Which country had the shittest tanks?
>>3389668
New Zealand.
Someone's gonna post it in a little bit.
>>3389776
needz more dakka
>>3389776
looks like something from a cartoon
>>3389668
Who cares, tanks were only relevant for 1.5 wars.
>>3389668
Of the major powers its easily Italy hands down, arguably Japan as well but they didn't really have that much of a need for them and they did produce some decent tanks despite that.
The British did produce a number of good tanks, they're mostly decried as shit because they're often compared to later German designs and their flaws are often exaggerated.
>>3389776
>Guns in every direction
HOW DO YOU EVEN ATTACK THIS?
>>3389776
>runs at tracter speeds
>weighs 25 tons
>made out of iron in a tractor factory
>>3389776
Improvised tanks are the shit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2FPtd0eR_o
I'd call it a tie between Japan and Italy.
>>3391034
>Mamma mia Luigi, the pizza is-a for-a eating, not-a putting on a tank-a!
>>3389776
>we don't have the industry or expertise to make a tank
>don't worry about it, how bad can it be
>ohhh
>>3389668
Japan
>>3389776
A challenger appears.
>>3393282
desu the tank never got out of the prototype state
the only reason it ever got to that stage is because the Tsar was so impressed at a toy model of it going over a boot that he commissioned it.
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/tsar-tank/
>>3389776
>>3393279
Tanks happen to be extremely useful in jungles.
>>3389668
When, at what time period?
Looks like a chubby kid
>>3389776
given the resources and expertise available to New Zealand, it is comparatively better than most British tanks
>>3390725
British tanks were consistently mediocre or terrible throughout WW2, it wasn't just a feature of their end-of-war tanks being bad (in fact that is part of it, that the British were years late in their designs)
Anyone has the Yukari post defending Italian tanks?
>>3389668
>Every British tank since the centurion has been fitted with proper tea making facilities
>Implying any armoured vehicle capable of making a brew could be considered inherently bad
>>3389668
>t. WW2-and-thats's-about-it-historian
Mark IV battle tank was one of the best.
>>3393554
>British tanks were consistently mediocre or terrible throughout WW2
Is that why the Germans had nothing that could take out a interwar Matilda II? The main german anti-tank weapon, the 37mm gun, was nearly useless against it and they had to rely on 75mm anti-tank guns and the famous 88's.
>it wasn't just a feature of their end-of-war tanks being bad
Their end-of-war tanks were decent, they just came late. The Comet (barely saw action) with a modified 17pdr and the modified Sherman firefly with the 17 pdr were both tanks that could deal with pretty much anything on the battlefield. They also produced a number of Archer tank destroyers with the 17pdr gun.
>>3393279
Would have been useful in China probably
>>3395082
Well they did use them, the inherent problem is that any tank designed for Japan would be a "bad" tank because Japan didn't need high velocity guns or heavy armor to fight almost exclusively infantry, not to mention the state of infrastructure in China.
Pic related is the Type 3 "Chi-Nu". It never saw action as it was kept in Japan to be used against any allied invasion.
>>3389668
i would say Moldova
>>3389668
The countries which didn't have any
>>3389668
Japan, next primary school level question?