Jump to content


italian turretless light tanks

Italian Italy light tanks

  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

CamperKaempfer #1 Posted 30 April 2018 - 06:26 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23435 battles
  • 369
  • Member since:
    01-10-2017

this is a continuation of my previous post about an expansion of the italian tech tree. this is kind of a wacky line whose main purpose is to introduce the L3/35 aka carro veloce (fast tank) 35 or CV35.

 

all of these tanks would have the following strengths:

-excellent gun depression between 12 and 15 degrees

-high burst-damage thanks to autocannons

-above average to excellent mobility

-small size and very low profile

-the carri di comando also have good armour

and the following weaknesses:

-no armour on the L3/35 (11mm max)

-no turret

-possibly bad penetration and soft stats. but both are arbitrary

 

fun fact: the L3/35 would be the smallest tank the game by far, with a height of only 1.3 meters. the closest thing to that in the game is the elc-amx-bis with a height of 1.58m, but while some tanks are less wide or long than the elc, the L3/35 would be smaller than anything else in all dimensions.

 

L3/35

 

classified as a light tank but a tankette by other nations' standards because it lacked a turret and was usually only armed with 8mm machine-guns.

 

engine

the L3/35 would get its historically accurate 43hp engine as a stock engine and the same 70hp and 108hp engines that the l6/40 already gets in the game (the latter engine actually belonged to an armoured car from the same period), since the L6/40 is a close evolution of the L3/35 and has a similar engine compartment.

its very low weight of only 3.2 tons would give the L3/35 a whopping power/weight ratio of 33.75hp/t, which would tuned down only slightly when mounting big autocannons.

 

armament

the only historically accurate armament configurations with anti-tank capabilities are the solothurn 20mm and the breda 20/65, which can be mounted in the game by the german leichttraktor and the italian l6/40. i propose, as top guns, the longer scotti-isotta-fraschini 20/70 or cannone mitragliera da 20/77 with better penetration, which are nearly the same size and shape of the breda 20/65 and were used interchangeably,firing hte same ammunition, in the same antiaircraft and antitank roles.

another possible but unnecessary realistic gun would be the vickers-terni 37/40, which was mounted on a development stage of the L4/60, whose hull still resembled an L6/40 in every aspect.

 

tier placement

given its armour is 11mm at best, this little machine would need to rely on its speed and extremely small size (only 1.3 meters in height) to avoid fire and relocate to positions where it can exploit its camo rating to snipe with any of its 20mm autocannons.

given that some of hte bigger maps aren't available at tier 2 this tank might be better off at tier 3 or 4.

i know it sounds far fetched, but the armour is irrelevant at any tier. the excellent speed is more useful at higher tiers and the long autocannons can have good penetration (it all depends on the developers. they gave the matilda's 40mm 2 pounder an unrealistic 120mm of pen. the 39mm of penetration that the breda mod 35 is true a 500 meters and since such fast and light rounds lose much velocity over distance due to friction it would be much more at the standard 100m).

 

CARRI DI COMANDO

 

italy designed six several turretless vehicles based on the chassis of light and medium tanks. two where infantry carriers and four were so-called commanding vehicles, fitted with additional radios and meant to direct all other armoured vehicles during operations.

i won't consider the two infantry carriers because they have open tops and wide, long "untanklike" shapes and offer no advantage over to the commanding vehicles.

for those who want to know more about them, they were both inspired by the british universal carrier which the italians encountered in africa. fiat produced the prototype of and exact copy of the universal carrier (cingoletta 2800 or cvp-4), which was selected for production by the italian army over ansaldo's superior but more costly design (anslado L40). production was cancelled as italy's situation worsened.

the commanding vehicles are based each on the fiat L6/40 (current tier 2 light), m13/40, m14/41 (current tier 2 medium) and m15/42 (current tier 3 medium) respectively and built by removing the turrets and covering hte turret rings with four-piece hatches.

all, except the one based on the L6/40 (which i'll leave out of hte line), were armed with 13.2mm machine-guns mounted in the hull in place of the smaller 8mm guns of their parent models, but could also mount 20mm autocannons in the same spot. all of htem would have the same weapons of the L3/35.

i will also leave out the carro comando m40 (based on the m13/40) because it's just an m41 with a weaker engine.

at tier 2 i would have the carro comando m41 (based on the the tier 2 medium already in the common test). i would be relatively mobile, but how exactly i can't say because i don't know its the exact weight, and well armoured with 30mm at the front and 25 at the side. like all following turretless lights, it would have high burst-damage potential.

the two remaining candidates for tier 3 and 4 are the L3/35 and the carro comando m42. the latter is based on the current italian tier 3 and i would have it have a historical armour of 50mm at the front and 45mm at the side (the tier 3 in the game only has 25mm of side armour for balancing reasons). i'm not sure which should go where. possibly the the carro comando m42 should come first  because, being balanced partly around the armour, it would suffer significantly for any tier it gets moved up, while the L3/35's speed and size advantage would become all but more significant.

alternatively, both should stay at tier 3, one in the regular light tank line and the other in the turretless line, both serving as a bridge between the two (see my light tank line proposal), and only the latter leading to a the tier 4 tank destroyer.

 

further notes about modules: all tanks in the line could either share the same armament and only differ in mobility and armour or could have their armament upgraded, form a breda 20/65 mod 35 at tier 2, to a scotti-isotta-fraschini 20/70 at tier 3 and a mitragliera da 20/77 scotti at tier 4.

the m41 would have the same 145hp engine the m14/41 has in the game and both tanks used to have in real life

the m42, sharing the hull with the m15/42, would also share the unhistorical 250hp engine the latter has in the game

 

tank destroyers in the following post. you're encouraged to check out my previous post about other italian tanks and tell me what you think

 

pictures:

first two pictures: L3/38 controcarro with 20mm solothurn

third and fourth pictures: cingoletta ansaldo L40 with 13.2mm

fifth picture: carro comando L6/40 with its 8mm machine-gun covered by a shroud that was supposed to resemble a 47/32 gun in the hope of scaring off enemies, as was the case with all specimens of this model.

sixth picture: various italian m-series tanks including (presumably) a carro comando m42

all following pictures: carro comando m40 or m41

Attached Files

  • Attached File   L3-38 controcarro.jpg   18.01K
  • Attached File   l33 controcarro.jpg   38.5K
  • Attached File   Cingoletta_Ansaldo_L40.jpg   18.73K
  • Attached File   cingoletta+L.+40.jpg   114.06K
  • Attached File   carro_commando_l640.jpg   6.92K
  • Attached File   tanks.jpg   83.13K
  • Attached File   carro_commando_01.jpg   67.95K
  • Attached File   carro_commando_02.jpg   94.93K
  • Attached File   carro_commando_03.jpg   26.12K
  • Attached File   CarroComandoM40-2.jpg   35.54K

Edited by CamperKaempfer, 01 May 2018 - 12:38 PM.


DuncaN_101 #2 Posted 30 April 2018 - 06:57 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 53741 battles
  • 2,035
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011
Wouldn't these be classified as TD's then?

CamperKaempfer #3 Posted 30 April 2018 - 07:54 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23435 battles
  • 369
  • Member since:
    01-10-2017

View PostDuncaN_101, on 30 April 2018 - 06:57 PM, said:

Wouldn't these be classified as TD's then?

 

i understand the argument for htat but there's also one for considering htem as light tanks.

the commanding vehicles weren't meant as tank destroyers and mounted 13.2mm machineguns solely for self-defense, only useful against lightly armoured targets. instead, they were used for reconnaissance and relaying orders to their armour units.

i know they can mount those 20mm autocannons because very few m14/41 tanks, which have the same hull frame, did so, but even thusly armed they wouldn't match the firepower of contemporary tank destroyers.

 

the l3/35 antitank can be an exception.

it was originally conceived as a light (the L stands for leggero, which means light) and was provided with a solothurn antitank rifle to give it some antitank capability. this version was probably used as a tank destroyer because it was the only piece of italian armour that could defeat other armour, and yet needed to stay hidden to avoid having its weak armour, good only against small arms, challenged.

nonetheless its firepower hardly matched that of contemporary light tanks at best. i assume the spanish version with the italian breda 20/65 mod 35 was used as a normal infantry tank, which was simply provided with something to fight back in case it encountered enemy tanks. also, when the l3/33 was introduced there were no tank-destroyers yet. heavily armoured british and french tanks had yet to appear on the battlefield and contemporary tanks could at best deal with some of the antitank infantry rifles in service at the time, but not with other tanks (except breakthrough tanks armed only with machine guns) or towed guns, no matter how small

 

in world of tanks you could play them as both light tanks and td's. the l3/35 would play like the elc amx bis used to before the 9.18. the elc was meant as an airborne tank destroyer, but in world of tanks it's a light tank because it's very small and (was) very fast. it does have a turret but the limited traverse it's given in world of tanks makes it resemble a TD just like my turretless lights

 

this is probably a much longer answer than you wished for so i'll just say more that i don't have any strong opinions about it. maybe they would be more appropriate as TD's.


Edited by CamperKaempfer, 30 April 2018 - 07:54 PM.


Jigabachi #4 Posted 30 April 2018 - 08:39 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17948 battles
  • 19,565
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
The idea sounds good, especially after they butchered the ELC, one of the most unique tanks in the game. But looking at those pictures... hmmm... no, thanks. 

Bulldog_Drummond #5 Posted 30 April 2018 - 08:42 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 30317 battles
  • 9,786
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

The Italian tankettes were death traps.  You could kill them with a .45 pistol.

 

They were only intended for maintaining control over spear-armed natives in Libya.



Shaade_Silentpaw #6 Posted 30 April 2018 - 08:45 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23416 battles
  • 447
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015
I think I'd rather inhale vinegar than play a turretless light tank, to be honest with you.

CamperKaempfer #7 Posted 30 April 2018 - 08:53 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23435 battles
  • 369
  • Member since:
    01-10-2017

View PostJigabachi, on 30 April 2018 - 08:39 PM, said:

The idea sounds good, especially after they butchered the ELC, one of the most unique tanks in the game. But looking at those pictures... hmmm... no, thanks. 

 

yeah, i kind of imagined it that way. it's the first two pictures btw.

the elc is one of the more modern tanks in the game and yet it got relegated to tier 5 which s populated by WWII tanks. it's probably the most modern tank at tier 5. the l3/35 would be one of the earliest tanks in the game, and probably earlier than any tier 4 and in real life it would hardly stand a chance, but world of tanks isn't reality and we have WWII german tanks fighting their way among tanks form the 60's. as ugly as it is, i think it could work. also the bigger guns might give them a more intimidating look

 

View PostShaade_Silentpaw, on 30 April 2018 - 08:45 PM, said:

I think I'd rather inhale vinegar than play a turretless light tank, to be honest with you.

 

you won't have to do either, but i'l still remind you that the elc is for all intents and purposes a turretless light tank
 

Bulldog_Drummond #8 Posted 30 April 2018 - 08:57 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 30317 battles
  • 9,786
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View PostCamperKaempfer, on 30 April 2018 - 07:53 PM, said:

 

yeah, i kind of imagined it that way. it's the first two pictures btw.

the elc is one of the more modern tanks in the game and yet it got relegated to tier 5 which s populated by WWII tanks. it's probably the most modern tank at tier 5. the l3/35 would be one of the earliest tanks in the game, and probably earlier than any tier 4 and in real life it would hardly stand a chance, but world of tanks isn't reality and we have WWII german tanks fighting their way among tanks form the 60's. as ugly as it is, i think it could work. also the bigger guns might give them a more intimidating look

 

I shall be interested to see what WG come up with in the way of Italian (and in due course Polish and Rumanian) tanks.   It's a game of course but the concept is risible.

CamperKaempfer #9 Posted 30 April 2018 - 09:05 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23435 battles
  • 369
  • Member since:
    01-10-2017

View PostBulldog_Drummond, on 30 April 2018 - 08:42 PM, said:

The Italian tankettes were death traps.  You could kill them with a .45 pistol.

 

They were only intended for maintaining control over spear-armed natives in Libya.

 

you could defeat them with a 45acp pistol.

no, you couldn't

 

they were only intented to maintain control over spear armed natives in libya.

no they weren't. they did try doing that with the fiat 2000 but it didn't end up well. italian tanks were designed to combat the british in africa and the soviets in their natural habitat.

 

they were death traps.

there are many reasons why they were bad. some, like the bad quality of the armor, are of not concern to the game. others, on the other hand, are, but as i said to you before, italian tanks are already in the common test an players don't seem to care how bad they were in reality and are doing well, so your comment is pretty much pointless

 



Bulldog_Drummond #10 Posted 30 April 2018 - 09:08 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 30317 battles
  • 9,786
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View PostCamperKaempfer, on 30 April 2018 - 08:05 PM, said:

they were only intented to maintain control over spear armed natives in libya.

no they weren't. they did try doing that with the fiat 2000 but it didn't end up well. italian tanks were designed to combat the british in africa and the soviets in their natural habitat.

 

That worked out well.



CamperKaempfer #11 Posted 30 April 2018 - 09:09 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23435 battles
  • 369
  • Member since:
    01-10-2017

View PostBulldog_Drummond, on 30 April 2018 - 08:57 PM, said:

 

I shall be interested to see what WG come up with in the way of Italian (and in due course Polish and Rumanian) tanks.   It's a game of course but the concept is risible.

 

they're not planning to introduce romanian tanks. if you're interested in what the italian tech tree looks like (the real one in the common test, not my proposals), you need but to look it up (i assume you have a browser for obvious reasons). if you'd like to try them out then download the test server

Edited by CamperKaempfer, 30 April 2018 - 09:21 PM.


Bulldog_Drummond #12 Posted 30 April 2018 - 09:11 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 30317 battles
  • 9,786
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View PostCamperKaempfer, on 30 April 2018 - 08:09 PM, said:

 

they're not planning to introduce romanian tanks. if you're interested in what the italian tech tree looks like (the real one in the common test, not my proposals), you need but to look it up (i assume you have a browser for obvious reasons). if you'd like to try them out.

 

As a tank buff, I'm familiar with real life and putative WW2 Italian tanks, thanks.

 

The armoured cars were okay.


Edited by Bulldog_Drummond, 30 April 2018 - 09:12 PM.


CamperKaempfer #13 Posted 30 April 2018 - 09:21 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23435 battles
  • 369
  • Member since:
    01-10-2017

View PostBulldog_Drummond, on 30 April 2018 - 09:11 PM, said:

 

As a tank buff, I'm familiar with real life and putative WW2 Italian tanks, thanks.

 

The armoured cars were okay.

 

all i said is: if you're really so interested about what wargaming is doing, then look it up. if you already know then there's nothing to wonder about.

yeah they were okay, although they couldn't escape the armour problem i menitoned

 

View PostBulldog_Drummond, on 30 April 2018 - 09:08 PM, said:

 

That worked out well.

 

really? i read it couldn't keep up with their cavalry and was taken back to italy for public demonstrations. but if you're talking about the tankettes then i'll believe you
 

Bulldog_Drummond #14 Posted 30 April 2018 - 09:31 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 30317 battles
  • 9,786
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View PostCamperKaempfer, on 30 April 2018 - 08:24 PM, said:

 

really? i read it couldn't keep up with their cavalry and was taken back to italy for public demonstrations. but if you're talking about the tankettes then i'll believe you

 

As I say, the Italian WW2 tank effort was risible.

 

British WW2 tanks were also mostly rather poor but not to such an ineffably ludicrous and exiguous extent as the Italian efforts where the metal used might have been more profitably used on making tin helmets for the infantry.

 

Japanese WW2 tanks were also on paper pretty useless but adequate for jungles and islands.



CamperKaempfer #15 Posted 30 April 2018 - 09:45 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23435 battles
  • 369
  • Member since:
    01-10-2017

View PostBulldog_Drummond, on 30 April 2018 - 09:31 PM, said:

 

As I say, the Italian WW2 tank effort was risible.

 

British WW2 tanks were also mostly rather poor but not to such an ineffably ludicrous and exiguous extent as the Italian efforts where the metal used might have been more profitably used on making tin helmets for the infantry.

 

Japanese WW2 tanks were also on paper pretty useless but adequate for jungles and islands.

 

you're confusing. you don't seem to give pertinent replies to the corresponding posts

Bulldog_Drummond #16 Posted 30 April 2018 - 10:08 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 30317 battles
  • 9,786
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View PostCamperKaempfer, on 30 April 2018 - 08:45 PM, said:

 

you're confusing. you don't seem to give pertinent replies to the corresponding posts

 

In his countenance this person read an expression of no-encouragement towards his venture.

Nishi_Kinuyo #17 Posted 30 April 2018 - 10:15 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 7859 battles
  • 4,521
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View PostCamperKaempfer, on 30 April 2018 - 09:45 PM, said:

 

you're confusing. you don't seem to give pertinent replies to the corresponding posts

Don't mind that, he's probably drunk on whiskey again. :trollface:

 

Still though, I don't see the actual point of adding those two LTs to the game.

Neither the armour, nor the speed, nor the armament are things to write home about.

And they're screwed as well compared to any competition by being casemate.

Those things combined would suggest to me that they'd be tier 1 material; tier 2 if you want to stretch it.



Bulldog_Drummond #18 Posted 30 April 2018 - 10:20 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 30317 battles
  • 9,786
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    08-10-2014

View PostNishi_Kinuyo, on 30 April 2018 - 09:15 PM, said:

Don't mind that, he's probably drunk on whiskey again. :trollface:

 

Still though, I don't see the actual point of adding those two LTs to the game.

Neither the armour, nor the speed, nor the armament are things to write home about.

And they're screwed as well compared to any competition by being casemate.

Those things combined would suggest to me that they'd be tier 1 material; tier 2 if you want to stretch it.

 

On the contrary I am sober as a lord, I mean drunk as a judge.  Well, I dare say you know what I mean.  In another thread we are encouraged to become excited about a Romanian tank thread.

 

Only one song seems appropriate to such ideas...

 



CamperKaempfer #19 Posted 01 May 2018 - 10:56 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23435 battles
  • 369
  • Member since:
    01-10-2017

View PostNishi_Kinuyo, on 30 April 2018 - 10:15 PM, said:

Don't mind that, he's probably drunk on whiskey again. :trollface:

 

Still though, I don't see the actual point of adding those two LTs to the game.

Neither the armour, nor the speed, nor the armament are things to write home about.

And they're screwed as well compared to any competition by being casemate.

Those things combined would suggest to me that they'd be tier 1 material; tier 2 if you want to stretch it.

 

drunk again, or still drunk. it had only been a day since my previous post. if bulldog drummond is reading this, please don't get mad. i'm just kidding around.

well, there isn't much of a purpose i must admit.

beside introducing those tanks just for the sake of having them, they're also supposed to complement my italian regular light line

in my previous post i proposed a continuation of the italian light line and in the second one of my proposals i left a gap at tier 3 which i planned to fill with a turretless light, and since we'd have a turretless light i though we might also have a mini line of them to serve as a bridge between tanks and TD's.

 

about the tiers they'd fill, apparently we disagree. now, don't get me wrong. i'm fully aware that historically speaking those things were very bad and might even look out of place beyond tier 2, but i also think the smallest tank in the game with a specific power of 33hp/t and powerful autocannons with high burst damage could be a tier 3 or 4 (in my post about tank destroyers i'll make tables with all the stats in detail).it would in fact be similar to the elc. both have almost no armour (although the elc can ricochet whereas the l3 will be overmatched by everything), powerful guns (the l3 would have high burst damage instead of high alpha, but the gun would aim faster) and are very fast. of course this is the way i imagined it. many aspects are arbitrary and only very loosely based on realism (like soft stats and track traverse).

 

there's a hungarian modification of the l3 with a cupola. it could be used as a model to justify giving it reasonable view range.

 

it's not like i'm trying to convince you. i know it's a wacky idea but hey, a man can dream!


Edited by CamperKaempfer, 01 May 2018 - 10:57 AM.


trrprrprr #20 Posted 01 May 2018 - 12:02 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 1726 battles
  • 583
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011
Whats next? Gunless heavy armored ramtank?  Max speed 120km/h, frontal armor 500 and main purpose of it, clear roads...but in war where used to kamikaze other tanks to death!





Also tagged with Italian, Italy, light tanks

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users