Jump to content


who knowes how tanks are named on this game


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

Ezylryb_m4 #1 Posted 19 March 2016 - 11:15 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 2649 battles
  • 32
  • [VTDA] VTDA
  • Member since:
    07-07-2015
does any one know way the m7 priest american tier 3 SPG has its British name rather than its american name the m7 howitzer? i have worded this for a very long time. if any one could help it would be apresated thankyou

Salentine #2 Posted 20 March 2016 - 07:17 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23573 battles
  • 1,720
  • Member since:
    05-07-2013
what a shame WG didn't use the Australian version the 'kangaroo'...

K_A #3 Posted 20 March 2016 - 09:33 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 13577 battles
  • 4,666
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013

While the British came up with the name "Priest", the Americans did also use it themselves.

 

And also probably to distinguish it better from the other SPGs in the game. 



Nishi_Kinuyo #4 Posted 20 March 2016 - 11:58 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 7242 battles
  • 3,725
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011
Imo, the murikans need to come up with a naming system that makes more sense, like the Japanese system for example.

Ezylryb_m4 #5 Posted 21 March 2016 - 11:29 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 2649 battles
  • 32
  • [VTDA] VTDA
  • Member since:
    07-07-2015

View PostSalentine, on 20 March 2016 - 07:17 AM, said:

what a shame WG didn't use the Australian version the 'kangaroo'...

 

i don't mean to be rued but wold of tanks i a tank on tank game and the kangaroo is a APC (armed persanl caryer) with one 50 cal gun. and how is that going to kill other tanks, i am more anoyed that there is no churchill 3 17 pounder in the game other than teh churchill 7 black prince that seid it was a rolay enganer egserametal tamk rother than factory fited one

Edited by Ezylryb_m4, 21 March 2016 - 11:30 PM.


datester #6 Posted 22 March 2016 - 01:12 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29175 battles
  • 359
  • Member since:
    07-30-2014

View PostOnisuzume, on 20 March 2016 - 10:58 AM, said:

Imo, the murikans need to come up with a naming system that makes more sense, like the Japanese system for example.

 

The US name their tanks after their generals (grant, sherman, pershing etc.). Why doesnt that make sense?

 



Nishi_Kinuyo #7 Posted 22 March 2016 - 06:19 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 7242 battles
  • 3,725
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

Because I got no ffing idea what it is? Type 3 Chi-Nu? I immediately know the year, and thanks to the Chi-prefix that it is a medium tank; the -Nu suffix tells me that it is design number 10. Everything you need to know in a compact package.

Why are there even multiple vehicles named M3? Or M2, or M7. Why are there two Stuarts with a different M number?


Edited by Onisuzume, 22 March 2016 - 06:19 PM.


Ezylryb_m4 #8 Posted 22 March 2016 - 09:14 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 2649 battles
  • 32
  • [VTDA] VTDA
  • Member since:
    07-07-2015

View Postdatester, on 22 March 2016 - 01:12 PM, said:

 

The US name their tanks after their generals (grant, sherman, pershing etc.). Why doesnt that make sense?

 

 

i don't mean to be rued but the Americas named the m3 lee (grant) where named after generals but the two names come about there turret configuration as the us preferred was named by  the us and after Robert E. Lee but the British did not like the us configuration so redesigned the turret  for there used and named it after Ulysses S. Grant so that there was no confusion.

DingIsHere #9 Posted 22 March 2016 - 09:14 PM

    Colonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 15970 battles
  • 3,784
  • [4Q2] 4Q2
  • Member since:
    12-22-2011
In general, the Yanks used the numbers, but when us Brits bought them (lend-lease) we gave them most of the names, the yanks then adopted those names.

Ezylryb_m4 #10 Posted 22 March 2016 - 09:24 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 2649 battles
  • 32
  • [VTDA] VTDA
  • Member since:
    07-07-2015

View PostDingIsHere, on 22 March 2016 - 09:14 PM, said:

In general, the Yanks used the numbers, but when us Brits bought them (lend-lease) we gave them most of the names, the yanks then adopted those names.

as far as i know the US designated the lee version as Medium 3 Lee ore m3 lee for short so there was no confusion with the M3 light (M3 stuat)which was called the m3 for short a lot  so imaged calling it the medium 3 and shortening it to m3 what is the problem there?


Edited by Ezylryb_m4, 22 March 2016 - 09:24 PM.


datester #11 Posted 23 March 2016 - 12:44 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29175 battles
  • 359
  • Member since:
    07-30-2014

View PostOnisuzume, on 22 March 2016 - 05:19 PM, said:

Because I got no ffing idea what it is? Type 3 Chi-Nu? I immediately know the year, and thanks to the Chi-prefix that it is a medium tank; the -Nu suffix tells me that it is design number 10. Everything you need to know in a compact package.

Why are there even multiple vehicles named M3? Or M2, or M7. Why are there two Stuarts with a different M number?

 

'M3 Medium' immediately tells me its a medium, its design number 3,and its a production version (M) instead of a design/prototype (T).Everything you need to know in a compact package.

'Lee' is just a nickname.

 

The US army starts the M-numbering at 1 for every class of weapon. So you have a M1 light tank, a M1 medium tank, a M1 howitzer, a M1 rifle and a M1 helmet.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



K_A #12 Posted 24 March 2016 - 12:53 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 13577 battles
  • 4,666
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    04-18-2013

View Postdatester, on 23 March 2016 - 11:44 AM, said:

 

'M3 Medium' immediately tells me its a medium, its design number 3,and its a production version (M) instead of a design/prototype (T).Everything you need to know in a compact package.

'Lee' is just a nickname.

 

The US army starts the M-numbering at 1 for every class of weapon. So you have a M1 light tank, a M1 medium tank, a M1 howitzer, a M1 rifle and a M1 helmet.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But wouldn't it have been easier to distinguish between them all by naming say mediums M1, M2, M3 etc, light tanks L1, L2, L3 etc, rifles R1, R2, R3 or something etc. etc.?

DingIsHere #13 Posted 24 March 2016 - 05:24 PM

    Colonel

  • Clan Commander
  • 15970 battles
  • 3,784
  • [4Q2] 4Q2
  • Member since:
    12-22-2011

View PostK_A, on 23 March 2016 - 11:53 PM, said:

 

But wouldn't it have been easier to distinguish between them all by naming say mediums M1, M2, M3 etc, light tanks L1, L2, L3 etc, rifles R1, R2, R3 or something etc. etc.?

 

I will answer that by simply saying...

 

Murrican Army.



datester #14 Posted 24 March 2016 - 10:52 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29175 battles
  • 359
  • Member since:
    07-30-2014

View PostK_A, on 23 March 2016 - 11:53 PM, said:

 

But wouldn't it have been easier to distinguish between them all by naming say mediums M1, M2, M3 etc, light tanks L1, L2, L3 etc, rifles R1, R2, R3 or something etc. etc.?

 

L = LightTank, LandMine, LaserRangeFinder or LightMachineGun ...

One letter wouldnt be enough.

 

 






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users