*Laugh*
The armor of 89. So weak that strong volleyball strike will pierce it and knock it out apparently.

Allied tank crews found that their .50 coaxial and hull guns could penetrate the armor of most Japanese tanks. I guess that makes a volleyball as deadly as the .50 MG.

It would be funny if there serve was also enough to take out the IS-2.

But yes, the Type 89 is usually considered crap by 1939.

It's so sad that they are given a tank that really can't withstand anything =,=.

For Pete's sake, somebody give them a Sherman or something! The bigger issue is that 89's gun is an absolute joke in an anti-tank role.

KJlost said:

For Pete's sake, somebody give them a Sherman or something! The bigger issue is that 89's gun is an absolute joke in an anti-tank role.

They served mostly as bait though. I think giving them a Sherman wouldn't give them any more value as bait. Actually, the Type 89 is the most suited one.

KJlost said:

For Pete's sake, somebody give them a Sherman or something! The bigger issue is that 89's gun is an absolute joke in an anti-tank role.

Plus there's the fact Shinobu drives on PURE GUTS ALONE. Puts the tank at maximum ON-ROAD speed, while others have to slow down to OFF-ROAD speed.

KJlost said:

For Pete's sake, somebody give them a Sherman or something! The bigger issue is that 89's gun is an absolute joke in an anti-tank role.

The gun on the Type-89 wasn't intended for fighting other tanks, it was intended for destroying bunkers with its APHE shells. At the time they were fighting the Chinese armed forces who had very few tanks so they only needed to be resistant to the light machine guns the Chinese were using. They were also envisioned for use on the many hilly jungle islands of the Pacific where being heavily armoured would be counterproductive and mobility and anti-infantry capability was far more important.

sporked said:

The gun on the Type-89 wasn't intended for fighting other tanks, it was intended for destroying bunkers with its APHE shells. At the time they were fighting the Chinese armed forces who had very few tanks so they only needed to be resistant to the light machine guns the Chinese were using. They were also envisioned for use on the many hilly jungle islands of the Pacific where being heavily armoured would be counterproductive and mobility and anti-infantry capability was far more important.

You are right about not designed for tank-to-tank combat. But it's more on infantries support than busting bunkers. Because the Chinese, ROCs wasn't even capable of constructing proper bunkers or pillboxes to begin with, as far as I know it. And their anti-tank capability was shit too, thanks to having almost no anti-tank rifle or gun, let alone tanks that can actually do something on Type 89. And as China was pretty much the only enemy they fought on land properly, they didn't feel the need to up-performance of their tanks.

Some please just give them an M5A1 Stuart