Terror Online, Failure in Reality | Entwicklungsfahrzeug 25 (E 25) 

It was the introduction of too many OP paper tanks that contributed to my stopping playing WoT. Real tanks with proven real world capabilities being outmatched by projects that were abandoned because of their impracticality ? No thanks.

Oh dont get wot players started...(i took up airsoft at 45 rather than continue handing wg money) Tekno NZAD Asia server. Officer commanding

@@Kevin-mx1vi IS-7,IS-4,S.Conqueror(it is just Conqueror with an additional face plate and some minor buff), Maus, Obj 268,... are all power crept by blue-print vehicles that never go into the mock-up stage, not even the prototype

I mean I quit WoT literally years ago, as in before wheeled vehicle shit was a thing. I LOVED my E-25. it was awesome. Is it awesome now, no fucking idea. but given the ridiculousness WoT has introduced since... I am willing to be its been kinda power creeped..... I am willing to bet the E25 these days is simply a kinda rare tank, that is utterly outmatched by the meta... But then you actually had to work to USE that thing properly. Yes, it had an insane camo rating, but its view range was not very good, least not from my memory.... but then I have not played world of shit for 5 or 6 years now...... SO I might be wrong....

@@alganhar1I played a little bit last year and it still does well in its tier, but the jank camo/spotting mechanics have been completely wrecked by new matchmaking and new tier VIII lights and there are so many new VIII premiums that dominate. I spent actual money on the E25 and the JT88 way back when, so it sucks that both are no longer that good. Especially the JT88 where most new VIII mediums don't even need to aim for weak spots in the front

😂😂😂😂

Xkcd!

The KanJPz was a successor to the Jagdpanzer 4, with lessons learned from the Jagdpanther. Closer to a Jagdpanzer version of the E50 concept. The E25 was supposed to be a direct replacement for the Jagdpanzer 38t (AKA the hetzer) but with streamlining for mass production.

You're almost on the right track there. Many of the people and companies responsible for the Kanonenjagdpanzer were also responsible for the Jadgpanzer IV.

@@Kieselmeister The E25 was not a replacement for the Jagdpanzer 38t, its was a replacement for the vehicles that fit around the 25 ton category (Panzer III & Panzer IV as well as their variants) hence why it was called the E25. It was the E10 that was going to fill the role of the tanks around 10 tons and so would of included the 15 ton Jagdpanzer 38t and late variants of the Panzer II The comparison of the KanJPz and the E25 is apt, as the former was about 27.5 tons, and so in the E25's weight class This whole incorrect idea that the E25 was supposed to replace the Jagdpanzer 38t, seems to be a product of WOT. The ingame model is unrealistically small. Its ingame weight is 1.5 tons more than an ingame Jadpanzer IV despite being smaller in length, height, width and even having less armor. Combine this with the E10 being the only one of the E series that isnt in WOT, and the E25's uncannily similar appearance to the Hetzer and its easy to see why this myth has come to be

​@@wolfehoffmann2697Those were good people 😹

I believe it is based in the HWK11 hull, which was jointly developed by West Germany and Mexico.

The crew would have been very young or without legs had the war lasted much longer.

Meanwhile russian tanks:

A full loadout of gold grounds the fun was golden. Never made money on it. WoT was and is still redicoulus, which is why I quit two years ago. Pay to win. Not a fred game. Removing both friendly fire and artillery broke the game. What a bunch of stupid developers.

Great ambitions, insane political leadership

聽起來好像很混亂，但是完成了所有的設計需求，減少了大量的零配件生產的複雜度與通用性，也不是同時所有工廠都要馬上停產去轉換 甚至部分來說，只是要生產一種"新的部件" 而不是7、8種的零件 我不太確定物流方面倒底有多少問題

They expected to have Egypt and Crimea in 42 with new factories

No way, the hull is way too small and the engine way too weak.

please stop thinking ❤

dont

Honestly, would be hilarious, an e25 looking thing with a vk30.02m looking turret with a low cupola is funny to think about

​@@hondafknciviv3818yea lol

I wanna see the E10. An even smaller boi.

They tried. But germans are to lousy as engineers and to stupid in general to pull it of

That'd just be French. xD

@@KipMagnusJansson thank you! I hope the tank encyclopedia makes the whole series

You are comparing apples to peaches. E-25 would have been a 1945/46 development while Pz IVH (J was a later but worse version) was essentially a 1930s design. 50mm sloped at 50° comes pretty close to 80mm effective armor. The old MAYBACH in Pz IV also dates back to the 30s. There were engine developments, supposedly diesels, for the E-series with up to 1000 (?) HP for the big boys, i.e. E-50 and E-75. If it was to have that kind of mobility, the E-25 would have needed a 500 HP engine at least. It's all theory anyway. However, how all that would have come to play, considering the fuel situation you've mentioned, is questionable at least. The whole thing is so Sci-fi, it wouldn't be misplaced in "The Man in the High Castle". They would have needed the E-series to travel back in time to stop the Allies from overrunning Germany to be able to produce the things in the first place ...

Well, just because a vehicle can move faster doesn't mean it will do so all the time. The battlefield would have remained a warzone with all the constraints that imposes and I suspect the E25 would have simply had a bit more pep to get over hills or make quick dashes when flanking, retreating or moving to otherwise favourable positions. Back then, most fuel was consumed when travelling to the front or whilst idle and neither requires maximum acceleration or speed. Plus, it was supposed to be light and this would further improve its fuel economy (in theoy). r

@@aymonfoxc1442 Absolutely. Top speed is only important for quick deployment. On a battlefield, acceleration is way more important. You won't go 60 km/h off-road anyway in a WW2 tank. Way too much attrition for any component of the suspension. And the Germans (and British !) tankers didn't wear head protection or helmets, which makes an off-road trip so much more enjoyable ...

There's some reasons it was never built, and those make it a failure.

Not very likely

It would have lasted for a few more months at most. You think tanks were why Germany lost the war?

Yeah it would have ended with the A Bomb being dropped on Berlin

At that point in time artillery and aircraft weren't that effective against tanks

@@thelordofcringe dude plays too much war thunder

​@@thelordofcringe Aircraft and artillery was effective against lightly armored vehicles and open tops. But weren't so effective against closed tops. However i'm running of memory here so if you got a source please share :) And sorry about the hostility

Definitely not, but a jadgpanzer IV without it's skirt armor would look very similar at a quick glance, as the E25 is very very often depicted without skirt armor.

@@wolfehoffmann2697 go watch it has the interlocking wheels like the e25 and the 2 exhaust on the rear of the tank go look for yourself

Because it is. The talk of the 2cm gun was about the strange depictions with a Panzer II turret mounted on the roof.

​@@wolfehoffmann2697 Video said it was a 2cm. 11:26

That's what all tank destroyers generally were supposed to be. SUPPOSED is the key word here. And the Germans came up with the idea first. The US Army "coincidentally" came to the same conclusion. Even TD doctrine was as close as it can get, only differing in the actual unit size desired to engage the enemy. Edit: We always forget the Russians; their "AT-gun fronts" weren't that mobile compared to SPGs, but they reflect the same doctrine.

They tried. But being germans they where to stupid and lousy as engineers to get it right. So instead of a universal replacement for P3 and 4 they endet with trash that destroyed the final drives after less than 200km and tended to catch fire for no reason

​@@mbr5742ah, the classic "they were stupid because it had flaws" argument. Alright fancy pants, take the chair of the armaments minister. Let's say that instead of 2 panthers they made 3 or 4 lighter and simpler panzer IV'mk2. They were out of oil reserves in late 1941, not enough fuel for normal operations so how would they fuel even more tanks? Where would they get additional rare metals, rubber and other materials to produce additional tanks? Everyone knows that Germany lacked manpower, especially trained crews/pilots, jagdtigers were being abandoned because the crews were spooked by a handful of shermans, they would have had to resort stuffing children into "reliable" tanks with no fuel, swarmed by aircraft, pounded by artillery and swarmed by infantry. 80 years some guy on the internet would say "ah, stupid germans made a million of small shitty tanks, they should have built like 10 really big ones" German engineers and industry made the best of the situation they were in. So did Soviet and American ones. The war was impossible to win. But please, share your thoughts how those imbeciles could have done better

The German economy was 75% committed to rearming throughout the 1930s. The fact they had ten years preparing for their next war while the rest of the world was trying to recover from the last says a lot about how poor their design and engineering actually was.

Wrong. Gun & armor mean jackshit when there's only room in the turret for just the commander and gunner with no turret bustle or dedicated platoon communications. That was the French tanks. Big armored tank hulls with tiny turrets and zero fighting compartment ergonomics, not even pre-planned room for expansion. The German PZ 3' and 4's in contrast, featured all those forward thinking solutions in their turret designs from the getgo ; so that they actually had a proper system of target finding, communication and thus increased odds of hitting said target. Also, in real combat, it often suffices to incapacitate a tank, rather than a full armor penetration. So the French ies' inability to properly coordinate, also couldnt coordinate salvage of their tanks that got left behind.

Literally the only success the French and Soviet tanks had at the start of the war was when they were immobilised and acted as pillboxes. Everyone has heard about the "invincible" KV1 and B1 that supposedly fought off entire German armored divisions solo. But once you sit back and start thinking, you realise that these two cases were the ONLY ones that are famous, because these 2 vehicles were terrible tanks, that were better off being used as a pillbox. So suddenly it's not a B1 or KV1 tank holding off the Germans, it's just a pillbox with an AT gun. Much less impressive.

@@johnhighway7399 hardly, they failed due to being poorly supported among many other factors. As a tank, they were much better than early model Pz2/3/4s and early STuGs

​@@ivanivanovitchivanovsky7123French tanks weren't better than German tanks of the time. I don't count PS2, it's only a light tank. But as of Pz3 and 4 as well as the Czech Pz35 and 38, these were much more effective because of their ergonomics. The afrench tanks had better protection and that's about it. Having 1 man turrets with a combined commander, gunner, loader who also has to sit practically outside to have at least a bit of a combat overview just makes a tank almost useless. Well and the French tactics didn't help either.

@@wanderschlosser1857 better armoured and gunned = generally better tank. If you can’t get penned by most of the enemy’s armoured vehicles, it doesn’t really matter if you’re a bit slower in fire rate.

Somua is a post war design

@@Litium_Greinder Somua S35 was built from 1936 to 1940

Better armored and had a better gun. But the weakness was a one man turret.

Three man turrets and radios had far more of an impact during the German invasion of France than armor thickness and gun caliber

@@atanasijesimic4651 fair. but in a 1v1 Somua DID have an advantage the fact is that the Germans had the tactical and strategical superiority

Egirls:🤢 E TANKS:😎

It’s worth noting that the E-25’s on the move camo rating with the penalty was a match for or even better than many light tanks that have a class bonus for on the move camo. Once it sat still long enough, it far exceeded all but a handful of exceptionally stealthy light tanks for camo rating. Combined with a functional for its tier spotting distance of 360m for its day of introduction, this would be grandfathered due to its status as a premium vehicle when TD view ranges were significantly nerfed. Combined with its significant mobility stats, it is actually perfectly viable to give your E-25 a passive scouting build to swap to either in matches where neither side is given light tanks at all, or in matches where the opposing light tank is at a significant mobility disadvantage. I have felt especially dirty in No-LT matches running this as a passive scout on a hood scouting map, in some cases getting an ace tanker badge in it without ever firing a shot. One of my dirtiest moments was sneaking into an inconspicuous random bush near my own base when the enemy was preparing to go for my cap. Just out their in the open near the cap edge as friendly Arty tried in vain to evacuate. Enemy team killed the Arty, but pulled up to the edge of the berm to try to poke out shots at my team defending the cap. The problem was… their sixth sense wasn’t going off anymore. They couldn’t estimate where my teammates were really poking out over the ridge line for a shot, couldn’t tell if or where they were repositioning for their next shot. Nothing. One went as far as claim they were hacking in the all chat. Nope, they just had an E-25 in a camo net about 70m away from them laughing himself silly. If that Arty hadn’t been there, they may have realized that something was in that bush. I only open fired when it was the last tank left. Dirtiest thing I ever did in WOT… and I was an Arty Main who gold spammed in the M44 back in the day.

@@Zeknif1 I know right the feeling of being invisible is hilarious

It also gets obsolete more slowly.A pak 40 on threads would still be usable in 1945,50mm of armor was papier mache in 1942.

@@naamadossantossilva4736 You mean, a big enough gun never goes out of style?

@@nowthenzen Yep! Hence the trend of post-war designs to go more towards mobility and firepower than firepower and armor, as armor became very quickly useless against new munitions that hit the scene in the 50s - this fact didn't really change until ERA and composite armor came about much later.

@@nowthenzen Also, from most accounts, whoever saw first, shot first, wins first. It is really hard to respond to an enemy tank when your hull is ringing like a bell, even if it didn't penetrate. A burst of machine gun fire sparking across your vision ports is going to make it really hard to aim accurately.

there was slightly more than that, but yes generally speaking the e50 was going to be the base tank of the german army, and the e75 and e100 would be breakthrough tanks, with the e10 and e25 was scout and rear guard units respectfully. also to add the whole project was to just consolidate all of the tanks to use as many components as each other, that way you dont need 50 factories to produce 50 different parts for 50 different tanks.

@@Thekilleroftanks "50 factories to produce 50 different parts for 50 different tanks" German engineering at its finest :v

@@vunguyenxuanhoang7422 it doesnt help they keep finding problems and fixing them, and creating a new sub division of said tank. however the germans got nothing on japanese airplanes, you can legitimate have 20 different aircraft all under a6m3, solely because a wing spar was changed differently. and they had a system to show what was a major change, a minor change and a engine change. FOR THEIR AIRCRAFT DESIGNATION SYSTEM

​​@@Thekilleroftanksexcept that's the myth I talked about. E-100 predates E series development by about a year as it's continuation of Tiger-Maus project and it was shut down before Maus. And as stated, E-50 and E-75 development limited itself to developing component base that would fit dimensions of existing Panther and Tiger B, allowing their standardisation on shared components. E-50 wouldn't have been nothing beyond Panther G with fixed reliability issues. WoT popularized the myth that is taking a suggestion of one of the designers to the extreme, however that was only a suggestion and actual work wasn't done in that direction. E-10 and E-25 are even weirder case.

More like the Kanonenjagdpanzer built after the war in Germany. In concept, appearance and function. The Strv103 is a completely different approach.

Ah, a compatriot in arms. M18 Hellcat driver here.

@@HerrZenki Greetings.👋 When engaging an E 25 from the front, the left side of their lower front plate from your point of view is one of their ammunition racks. It might tank some practice to hit, but once one starts to figure out its exact position, they can learn to kill their DPM or at least reduce it a noticable about.👌

@@larry-three8225 excellent insights. Happy as a turtle in mud

@@HerrZenki Sweet. ':^)🐢

I found that the Bassoto with the derp gun is quite effective at eliminating an e25. Put in a gun rammer and pop out 2 450dmg shells in 5.5 seconds. They don't expect it, so each time they've basically sat in front of me and eat the first shell. Probably thinking that they will kill me before I reload. They don't, and another cockroach is dead. But general rule of thumb with an e25.... Avoid them.

It was contemporary and it was of German origin (enough for Guderian to write a memo to Hitler about it). You can check our website article about the Jagdpanzer 38t and find multiple German original documents using the designation. What it never was though is official.

is7 wasnt really a failure. it was an amazing tank that was way ahead of its time but it was hard to transport and the t54 was just so much cheaper to build. it just didnt fight the soviet doctorine

@allorfh2495 is the cybertruck the world's most amazing automobile? It depends on if you base that assumption on the sales brochure or what they could have actually built at the time. What we do know is: "it's the world's best tank! No really guys! Trust us! No you can't see anything more than those 2-3 pictures from kublinka from 15years ago", that it wasn't accepted into service, and 6 of the 7 prototypes didn't survive testing (mostly, as I can find, due to automotive failures and in one case the fuel catching fire and the automatic extinguishers failing). If it was a cost thing, they would have canceled the IS3 as well, it continues to boogle my mind that they didn't scrap those after noone wanted to buy them instead of making the 3M

I used to feel that way about the T-57.

And the EBR 🤠 With wheels better armoured than any tank, and auto aim better than any human 😱

Then go on😜

They address the front heavy nature in this video