>1 Tiger tank is worth 4 Sherman tanks. The Problem is the Americans always bring 5-some kraut general
Is this true? was German engineering really that fucking amazing and the only reason they lost is because of assembly line supplies from america and assembly line lives from Russia?
Tiger tanks were not common.
1 Panzer 4, the most common tank, is work 1 Sherman, roughly.
1 Tiger probably is worth 4 Shermans, if the Tiger wants to work that day.
>>356284
Kind of. It also had to do with the daily bombings absolutely wrecking the manufacturing capabilities.
So yes the plan was to throw 5 shermans at a tiger with two in front and sending the rest around the side. Generally at least one would make it to the rear and be able to get a kill shot. So statistically, 1 tiger is worth 4 shermans in an engagement.
But the means to produce Tiger tanks was limited to begin with and was only getting more difficult to produce while Shermans and T34s were being cranked out uninterrupted. So while a tiger may be able to take out 4 shermans, when it was killed it was far harder to replace.
Germany could never attack the production capabilities of the allies and theirs were always vulnerable. They were doomed the moment Barbarossa stalled.
>German engineering really that fucking amazing
Not really, they made everything too complex which made things more prone to errors and harder to repair/manufacture
Even if they had superior tanks they didn't have enough oil to run them, and they ran out of pilots(and fuel) which left the tanks venerable to allied air support
>>356352
They shouldn't have wasted so much fuel on burning jews.
>>356457
They should have made tanks that ran on burning jews.
>>356284
No. Even if the statement is true, a Tiger is a heavy tank, and a Sherman is a medium tank. It would be like saying
>1 Sherman is worth 4 Sd.Kfz. 251s.
>>356467
>western front
>fielding heavy tanks
>>356476
What can I tell you? The Germans were retards.
The american tanks could penetrate the front armor of a tiger tank.
That scene in fury where they have to bum rush it is complete bullshit.
Also America only saw like 3 tigers from d-day to the end of the war.
>>356284
Sherman's always worked in groups of 5, it was their SOP
>>356462
>>356467
This so hard
Also Economy of Force.
Even if a Tiger is worth 5 Shermans, the Sherman is better if it can be produced for the cost of 1/5 or less of a Tiger. This is why russians tanks are arguabky good. Sure they may not be technological marvels but they were 'good enough' and could be produced in vast numbers.
The Soviets even had limitations on their plane designers so they couldn't have revolutionary changes which would've resulted in slower production.
>>356614
>3 lines of bullshit
>>356284
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNjp_4jY8pY
