World of Tanks – Derp

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (8,320 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

Close ×

Source: The

It's been a while since I featured any derp gun gameplay that isn't starring the KV-2. I think we can fix that.

All music licensed from and


If you have a World of Warships replay, consider using a hosting service like

Just be aware that I get hundreds of emails every week and I can't promise that I'll show what you send in.


  1. History plz jingles

  2. I can’t answer your question about the Sherman jumbo production, but I know someone who probably can…. this sounds like a job for the legendary chieftain

  3. I really enjoy your videos Jangles, but i do say, this is the most greediest and their most shit move ever. And i hate to say it, but i dont like it that you promote videos with their trash. Their action of removing the bl10 from my isu152 was a game breaker for me and for a lot of people.

    People should stop giving money to this shit capitalist company. Let me give you another name to highlight their greed and lack of respect to the community and their own promises: ARP Yamato.

    It’s sad they turned out like this.

  4. 4:18 someone please explain this, what crit was that? he didn’t fire HEAT, how can a 152mm ARMOR PIERCING shell get absorbed by like 160+ armor???? This shit shouldn’t happen… This game has some issues..

    • Says on the screen that it took the track off, so I guess it just hit the drive wheel.

    • @Matakshaman But you can see the shell hitting the back of the tank, not the drive wheel? Maybe I’m in the wrong still, I’ve had this happen to me too many times, where you hit and damage an ammorack but do no damage.. That shouldn’t be possible right?

      And sure maybe he did hit the tracks and/or drive wheel still a 152mm AP shell should go through

  5. typical wargaming op gun well if u want to pay for it np , a.k.a free to play but pay to win

    and that’s how i started to play everything else but games from wargaming after just under 4000 matches

  6. @jingles… that is a question for Mark Felton!!

  7. he US valued having more tanks over better ones. 49,234 Shermans were built, compared to a total of 16,392 Tiger Is, Tiger IIs, Panthers, and Panzer IVs. Also, half of that number is Panzer IVs, which Shermans could handle, and keep in mind that by D-Day, many of those German tanks had been destroyed in North Africa and on the Eastern Front. So in France and Germany, the US had 3-4x as many tanks as the Germans. German tanks were more heavily armed and armored, but this didn’t matter. Tanks vs. tank battles are and were rare. The truly important thing is having any tank at all to take ground and support infantry, and having more tanks allowed the Americans to provide more units with tank support. Furthermore, German tanks were mechanically complex, very heavy, and short on spare parts, so they broke down all the time. On the other hand, American tanks were extremely reliable and easier to fix. Lastly, in the event of a tank vs. tank battle, numbers are critical. Sure, a German Tiger was very powerful, but if you have 5 Shermans attacking it, they can hit the Tiger on its rear and side armor at close range. One Sherman can distract the Tiger while the others go around behind it. And in the worst-case scenario, you can just ignore the Tiger and drive off all of its supporting units, forcing it to fall back or else be destroyed by infantry with satchel charges. Or they could call in close air support to bomb the tank.

  8. If Belton Y Cooper is alive still you should ask him, He might know

  9. I think a part of the answer to why didn’t they build more jumbos is that the war ended. I also seem to remember from the chieftains video about said tank that it didn’t actually use the 105. It got the short 75. But it was still extremely popular, as you pointed out

  10. Jingles PLEASE NOTICE the criminal shit that war gaming console just did to world of tanks. Please.. its really something awful…

  11. If I remember from Nicholas Morran video, the E2 was to give US tankers a tougher tank until the Pershing, just like the Firefly was until Centurion, or the M3 Lee until they designed a 75mm turret. The E2 performed better than expected, but only barely. Added weight means more maintenance, more fuel consumption, more breakdown, etc. The M4 was reliable, but the E2 was the limit until reliability started dropping. And it was never fitted with the 76mm according to Morran, due to the added weight from the armor the 75mm was the biggest cannon it could carry before the suspension would be overloaded

  12. That Mr Jingles has a evil laugh, said my wife just now.

  13. “It turns out that overpowered guns are absolutely fine when you’re prepared to put your hand in your pocket and pay for them. They’re just… bad, if you can get them for free” – this is Soviet mentality in a nutshell.

  14. Because paper pushes rushed to replace the Sherman early.

  15. watching the second match I still don’t get why this game still has -2/+2 MM…especially at low tiers. 4s should never see 6

  16. The reason ISU-152K exists is exactly the reason I stopped playing WoT years ago

  17. This is nice but I need a Cyberpunk video today.

  18. 2 theories come to mind for how many jumbos were built, 1 because it was more expensive to make than a regular sherman and 2 people realized you can cannibalize tanks and add it to the sherman with the same effect

  19. It’s that Russian tank game again.

  20. I think the first 2 shots of the ISU-152K replay belong in the same category as the shots pulled in “meanwhile, in soviet russia”.

  21. came for the game, stayed for the history lesson.

  22. Gimme a slice of that Jumbo! Don’t skimp on the derp.

  23. Because 255 is when the Hex ends…

  24. The reason only a couple hundred m4a3e2 were built is because there were other shermans that had a role to play in the war. The easy 8 was the one that most sported the 76mm where as the jumbo had the 105mm. There were so many different designations for the sherman tanks its almost impossible to keep up with. It was also a familiar tank and very reliable that you could take a crew from the basic m4 and put them in the last model ever built and they would be able to run it without problems

  25. I saw the title of the video to be Derp, and I thought this video was going to be KV-2 o’clock

  26. That was an amazing match wow
    What a glory hog LOL

  27. it would be really fun if the senatle could be mounted with 2 25pounders as it was to test the turet for recole befor fitting the 17pounder

  28. The reason why the jumbo not mass produced was the design came too late in the war and although it was effective the cost of re-tooling and production were not worth what was seen as decreased enemy armor abilities as well as the need for smashing the Sigfried line was no longer required. it was felt that if a war did happen with Russia then a new design would be needed however other newer tanks were already on the board that were far more effective.

  29. Jingles, I love you, and I hate to break it to you but, The E2 never had a 105.
    Only the M4A3 VVSS and HVSS had the M101 (M4 for vehicle use) howitzer, E2 Jumbo’s came out of the factory with M3’s, some cheeky engineers put M1’s in them in Europe, but never the M4 105mm.

  30. look at The Chieftains channel He has a very good video on the M4A3E2
    with quite a bit of information that he explains it very well.
    I’ve never heard of Jumbo’s in the Pacific

  31. If I see Derp in the title of a Jingles video I’m legally obligated to watch

  32. There was only 250 built, as that is all that the British supplied tea brewing stations for. I also checked wiki just in case I was wrong and here is what I found. (Credit to Wikipedia for the following.)

    M4A3(105) – M4A3 with 105mm howitzer used for infantry support.

    M4A3E2 Assault Tank – postwar nickname “Jumbo” – extra armor (including 1 inch on front), vertical sided turret, but about 3-4 mph slower. Built with 75mm gun but frequently re-armed by the using units with 76mm guns. “Duckbill”-style extended end connectors (EECs) fitted to the outside edge of the tracks. Users: US, France (one vehicle)

    So it would appear that Wargaming may not have a historically accurate tank. Probably lost in translation somewhere along the line.

  33. The Jumbo wasn’t as mass-produced as other models of the Sherman because it shared a problem that was typical of a lot of German vehicles: weight. The standard variants of the Sherman were light enough to cross most bridges in Europe, but the Jumbo and a lot of German tanks could only cross specific bridges. Plus, the Sherman’s standard gun would slaughter most units already and what the Sherman couldn’t kill could be killed by artillery or planes.

  34. Ask the Chieftain why so few ShJs built, MJ.

  35. This makes me wanna get back into WoT solely for my mid-tier shenanigans

  36. I cannot believe that Jingles would ever make such a “noob mistake”
    the Jumbo was only equiped with the 75mm M3 cannon, later some Jumbo’s armed with the 76mm M1 started to show up in the battlefield but those were initially field conversions
    in the game we can equip the 105mm M4 howitzer because all other Sherman variants and Sherman related projects had that capability, it was common for US Army tank platoons to have all 3 calibers mixed, if eventually they had created a Jumbo only tank company then it would not be odd to see Jumbo’s with the 105mm gun

  37. I am a simple man: i see derp video from jingles, i click.

  38. They only built 250 or whatever due to the price it would cost more so they wanted to save money as they could make 1 1/2 regular Sherman’s if not 2 whole Sherman’s with what it took to make a single jumbo otherwise mabye it was the guns production rate

  39. Jingles, one reason is that the 105 Jumbo never existed and only a few field modded jumbos existed and they were all M4A3 (76) HVSS Shermans. The only Jumbos that existed were 75mm Gun Jumbos and 76mm Gun Jumbos. Another issue was how slow they were, the terrain that they had to move in was much different than the Aberdeen Testing Field and so it got stuck more often than not, because of it’s weight. The frontal armor wasn’t very receptible from being shot by 8,8cm shells and had difficulty when being shot by 7,5cm L/70s. Though it was fine when being shelled by short 7,5s. Also during late war, when they were more prevalent in the war, the US used Pershings instead.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *