At least I can bring documentation to an argument rather then quickly google something.
Look at the Tiger II thread, you prove you will not admit you are wrong, you argue/troll without admitting you are in fact wrong, until you can say you are wrong - you are nothing more then a troll.
I shown time and time again, you show no proof what so ever - and still continue to argue when in fact the arguement was lost.
Lol, you're an idiot. You proved that
multiple 122mm hits at close-mid range could and did result in heavy spalling, and cracks on the welds. Then you some how interpreted it to mean that the A19 could knock out Tiger II's from the front in one hit with near 100% reliability, and that soivet gunners using inferior optics, firing weapons with inferior balistics, and worse reload time could out-shoot the best the Wermacht had left. Even if thats late 1944 best, which is to say slightly above average for a soviet gunner, the Tiger II holds all the cards at 2000m.
*Edit*
"at least"? Sounds like I was correct there