The chieftain premiering at the same time was the hardest YT decision I've ever had to make
me too and it was my own video
Same
I'm glad you mentioned PSRM's tank interiors, only the Tiger, Panther, StuG, and Panzer 3 L have them at the moment since there's only one guy working on it. The devs of the main game were given the suggestion to add tank interiors but they complained that it would take around 7 months to do 1 meanwhile the modder who made the tank interiors had done those 4 in the last seven months ON HIS OWN
modding and developing are 2 different things. Generally the differences are quite small, but small differences can have huge and very annoying repercussions. The biggest one is optimization. If a mod has poor performance on some machines, those players will either go "eh, it's just a mod" and live with it, or move on. If a game has poor performance people complain, review bomb, refund ect. Another big difference is that when a mod has a lot of issues but does something cool, people focus on the cool and tend to ignore the issues. If a game adds that same feature people expect it to be polished. Basically expectations with a mod are a lot lower. Now, maybe this singular modder managed to make a perfect mod that works on most players machines and is well optimized with minimal or no bugs. But firstly Squad44 (and post scriptum prior to the purchase) have very few devs anyways, and secondly he managed to get interiors for 4 tanks, whereas the developers were likely saying it would take 7 months to get all of the tanks currently in the game done AND may effect the ability to put out new content of fix issues in that time, as developers are taken off one area of the game and put onto interiors.
TL;DR, it's pretty useless to compare a game's feature to a mod. In most cases the mods are making sacrifices in areas that game devs aren't willing to or can't.
Eta looks like Wendigoon but instead of giants he likes tanks instead
I sorta look like this guy, but more handsome
@@RasEli03 Aint no way you more handsome
"Tank Wendigoon isn't real, he can't hurt you" Tank Wendigoon:
I like how the Americans refused to give up their slow M10s for M18s for the M18 had less armour, yet there was that cromwell crew who loved the speed of their training vehicle made out of soft steel looool
If you get the chance, I think you'd love to see Red Orchestra 2's tanks. There's technically only 6 armored vehicles in total, that being the T-34-76, Panzer IV, T-70, Panzer III, lend-lease Universal Carrier, and Sd.Kfz.251, but lemme tell ya, I think you'd LOVE to look them over.
One of my favorite small creators by far. high quality and a sense of humor.
As a french speaker, your attempt at SOMUA was hillarious, but in a good way mid you!
French is hard, it was a very good attempt.
When that BF1 soundtrack hit, I got the strongest mini-nostalgia I've felt for a long time. You *have* to cover BF1 in one of your future videos, I beg you, please!
I second this, would make for a good video with the different weapon packages
YES!
oh, now this is gold, a tank nerd reacting to tanks, time to see if i can get it all right before he does, god i can't wait for A Guide to the Sherman Variants: The GMCs and HMCs (you can't escape it eta)
Hunnicutt is a pretty good source for that information, and he actually is an official source. I love Eta, but if you want stuff that only someone actually affiliated with the US Army would have access to, look at Hunnicutt. His book on the Shermans and Pershings is fantastic.
Your channel is an absolute hidden gem. Ive been enjoying ur content for the past weeks.
Loved the part when he said french tanks were good
wtf u mean the somua s35 was arguably the best tank at the start of the inavsion of France
Is that sarcasm?
@@willliamnash4855 very arguably. By that time, Pz. III and IV were around, both featuring Radios, three men turrets and actual visibility from inside the tank.
Also, the S-35s deployement didn't really Help them either.
@@harmdallmeyer6449 I'd say the SOMUA S35 was roughly equal to the 2nd generation Panzers, maybe even a little better in speed and effective firepower. Of course they were a lot less reliable and horrible to communicate with, which calls into question how good a tank is when it cannot be employed correctly...
However, keep in mind that the amount of Panzer III's and IV's was minimal during the invasion of France. Most German tanks were either the terrible 1st generation tanks or the Czech tanks 'found' after the Munich betrayal. Against those tanks the SOMUA kicked ass.
@@harmdallmeyer6449 Well to be honest, seeing what the French generals did with the tanks and troops they were provided, it really wouldn't have mattered much how good the S-35 was.
Absouluty great video man
2:50
AHHHHHH so that explains the bonple flag in the back makes way more sense when i think about it
that fun fact about the Somua plates was the best thing ive learned all week
8:12 If there was a competition for the worst tank gun ever, this 37mm would end up second, because its so bad that it wouldnt even win that.
Probably a little late to the party, but it wasn't the turbo that was removed on the Meteor but actually the supercharger seeing as though the tank wouldnt be operating at several thousand feet. It also had to have its rotation reversed via a completly redesigned cam shaft meaning that part had to be specialty made along side all of the tappets and valves, it was also derated to be able to work at much lower revs. They also fit the engine to a heavy recovery/transport truck know as the Antar, we really did try to make the most of the merlin.
Asi I Czech the fact about the souma surprised me, as I thought I knew pretty much all about the development of tanks in my country... Didn't know about that tho.. thanks for that eta!
Congrats on 11k! You are going to get to 100k in no time!
There is actually Poland too in this game, but it's a part of british as Sosabowski's The 1st (Polish) Independent Parachute Brigade that fought in Operation Market Garden and did pretty nice job there.
For the Firefly the British had already received 2 years earlier how to mount a heavy calibre gun when doing so in the Firefly Something rarely mentioned and forgotten in it's history. The 17 pounder was successfully mounted in the Australian AC1 Sentinal tank during its development and prooving having engineered the turret and ring mounting to accept this gun along many other calibre guns also. The Tank was field tested with a turret housing twin 25 pound guns installed to simulate the 17 pounder firing and ets effects on the turret and hull which they found caused hull stress and fracturing. The Australians did not field this tank overseas in theatre's of war instead they were deployed in allied tanks. The Australians sent their findings and information including engineering design technical information to the British in 1942 on how to mount a 17 pounder in turret with a wider diameter traverse mount in hull for turret to rotate on.This is discussed by the review by the Bovington tank museum 2 part videos on the Sentinel AC1.
Proud of being part of the 2.8%
IIRC IL-2 Sturmovik Battle of Stalingrad's got a pretty good in-depth tank system w/interiors like you described, but the actual high-fidelity armour's locked behind a £64 DLC and the loader's automatic (?).
Nice video mate!!! Grown so much since last year. Been watching you on my old account since the confusing Sherman video. Great job and keep going man
Speaking of the naming as with "Renault R35", it's quite common for foreign vehicle names to incorporate the full word, primarily when it's abbreviated in the original version.
Good examples are:
Yakovlev Yak-1 (just Як-1 in Russian), Lavochkin La-5 (just Ла-5 in Russian)
Messerschmitt Me.109 (Me.109 AND Bf.109 in both German and Soviet documentation)
Sometimes they don't though, as with LaGG-3 (Lavochkin, Gorbunov, Gudkov), Ta.152
Sorry for examples being just aircraft, but these're the closest to the naming pattern like R35.
Say, did we both get tank pfp's from the same museum?
Cause that funnily enough looks like Goofy, the Stuart, from the AAF tank museum
Would've been weird running into you at one point, you'd have gotten a kick outta tanker's experience day, the Panzer IV looks nice on the inside...as nice as it could be.
Was randomly trawling through a discord channel I moderate, and a clip of your StuG guide was there, and I saw the pfp.
We definitely did! I’ve only been down to AAF once and I’d love to go again on a day when I can get inside a tank, especially the Panzer IV that would be a dream come true!
You should cover the tanks of IL-2 Sturmovik: Tank Crew. Personally, I think that game has the best tanks I've ever seen in a video game. The attention to detail is incredible and it would take hours just to cover all the details just for 1 tank. My favourite detail is how when the engine is knocked out and if you fire the main gun a lot the crew can be knocked unconscious due to the smoke from the breech not being ventilated out from the vehicle. You could crew it alone but it does support multiple people in the same tank.
It's not even a game anymore. It's a full simulation.
Just found your channel recently. My first video was the Sherman guide and then I binge watched the rest of your videos. Keep up the great work bro❤️
Australia ignored in intro !! 🥳🥳🥳🥳🥳
But yeah like you said in the outro, I feel the exact same way for HLL. In other tank games you're practically exclusively relegated to PVP tank combat which 1. didn't occur all too often and 2. wasn't the primary role of the vehicle. In HLL and PS, you actually get to both operate realistically and immersivity in a crew but also engage and operate the vehicle itself realistically.
Your commander will hear radio reports about a position the infantry is having trouble assaulting, so you're commander orders the driver to move to that position and him with his bow mg and the gunner with his coax and HE shells soften up and weaken those defences for the infantry to take that position.
Or in another scenario, you're on the defence and you hear reports from the command chat that the team is being pushed on an exposed flank, so you commander looks at the map and finds a chokepoint to plug that hole in the teams defences, the driver moves there, and the vehicle becomes that mobile bunker in the defence lines. And even whilst stationary the driver is looking for targets with the bow machine gun, the commander spotting targets, the gunner using his coax and HE.
Or in a third scenario, you hear reports from infantry squad leaders about an enemy tank in a rough or exact position, and your commander orders you to move out and engage. If you were given good intel, and say your a Panther crew and that tank was a Stuart your commander can decide to move directly to engage. Or, if it was vice versa, you could plan a flanking route and take the enemy crew by surprise in the flanks. I've had plenty of situations where I've taken out a Medium tank in a heavy or a heavy tank in a medium by having better intel, and a superior and more effective crew working efficiently to coordinate and engage the enemy.
Or a 4th scenario in a urban environment where because you're so exposed to infantry, your tank commander and a nearby squad leader agree to work in conjunction to mutually support, engage, and move up together, both tank and infantry covering each other and their weakness' to operate in that specific AO more effectively.
You don't get that in a dedicated Tank game. Because a Tank is simply just one part of combined arms warfare, a cog in the machine. It has a symbiotic relationship with the infantry, both supporting each other to conduct operations. It's only in primarily infantry focused games with living, thinking player infantry in which the infantry operates semi-realistically like PS or HLL that you even have the OPPORTUNITY to conduct the combined arms warfare scenario's I explained, and all of that was organic and dynamic - it's not a once off mission you play and that's that. There's nothing more fun, immersive, or satisfying.
And honestly? It kind of sucks. I want to get into a HLL game to play as a tank crewman, but I don't have anyone else to play it with so I can only crew with pubs, and that opportunity only presents itself once in a blue moon in those games. And for me in Aus PS is practically dead and I only have HLL. And I know I won't ever get this experience anywhere else either.
Biggest issue with IL-2 tank crew is the lack of infantry in that game. The tanks are INCREDIBLY well modeled but what's the point if you can never use them in the way they were actually used.
congrats on 12k man, huge (new) fan, can wait for more videos :))))
11:50 the reason why it's named H35/39 it's because in France old designation standards, the "/" mean "Updated" so H35/39 mean H35 tank updated to the 1939 version of it. I don't know if i'm clear but that's basically it. :)
Thanks for shouting out my favourite game! It doesnt get near enough praise, even from people with thousands of hours in it. Subbed :)
Found your channel a few months ago now and you make some excellent videos my guy
I actually didn't know post scriptum had france, also thanks for the analysis of the tanks, very informative
ETA: talking
Some random guy in the background: HOLY SHIT
Lol, timestamp? I must have missed that in the edit
@@eta320 34:24 around there
What you're describing at the end could make for a interesting VR game. It could just be co-op game where each player is a crew member and has to physically interact with the equipment inside to complete a scenario. It's a great idea for VR since the crew don't have to move that much outside their position; while at the same time offering a good reason to have them travel in the virtual space without them moving IRL. In addition VR does tend to give claustrophobic vibes to players, which meshes great with the idea of a tank simulator. In addition getting hit with a HEAT shell in VR would be the mother of all jumpscares.
A loader in the game would be an asset,as he is an extra set of eyes. He could even be given a machine gun on top of the turret.
Eta you never fail to make great videos.
The Cromwell is the wrong variant in this game, it is the Cromwell 1 which was used mostly for training. It is obvious due to the 57mm 6 pounder instead of the accurate 75mm quick fire gun off of the Cromwell 4.
I think the best tank experience would be in vr especially on the loader position
Just found your channel a couple weeks ago, love your videos!
The Firefly in this game is not an M4a4 (known as the VC) it is rather a standard M4 (IC) you can tell as the hull is shorter and it has the radial engines of the early shermans
I do believe the Firefly in the game is built on the Sherman V, the gap in the VVSS bogies is there, it has the 3 piece transmission case, and the small hatch hull. All of these are tells of the M4A4. And to put the icing on top, it definitely has the A4’s engine deck.
@@eta320 yes I think it is a mix match of different shermans
I'm very much aware that people would call it normal for you to be historicly accurate about France WW2 but I just want to thank you about it since you're probably aware of the overdone jokes that are just not even funny anymore, great respect to you and ur channel, keep the good work going !
13:21 I’m sorry but I smiled because of your pronunciation which isn’t great at all x)
Not your fault tho.
I love french tanks from the 30s, probably my favorite ones.
Especially the S35, this thing was a BEAST in 1936 and in 1939.
Amazing speed, amazing armor, amazing gun, and overall very reliable.
The B1 bis is the 1936 tiger, a mechanical nightmare to build, but actually more reliable than you’d think, and a monster on the battlefield.
If only the French government had actually listened to De Gaulle, France would have won.
But the French governement at the time was a bunch of old men still thinking they’re the best after the Great War victory (panzers on Paris go brrrr).
Btw « Société d’outillage mécanique et d’usinage d’artillerie » means « Mechanical tooling and artillery machining company ».
It's hard to say with certainty that France would have won, but it's clear that it would have been very different if the French higher ups knew what they were doing...
Got to disagree that the S35 was a beast. Good armour, speed and gun, yes. But it's a one man turret, the commander not only has to command his tank , but also load and fire the gun. There's a reason that everyone transitioned to three turret crew, commander, loader and gunner. if you're the platoon/troop commander you also have to command the other tanks in your unit. You have a radio so higher levels of command can talk to you, but, for budgetary reasons the rest of the tanks in your unit don't, so you're reduced to waving flags at them or shouting. Visibility from the turret was also awful. So, if you're looking at the hard factors the S35 is good, looking at the soft factors it's awful. You need both to be good for a tank to be good.
@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 Thats true for every French tank.
One man turret, their biggest issue.
I can't help but think that this man is the short-haired Jesus of moistcritikal, but a tank enthusiast
Your idea of a multi crew vehicle control I have been looking for such games with tanks and even bombers I really wish they made more of that type of games
Hell Let Loose would be great to check out. Tanking in it can be stressful
The music at the end giving "after the war ended Eta320 went on to-" vibes
Gunner Heat PC is also a pretty cool tank game you should check out. It's the only game I can think of that has a ready rack style gameplay mechanic. After you've fired X amount of shells, you start reloading slower until you get out of combat and order your loader to reorganize/refill his ready rack, which prevents you from shooting for a while.
That being said I think most games did it right by combining the loader with the gunner position. Even RO2 did this. Loader position would be just too boring since you can be basically afk until the fighting starts. IRL they had to scan for targets with their periscope, but that bleeds into the commander's role in the games. Same reason for combining the driver/bow gunner spots into one. Bow gunners don't have much to do until they are in the fight. Very boring gameplay.
Coolest thing about RO2 is that they fully modelled the commanader's cupola, so instead of this boring binocular vision when you're buttoned down, you're actually peeping through the glass slits in the cupola.
16:00 Its also worth noting that both Czechs and Germans agreed that the LT-35´s suspension was an absolute shit in comparison to LT-38 and most German tanks.
From Poland with love < 3
I'm convinced, I'm going to buy Post Scriptum at this point
this channel is amazing and it's topic is nice
Already 10k
Just a word of advise…
HLL is gonna make u flip, in a bad way lol
All tanks have the same speed, turrets move like a m10, and my god u don’t have the option to fine tune like in post scriptum.
Also fun fact about post scriptum, AP-HE shells can be used on buildings to clear them out, so one a AP-HE shell penetrates a wall, or even hits the ground, it has that lethal HE blast, not as deadly as a full HE but as a last resort, or wanting to blow up some sneaky bots in the building, that’s a good way to do it, and yes hitting the group with even regular AP can be VEEEEERY deadly in this game, also, ricochet can kill too.
Ps: I am 100% behind ur loader idea btw!!! My god that would be soooo cool, just imagine the screaming of the loader and the controlled chaos haha
Very good video keep up the good work
ever heard of foxhole? tanks in game though fictional are very interesting to look at mechanicaly and there olso is multy person operation, and havving been in a tankers seat in that game before it does get quite stressfull like how you mention here
H35/39 mean that it's a H35 (designed in 1935) modified in 1939
Like for exemple the french LMG "MAC 24/29" => it's a weapon designed in 1924 and modified in 1929
It's my long lost brother, a fellow tank enthusiast, where have you been all my life
I love the tanking in HLL because it mixes arcadey fun perfectly with relative realism. Tanks have a driver, (who also works as the bow gunner), gunner (who also loads the gun) and the spotter, the tank commander. I believe this is the optimal way to have multi-crewed tanks, I could see a loader in there, maybe, but I can't think of a decent reason to include a bow gunner.
Pz 38 is called strv 41 in Sweden and was actually a really good tank
2:24 Holy shit, what a miracle, more than 1%, let alone 2!?
Truly a chick magnet
Sherman’s do that to yuh sometimes
IL-2 Tank Crew is your best friend.
StuG main here
Fun fact aphe in ps goes through walls and explodes on the inside makes it easy to deal with infantry in buildings
The BFV music hits a little diffuser @ 30:00 😅
I see your normally do older tanks but I would love to see a video regarding your opinion on the modern vehicles in Squad. It is very much similar to PS and HLL but modern combat.
I am a Polish viewer
You should give a go to IL2 Tank Crew :3 fully modeled interiors for their tanks, and can multicrew them as well.
ETA320 TO THE MOOOON
This is the shit ive been waiting for!!!
You're god damn right
I think if there was a dedicated loader position, his role could also be a medic for inside tank, plus also be an extra guy for doing repairs
omg I am a Eta320 super fan!
I want to suggest a future T.E.R. video on the Vehicles of Foxhole. Granted, none of them are direct recreations of real vehicles, but they do borrow some features. Also, it's not that common of a subject on TH-cam, and there was some demand for it when Gamespot did a Firearms expert reaction video on the game's guns.
Germany be like: that's a nice little tank you got there France, be a shame if someone...... strapped 4 stuka rockets to the side of it
i liked to think that those ribbets on the Crom's turret were spikes or something like that
This video made me wish I still had friends. 10/10 🎉
This is going to be interesting
The friends part got to me
The subscriber to viewer ratio is actually crazy high compared to others
I enjoyed the hoi4 soundtrack very prominently in the background
i loved the part when he fell out of his chair
2:50 Porand Mentioned!
Polish Mountine!!!🇵🇱🏔🇵🇱🏔🇵🇱
cant wait for next game
the armor layout on the somua turret is not the same as the B1, the turret are roughly the same, but, armour on those mounted on the B1 were thicker
Whenever I see the word "Somua" I always pronounce it like "some-ow" because that is just how it looks to me
Please Eta please do the Just Cause series. It will have you both intrigued and disgusted in a way no other series can.
Société d'Outillage Mécanique et d'Usinage d'Artillerie = Literally, "Mechanical Tooling and Artillery Machining Company."
38:03 star citizen mentioned 🎉
You have a very good French Prononciation btw
Almost at 15k in one month!
For an older game, Red Orchestra 2 had pretty good tanks, just not enough variety.
hey eta i got a question for you. where'd you buy your tanker jacket? you've been wearing it for quite some time so i assume it's good quality, and i wanna buy one myself that'll last a good while.
Nice HOI4 music, my favorite
Edit: You could also say that the Cromwell is very... Rivetting.
I really love HLL but yeah, tank wise PS is definitely more realistic. Hopefully some day I'll get to play it
You shuld get PS for me its mor relistick and mor imersiv and greate saund greate moment that cen feel like you are in som movi or right ther and its allot of fun
The H39 have a slitly diffrent hull to the H35
And the H35/39 is the H35 hulls woth the new 37mm turret of the H39
Hello yes I am one of the women who watches your content. Its interesting what can I say lmao
So one thing you didn't mention and I myself don't fully know if its true but its what I have seen alot in different sources. The 17 pounders breech on the firefly was so big, that if they mounted it conventionally then the roof of the sherman would prevent it from being loaded so they mounted it sideways and because of the big breech now in the way, the loader would have a very hard time escaping the tank so that was another reason they added the loaders hatch so he wouldn't have to try to get around the massive breech.
So the Fireflies breech wasn’t mounted totally sideways, it was just at an angle, which actually isn’t too uncommon. The M18 Hellcat had its breech tilted as well, you can even see it later in the video.
As far as the loaders hatch goes, it definitely makes sense that the larger breech of the Firefly made the already dubious lack of a loaders hatch even more of a problem. I always figured that the British were simply used to having loaders hatches on their tanks so they found the Sherman’s lack of one to be confusing, but it also makes sense that it was necessary on the Firefly because of the 17 pdr
@@eta320 I know about other tanks having tilted breeches, but the only one I heard given an excuse was the firefly, again didn't know if it was true just what I have heard here and there. But regardless great video, only recently found you hence why the late comment on this video and surprised at a reply.
Subscribed. So what's your favorite Sherman variant? Mine is the M51
The Composite Firefly.
@@eta320 nice
Regards from Poland. We are BEST 3,2%.
hello kind sir, i would like to know the background music youre using for the sherman segment thank you.(liked the vid btw very nice)
The song is “Hole in One” from the Rhythm Heaven Fever sound track. Assuming you’re referring to the “How’s that Sherman” segment!
Also glad to hear you enjoyed the video!
@@eta320 alright thanks for the help man I appreciate it!
THe AK guy If he liked Tanks more than AK's
I noticed that in this video you talked about how the Cromwell was pretty good, but in your tank tier list video a couple years back, you noted that the Cromwell wasn't so good. I can certantly see that you have corrected what you believed, but what i am wondering now is: what made you believe that the Cromwell wasn't "up-to-scratch"? for lack of a better term.
I didn’t know much of anything about the Cromwell at the time of making the teir list, and only knew that British tanks were cramped and unreliable