What was the best weapon of World War II?From my point of view it was "Panzerfaust" because you only needed 1 shoot to destroy any tank. Furthermore this weapon was extremely cheap and easy to use. I also consider the MG 42, the Flak 88 and the Stug III and IV but my favorite is the Panzerfaust.
While a neat advancement, the 30m range on Panzerfausts until late 44 was a major limitation to their potential to be decisive in the greater context of the war
>>65113027>>65113012
>>65113029And towards the end of the war Germans would ambush and surrender instantly afterwards
In field combat, an effective range of only a few tens of meters was far too short.The same would likely have been true for Panzerschreck and Bazooka, which were slightly better in terms of range and reload speed.Even the AT-3, which gained fame in the Yom Kippur War, cannot ignore the role and results of other heavy weapons that made up anti-tank complex positions.
>>65113036That's legitimately evilI would have hosed them down
Sten gunMG42realistically its probably some kind of mortar or artillery piece though.
>>65113103The Germ 8cm mortar was probably there most effective weapon, probably killed the most combatants in ww2 out of any single individual weapon.
>>65113089If logistics is so singularly important why did the USN convert so many fast oilers in to CVLs?Because you still need to kill people no matter how many field kitchens you have.
>>65113123>CVLs?CVEs
>>65113123What he meant to post was a pic of the Willow Run Ford plant, or a female assembly line worker (Rosie riveter).None of which are weapons - OP topic 'best weapon'
>>65113012The 42 is the only german weapon up for consideration, the rest were dead ends after the war, and the germans probably wouldnt have (poorly) copied the bazooka after adopting the Pfaust if it was doing a perfect job. The StuGs are easily the best german tanks all around but the Sherman, Chaffee, and T-34 all saw much more extensive postwar use, and cost their host nations less while being much more flexible and adaptable with turret swaps and engine refreshes. The thing about WW2 is that late war a couple american superweapons become such obvious answers that they have to be banned from discussion half the time. The B-29, the Hellcat, the, you know, atom bomb. Even if they weren’t nuclear, I’m pretty sure basically no country possessed air defenses capable of reliably countering high altitude B-29s supported by P-47s or other american high altitude endurance fighters.
>>65113012Probably some generic mass produced artillery piece the Soviets could deploy by the thousands desu
>>65113103>Sten gunI'm British and I'll be the first to say you're mad if you think that was a good weapon. Literally last measure used in desperate times type shit, the Stirling SMG and Grease Gun are far better
>>65113217It was cheap and it worked, whats the issue
>>65113012Least wehraboo post
>>65113239The Bob Semple was a cheap tank that worked
>>65113172>the rest were dead ends after the warBizarre postYeah no nation pursued further development of ballistic missiles after WW2
>>65113251I was only referring to the weapons listed in the OP. Obviously several other German designs received postwar development.
>>65113250the bob semple was a POS. The sten gun was not measurably worse than any other smg
>>65113217Seeing as youre British I’m going to assume that you haven’t actually fired one, I have a friend with one and it basically always works. Seeing as it basically always works, the fact that it is very cheap makes me feel that it’s a pretty good gun. Certainly, I would rather have a sterling or thompson or KP31 or whatever, but if i had to pick between a sten and a bolt action for clearing a room or using as a backup weapon when lugging a PIAT around theres zero question.
>Cheaply made>You die with the tank
>>65113283>The sten gun was not measurably worse than any other smgYeah you know a lot about the sten? Zero significant differences compared to other WW2 SMGs is your position?
Sten was a piece of SHIT for the individual user in reliability and build quality, but very cheap strategically
>>65113012The greatest battle implement ever devised.
T-34. The Germans had no counter to it, even late in the war.
>>65113363pretty sure they had about 10 counters for it.>>65113361semi auto rifles are nice and they gave american platoons more firepower but they were somewhat expensive and probably not as much of a difference maker as others.>>65113357>>65113352Luckily it was so cheap you could test fire one a bit and if it was poorly built throw it out and use one of the other 100 that came in the delivery.
>>65113363Shame it was never deployed!
>>65113320>You die with the tank>with the tankapparently they were of questionable effectiveness, in which case just "you die" would be more appropriate
>>65113394You jest, but only a very specific fraction of total T-34s match their on-paper specs.
>>65113012yeah i remember being a teenager and being a retarded wearaboo as well.German ww2 weapons are likely the most over hyped and overated shit even. For a nation that lost the war, its PR work is mega impressive.The best weapon of ww2 was the nuclear bomb and its not even close. Taking that out of the equation, probabaly the Metor , sherman/t-34, m1 grand or the mp44
I'd put my money on the STD-44.Did it change anything? No. Was it useful in the context of Germany? No. But it did show the world where firearms development was heading, and that was towards a mag of 30 and select fire. Similar to the V-2. Killed more of their own than enemies, but interesting and it too showed where things were heading, at some point in the future.
>>65113012>What was the best weapon of World War II?Seriously?
>>65113652Why is it shaped so blunt? It won't fly fast nor scare the enemy. Make it look sharper.
>>65113522As opposed to an unspecific fraction?
>>65113012If you look at it as infantry-portable, disposable anti-tank weapon, yeah it's pretty significant.Bazooka was there first, but the Panzerfaust escalated the warhead size so that it coud reliably threaten tanks.>>65113029It's not really about hard-kill capability, if you're in an environemnt where every single enemy soldier can have AT firepower with him, your tanks suddenly lose a lot of their mobility and freedom of action.
>>65113522Wrong T34, wise guy.>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T34_heavy_tank
>>65113217As a gun in and of itself, yeah it was pretty mediocre. But it allowed the British army to go from not having any SMGs, to having millions of them. Enough that they just just drop them all over Europe to arm resistance groups.
>>65113012IMO it's the Flak 88 for being so effective or the PPSh because it was so cheaply produced, honerable mention for the Mosquito.>>65113063Same and I'm sure plenty did, I will accept surrender but not while my buddy is still screaming from what you did.
>>65113537>For a nation that lost the war, its PR work is mega impressive.Most of the PR came from allied governments, they knew they had to rebuild Germany for the European economy and didn't want public pushback against helping them so ran a heap of pro-German propaganda.
>>65113172>Dead endsPlenty of German weapons continued in use post-WW2, sheer numbers is a huge reason for continued use of a lot of Shermans/T-34/Chaffee. PzIVs for example saw use in the Middle East extensively. 109s saw use by the Spanish, Czechs and Israelis into the late 50s. German aircraft cannon designs, particularly the MG-151 were extensively used post-war in Africa. The MP40 directly was replicated by several post-war SMGs (Zastava M56 being the most memorable to me).Furthermore the V1 was copied by the French, Russians and US in various guises. Meanwhile the V2 was directly copied by the French, Russians, British, Americans and Chinese.>>65113217It's called a Sterling and in the war it was a "Patchett" and was used in limited numbers. Also the Sten was good for what it was.
>>65114020Not to mention the ruhrstahl (among others) were tried and copied, proved a good idea but impractical implementation. Turns out you don't want to think too much about the hows and whys of fuel while in combat, you just want to concern yourself with launching it.
>>65113652>weapon that can never be used again
>>65113012The only wunderwaffe that actually worked
>>65113912>Most of the PR came from allied governments,yeah and no. Leting the german officers write their garbage memoirs.>yeah guys totaly 1 tiger tanks for 100 shermans, and the mg42 cutdown trees, the 262 downed bomber groups one handed
Easy. Proxy fuses. Later in the war U.S. artillery also had shells with proxy fuses
>>65114658That was a very good innovation
>>65115109Apparently you needed about ten percent of the shells otherwise for the desired effect.
>>65113012Unquestionably the ‘biggest’ innovations of the 2nd world war from a military technology perspective were atomic weapons and the modern aircraft carrier group. You could also maybe add RADAR, mechanical computers, and the proximity fuse to that list. Jet aircraft and the V2 are honorable mentions though those are mostly pure prototypes, and also the Superfortress for being the first military aircraft with a pressurized cabin (though this technology had been proven in the late 30’s). In terms of the ‘best’ weapon, that’s a contextual question. But FWIW I bet there’s some artillery piece or innovation I don’t know about that ranks #1 for battlefield kills. What’s my favorite? I really fuck with the Superfortress. Like god damn. 20,000 pounds of fuck you (thats pounds of bombs, mind you). It just mogs.
>>65115529>mechanical computersWhat about electronic computers?
>>65113012The US war board. imagine leveraging a country that just shook off a depression with a massive jobs program your future debtors are going to finance
>>65115529sexoooo
>>65113537I just want to heartily thank you for calling out OP on his wehraboo faggotry.
>>65113239It was extremely dangerous and prone to misfire
>>65113103>Sten lumped with MG42 for best weapon of WW2Is this based on how effective both were against allied troops?
>>65114020>German aircraft cannon designs, particularly the MG-151Also MG 213/30 that became Aden cannon. And 30×90mm ammo for Mk-108 and Mg-213 cannon. That was Predecessor of Aden cannon ammo and the M230 chain gun ammo of the AH-64 helicopter.
>>65116585That it was though I have heard that if you remove the select fire mechanism and make it full auto only then the Sten magically becomes perfectly reliable.
