Comments by "Kameraden" (@Alte.Kameraden) on "MAUS! Was Hitler right to build the super-heavy tanks of WW2?" video.

  1. Honestly it makes sense militarily going from having universal tanks to specialized tanks, vice versa. For example, the British didn't have a lot of success because of combined arms warfare didn't allow the break through tank to work properly, it would just get destroyed. The Germans had great success with their Panzer III and IV tanks, but as the war went on that success faded, combined arms concept collapsed because of material shortages, no more stukas raining from the sky and artillery and armor always being available. Of course this would logically come out in the eyes of someone who isn't always on the front as "Well our old way didn't work, we gotta do something different." Being the Tiger tank was very successful at the break through role, it's kinda obvious why they kept going down that path, after blitzkrieg had already crumbled, and became ineffective on the German end. Without combined arms to back up the tank, the tank itself needs to be strong enough to do the job almost on it's own. So the Germans started getting ridiculous, to make up for the fact they couldn't have the Stuka rescue them anymore. Honestly, if you view it that way the heavy tank obsession starts to make some sense.
    5
  2. In defense of the Soviets, I often call the Kv-1 the Tiger Tank of 1939/40/41. For obvious reasons.
    1