Anlushac11M3 Grant, Matilda II,and Churchill were all lend lease tanks that fought at Kursk with the Russians and never fails someone complains about British tanks being on a Russian map, saying their should only be Russian vehicles. The point was its historical fact. they were there.
I wasn't disputing the historical part, just wondered which maps. I've only played Kursk a few times, but never seen any Brit tanks. I may have just missed them though. Actually, from what I've read, Real Russians complained about Allied tanks on Russian maps :D They used them, and were glad to get them, but didn't like them, except for one (I think Stuart, but not sure)
Anlushac11 If you want a pure Russian APC since most Russian fans seem offended to have to use lend lease equipment the closest thing was the Russians used stripped down and gutted BA-10 and BA-32 Armored cars. Also I have seen pics of BA-64's used as APC's.
I don't know that that was true everywhere in the red army. I read "Behind Hitler's Lines" by Thomas Taylor (son of Gen Maxwell Taylor). It is the story of 101st Abn Div Paratrooper Joseph Beyrle, he was the only American soldier to fight on the western and eastern fronts in WWII. He was captured D night and ended up in several POW camps, the last one in Poland in late 44. He escaped, ran east, and linked up with a Russian Armored Bn and volunteered to fight with them. The Bn was equiped with Sherman tanks, Studebaker 2 1/2 ton trucks, American halftracks, and some Thompson SMGs. He said the russians regularly toasted with vodka to the USA, Detroit Michigan, Studebaker, the Lend-Lease act, and FDR. He was assigned as a rifleman, and asked to have a Thompson and they could find no Russian willing to give one up because they were prized possesions, so he was given a PPSh-41. It seems they loved US equipment. I used to think the same as you, but this book changed my perspective. If anyone is interested in reading it I highly recommend it, it will give you a whole new insight to the eastern front.
Usually all tanks in a battalion were the same type).. Imagine a unit composed of a wierd mix of T34, BT7, M4, M3, Valantines and, just for the kick of it, a Matilda II. There would be quite a few logistic problems with spare parts, ammunitions, quantity of fuel, speed of the unit and even worst is that all those tanks are not used in the same way. The unit this guy saw was most probably a lend lease equiped one (the tompson were included with the tanks, and they were VERY rare (so everybody wanted them)). As for the truck, they were quite common i think, as it was one of the most usefull things the US sent. And we don't want an all american soviet army because we dont want to return to vanilla and, most of all, we want diversity. If i want a Sherman (i never wanted one anyway) i will play on western front map.
the last thing i want is the sherman to get raped on two fronts. at least its kinda balanced where it sucks on one front and pwns on the other.
the sherman blows and thats that well exepect the sherman 105mm
um, forgetting the only real good sherman, the M4A4 Firefly? Mmmm, 17 pounder... the 105 is really more like a brumbar in that its nothin more than a HMC with armor
Komrad_B And we don't want an all american soviet army because we dont want to return to vanilla and, most of all, we want diversity. If i want a Sherman (i never wanted one anyway) i will play on western front map.
Nobody suggested FH make a American equipped Soviet Army.
But if a certain battle calls for a Russian Sherman should FH forgo historical accuracy because you dont want to use American equipment?