Matilda on Tobruk... -1 reply

  • 1
  • 2

Please wait...

Solo4114

Scoundrel Extraordinaire

50 XP

16th September 2002

0 Uploads

1,460 Posts

0 Threads

#1 10 years ago

The Matilda sounds like it's perfectly balanced and accurate historically, from what I'm hearing. I haven't had a chance to drive one yet, but they sound fine.

The main advantage the Matilda has is excellent armor.

It's main disadvantage -- which is significant in the desert -- is its lack of speed. The Matilda is an infantry tank, meaning it's supposed to support an infantry attack on a position and move WITH the infantry. This means it's moving at not a whole hell of a lot faster than guys on foot.

I think the gun is a wash, really. The 2lber is decent against other German tanks of the time, but only decent. It's not like, say, the long 75mm the Germans have or the 6lber the Crusader 3 has, or even the Sherman/Grant 75mm guns. But it gets the job done after several hits on an enemy target.

Ultimately, I think the big thing that balances the Matilda is its so-so gun and -- more importantly -- its lack of speed. Sure you can load up an infantry squad on the thing, but they'd better get comfy because they're in for a long, slow ride. So, actually getting the Matilda to a place where it can take a flag is going to be difficult. As a defensive weapon, again, it's so-so. It can take a beating, but it lacks HE and the 2lber is merely adequate.




LIGHTNING [NL]

FH2 Developer

50 XP

30th May 2003

0 Uploads

9,811 Posts

0 Threads

#2 10 years ago
'[SYN Ace;4112081']There were only a few Flak eighteens for use in Spain. Even in France the 88 wasn't a dedicated anti-tank gun and was pressed into service when the French and Brits counter-attacked because the lighter anti-tank guns couldn't handle the Char B and Matilda IIs. It was in Africa and the USSR that it started to become more prevalent as an anti-tank weapon.

Even then it had been used as an anti-tank weapon from the very start of the African campaign. That the Germans started using them as anti-tank weapons since El Alamein is pure fantasy. ;)




wjlaslo

I've defected to the Pies

50 XP

13th August 2004

0 Uploads

2,762 Posts

0 Threads

#3 10 years ago
MonkeySoldier;4110975Luckily the Matilda is ''just'' armed with a 2 pounder...As one ww2 tank commander said: ''I fired 40mm round, and the shell just felt in the sand after 450 meters.'' That probaly says enough ^^. Oh, and why aren't there any Churchills? Or didn't they existed around these battles?

They did. It was just decided that after two years of whiners going after the devs, enough extremely high quality content was enough for waiting for such a short time.




[SYN] Ace

Dread thinks I'm a special person

50 XP

7th October 2003

0 Uploads

313 Posts

0 Threads

#4 10 years ago
'LIGHTNING [NL;4113013']Even then it had been used as an anti-tank weapon from the very start of the African campaign. That the Germans started using them as anti-tank weapons since El Alamein is pure fantasy. ;)

I'm not saying they weren't used early on -- they were used in Spain and France and North Africa. I'm saying that the numbers they were used in this capacity wasn't great at first and only increased later. Even by 1944, if IIRC, some 9,000-10,000 88s existed , but the vast majority were still being used in their original AA role because of the U.S. and British strategic bombing, even though there were many voicing their complaints that they weren't particularly effective in this role and should be shifted to anti-tank duties. But Hitler was having none of that because he took the bombing of Germany as a personal affront and the Third Reich had to be protected.




Komrad_B

Score Monkey

45,850 XP

2nd September 2004

0 Uploads

4,500 Posts

0 Threads

#5 10 years ago
Solo4114;4113000 I think the gun is a wash, really. The 2lber is decent against other German tanks of the time, but only decent. It's not like, say, the long 75mm the Germans have or the 6lber the Crusader 3 has, or even the Sherman/Grant 75mm guns. But it gets the job done after several hits on an enemy target.

I wouldn't say it gets the job done actually. My experience with the Matilda is that I would never even get hurt, but wouldn't kill anything because after the 5th shot the Panzer would simply drive back behind a dune or get killed by something else. On Aberdeen I met half a dozen Panzer III and IV on a field and they were all shooting at me. I only lost a small percentage of my health and drove them off repeatedly, but I only "killed" one, with another one being finished off by some Valentine that was passing by. Very frustrating.




Damn Dirty Ape

Frisians>dutch

50 XP

23rd November 2005

0 Uploads

33 Posts

0 Threads

#6 10 years ago
I wouldn't say it gets the job done actually. My experience with the Matilda is that I would never even get hurt, but wouldn't kill anything because after the 5th shot the Panzer would simply drive back behind a dune or get killed by something else. On Aberdeen I met half a dozen Panzer III and IV on a field and they were all shooting at me. I only lost a small percentage of my health and drove them off repeatedly, but I only "killed" one, with another one being finished off by some Valentine that was passing by. Very frustrating.

Where were you hitting them? I've taken out a ton of PzIII's with the matilda, usually takes about 3 shots sometimes 4 or 5 if I miss or hit the front to kill one. Just try hitting anything but the enemy frontal armour while keeping your front to the enemy and you're good to go.




McGibs

FHdev

50 XP

3rd October 2003

0 Uploads

4,064 Posts

0 Threads

#7 10 years ago

I can only ever kill the idiot tankers with a matilda or val. Because theyre so slow and huge, they cant really maneuver to flank enemy tanks, so any tank vs tank combat is usually head-on slugfests, which infantry tanks win hands down.

Hope that youre fighting a moron who thinks he can win head on, and just lets you hit him 4 or 5 times till hes dead (and youve taken no damage). I killed at least 6 or 7 panzer3/4s on sidi with a valentine because they just sat there and let me shoot them in the face.

Smart tankers just run away and let something bigger, and preferably airborne try to deal with you.

Theyre really more "area denial" tanks.




evilmedic

Slightly cooler than a n00b

50 XP

14th December 2004

0 Uploads

31 Posts

0 Threads

#8 10 years ago

The matilda is very well armored and is the only allied vehicle that can resist a frontal shot from the 75mm L43 gun found on the Panzer 4 IVF2 or the Marder. That thing has 78mm of armor on all for sides.. The frontal armor is heavily sloped too.... So don't bother shooting the front of it with anything other than a 88mm.......The only thing which holds the matilda back is the 2 pdr pop gun.. Which is really only marginal against the Panzer III and Panzer IVs.




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#9 10 years ago

Yea he has 78mm on all sides but he hasnt no real armor on the roof or the floor. An infantery man should kill him with a mine or explosives. I throwed yesterday a 3kg charge on his engine deck (20mm 90°) and he has taken no damage, this isnt realistic.




N24Reporter

Betatesting FH2 is fun

50 XP

24th October 2006

0 Uploads

981 Posts

0 Threads

#10 10 years ago

Throwing a 3kg explosive pack ON a tank won't do shit in real life. You have to throw it under the tank to damage the tank badly, or stick it into vulnerable parts. Ontop the charge just blows up like a firecracker on a table and will only scorch the paint. :)




  • 1
  • 2