A note on nomenclature: Most people, who don't read the historical literature were used to the different nomenclature system: VK3002DB, which means "fully tracked vehicle, 30 tons, 2nd prototype, Daimler Benz". The D instead of DB means the same thing: Daimler Benz - just that one system is used by H. Doyle and the other by W. Spielberger. They both work the same.
VK2001D
VK3001D
Hi, I have slightly unrelated question. Would you have historical info about the Indien Panzer? Thank you.
ReplyDeleteThere's not much historical info available in the first place, apart from the vehicle set. It was a medium tank project for India from the 50's, made by Porsche in cooperation with Daimler Benz. Never reached the prototype stage, but its development influenced the early Swiss Panzer series.
DeleteIt also ended up losing to the Vickers MBT design, which can be compared to a simplified Centurion design with parts from the Chieftain. The Indians liked the Vickers tanks because it was cheaper and simpler to mass-produce. This eventually was modified by the Indians and turned into the Vijayanta tank.
DeleteOkinoshima
The information is there, but you need to look.
DeleteI wrote an article on the Indien-Panzer before. Take a look.
Deletehttp://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/212115-kankous-rambling-indien-panzer/
> Armor: Hull 90/40/40, turret 130/70/70
DeleteWrong.
VK3001D seems to be sht ... i have a suspicion that when the 30.01 projects were alive, no german engineer thought about angled armour (just look at 30.01H, 30.01P, 36.01H)
ReplyDeleteThe Tiger I was direct product of all those projects, no angles there, so it's no surprise.
DeleteBesides other tier 6 german mediums are doing fine in the game at the moment, no reason for this one to be worse in performance.
Angled armor is not the best thing in the world. It has some serious issues - for example very cramped space inside and also (if you look at the sloped sides) a smaller turret ring, which prevents vehicles from mounting bigger guns and turrets. German of course knew about the sloped armor, they just (rightfully) thought that their armor is perfectly adequate for everything they might encounter in 1941-1942, so they didn't bother.
DeleteSeems WG didn't get the memo. Armour angle, compared with thickness, is much too important in the game, imo.
DeleteThey know their trigonometry, you obviously don't.
DeleteAnd slope was very important and vs ammo used in WW2 more effective then same effective thickness of vertical armor, eg 100mm@60deg T-54A glacis (effective thickness 200mm) could not be penetrated by 88/71 gun, while turret of 200mm thickness could at short range.
Here, read and learn how important is sloped armor:
http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.php?showtopic=18562&hl=%2Bguns+%2Barmor
hello Bojan, I didn't know you were following SS blog.
DeleteHi there :) I'm one of the longtime followers of this site and I'd like to say a big thank you to all your effort into making these informative posts.
ReplyDeleteWith regard to the VK3001D in this post - is it the same as the VK 3002 DB Ingame? (I know that the upcoming line features 30.01D and a 30.02D, but they look both awfully the same :/) If not, do you have any info about any differences between the two models? (either in real life or in game models)
Well, they are not the "same". Basically, as the name suggests, 3001 was 3002's predecessor. The 30XX series were Daimler Benz's attempt at Panther (the 3002(MAN) won - that's what is generally known the "Panther"). The first DB prototype (3001D) had two versions: the earliest (which is the 3001D that is going to be in game) basically had a simple torsion bar suspension and regular roadwheels, the latter (more advanced) had interwoven suspension, which was later taken to 3002DB. 3001D also had only 60mm frontal armor (compared to 3002's 80mm). This first project was unsuccessful (there is a story going around that Hitler did not like it because it looked "too Russian") and it was decided to make the vehicle heavier (20mm more armor) and with different suspension, which turned into the 3002DB.
DeleteJust image a tank battle.
DeleteOne PzIV commander sees two silhouettes in the fog. One is the T-34 the other one a Vk30.02(DB). The PzIV commander has to decide fast and could accidently let the DB-Panther hit, because it's looking similar. :/
Yes, that is a nasty scenario. Such thing happened actually - with the Beutepanzers (captured vehicles in German use), that's why it was ordered that the German cross (or swastika) has to be extra prominent on the hull.
DeleteI see that WG seems to have changed from 3001-series to 30.01 names on your sceenie from German tree (maybe was there earlier but I work on a ship so cant play WoT for 50% of the year so havn´t tested 8.4 yet).
DeleteBut my thought is if this will be like a VK30.02DB on tier 6, the other 30.XX has the short-88-gun and if this one will be able to do it in despite of smaller turret and turretring this will be just like a 60mm-armo-VK30.02DB as e know it today. Then why bother to play new VK30.02D (except for Leopard-hunt without free-xp)?? It will be even more overlooked as a decent tank and get the same spot as the T-43 (without D10T-gun) has, in between if they dont buff mobility more than they did in the russian tree.
I read somewhere about rumors regarding a new top-gun for the VK30.02D, you havn´t heard anything or have any speculation in what gun that could be?
Oh, God. I just hope that WG isn't going to downgrade current VK3002DB to T6 as VK30.01D and force us to grind VK30.02D at T7 again, before accessing Indien Panzer. But this version kinda fits SerB's statements about Leo line possibly not coming out of VK 3002 DB and it has huge prospect of income for WG, as many players would use shitload of gold to convert exp accumulated on VK3002DB to skip both VK30.01D and VK30.02DB.
ReplyDeleteVK3002D = VK3002DB, it's the same vehicle, just different name (one was used by Doyle, the other by Spielberger). Indienpanzer will follow after the 3002DB.
DeleteYeah, I know it, but WG is WG. I wouldn't be surprised to see that, tbh. Anyway for me 3001D seems like potentially fun tank.
DeleteFINALLY i know what all this VK gibberish means, thanks Frank.
ReplyDeleteSo the 3001DB with top upgrades looks exactly the same as the second version, when is stock, that we already have in game.Only 2 exceptions i find(visual) are the missing machine gun weakspot on upper frontal plate and the suspension wheels.
ReplyDelete20mm less armour won't be a big difference since it'll be a tier6.
If it plays the same as the 3002DB I'll love it as much as I love the one I own now.
Yes, that basically describes it. Elite 3001DB should be the same as stock 3002DB, minus the armor
DeletePanther2 vs indiePanther
ReplyDeletehttp://images.megaupload.cz/shot_013cWkDh.jpg
Thx for the picture.
DeleteAll fine about the Indy Panzer...only thing that bothers me is that the 630 horsepower engine is really the top engine on that tank?...if it is so, it won't be very agile compared with 3002db...
But look at that armour... 90mm@ that kind of frontal slope will be hard as hell to penetrate. Turret seems a bit weaker, but that are stock turret stat, and even if upgraded one won't be any thougher (or if there would be no upgraded turret at all) it has nice mantlet and is very well rounded too.
DeleteSC, where armor is higly sloped on front hull it is not 90mm, where it is 90mm it is not well sloped.
Delete90mm is rounded part on nose, most of glacis is less, IIRC 60mm.
what's the chance for 81k to IndPz will change?:D
ReplyDeletenot big. all the tier 8 mediums cost around 80-90k. grind 100k and you are on the save side
DeleteNow I got a question. Does Vk mean "Vollkettenfahrzeug" if it was just a blueprint and "Versuchskonstruktion" if there was a real prototyp? | :)
ReplyDeleteDifferent sources state different things. Basically I prefer the Vollkettenfahrzeug version, because Doyle says it so.
Deletedifferent people, different words. :3
DeleteI prefer the "Versuchskonstruktion", because it makes more sense in my own small world ;)
what about "versuchskettenfahrzeug". that would make even more sense
DeleteDoyle is freaking englishman, AFAIK it is Spielberger who states it means Versuchskonstruktion, and I really have more trust in a German speaking specialist.
DeleteBesides that, "Fahrzeug" is usually used as "Kraftfahrzeug" ("[motor-]powered vehicle" instead of just "vehicle") and is shortened to Kfz. like the Kfz.1 Stoewer light uniform car of Kfz.13 Adler scout car.
Tracked and half-tracked vehicles were called Sonder-Kfz (special) like SdKfz 161 for Panzer IV.
I may be in a minority of 1, but i'm really not happy to see these tanks added to the game. There are already loads of German mid-tier mediums in game, most of which play quite similarly to each other. Will have to wait for the TS, but I strongly doubt that these will in any way be meaningfully different from existing tanks. More copy-paste shit.
ReplyDeleteMaybe they're copy-paste tanks with almost the same playstyle but look at the bright side...at least they're not copy-paste tanks from other nations like the chinese tree has.First half has US-British-French-USSR tanks, second half has remodels of IS-series and t-54 tank.
DeleteI call that a copy-paste creation.
And the only copy-pastes that come this patch are the 2001db, 3001db and recon panther.Other seem pretty unique.
Each of the T6 german meds are completely different. All they share is guns, but one of them is a brawler (3601), one a flanker (3001H) and 3001P is something different too. Leopard will be completely different than E-50M. Will it be similar to other nation's T10 - maybe a bit, but in terms of German tree it will be something new.
DeleteBesides, what would you call different? Flying tanks? Tank is a tank. It has gun, it has tracks and it has armour.
Then again, these vehicles actually existed.
DeleteI rather wait for the public test than listening to that bullshit here.
Delete@Szalony... Tank (in WOT) is not a tank. It's a collection of pixels and values that plays in a certain way. Agree with you re 3601 and 3001H being different, but 3001P is very similar to both and adding more similar tanks will just narrow the gap between these tanks even further. For me, if I want to appreciate tanks, I read a book or go to a museum - this is a game and gameplay issues should come first. Having loads of tanks that look a little different but play the same does nothing to enhance gameplay.
DeleteSo don't play the new tanks, noone is forcing you to do that...
Deleteyeah honestly, If you think the tier 6 meds are similar you aren't very good at this game.
Delete" Agree with you re 3601 and 3001H being different, but 3001P is very similar to both"
DeleteI don't understand that. If 2 tanks are entirely different, then something cannot be similar to both. It can be middle-ground between them, which in turn means that this is something different - cause it has something from one, and something from the other one. Besides VK3001P purpose is not to be entirely different tank, but to start one of the heavy lines, while 3001H and 3601H are part of different line. Now we'll get 3001D that will start yet again new line, and probably functionally replace VK3601H when it will become HT.
And even if new German med line will be similar to the existing ones of other nations (which doesn't seem to be true) or existing German one (which doesn't seem to be true either, due to Leo armour, then why the hell shouldn't Germans get their Cold-War era MBT? All of the other nations already got theirs.
Besides in game in which there are no other enemies than tanks, it is hard to create some more groundbreaking differences between tanks. MG, AA and flamwthrower tanks are both useless. Armoured cars would be just a cannon fodder. Only way I can see is to implement amphibious and Christie tanks that could use both tracks and roadwheels. Thing is that in WoT there are not that many maps that have enough water for amphibian tanks; these tanks would have to be light and Christie tanks would be restricted to low tier only. I think if you want more variety in AFV combat, you should wait for War Thunder, that will eventually combine tanks, planes and battleships in one game. That way APCs, MG, AA and flamethrower tanks could all be usefull.
The Christies didn't work that way. :|
DeleteAlso the Leo 1 is a Cold War -era MBT the last I checked.
About Christie suspension from Christie suspension article at Wikipedia:
Delete"Another feature of Christie's designs was the "convertible" drive: the ability to remove the tracks for road travel, allowing for higher speeds and better range, and reducing wear on the fragile caterpillar track systems of the 1930s".
Never said that Leo 1 is not Cold War era MBT; I was replying to a guy that basically stated that these new tanks are basically copypaste of existing ones; it was rhetorical question.
Re Christies: I know that thanks. The point is that AFAIK you had to open the transmission compartement and re-couple the powertrain from the usual drive wheels to the last roadwheels by hand (nevermind removing the tracks) to enable the wheeled propulsion mode. (Also not strictly speaking part of the suspension system but rather the powertrain design; the Soviets dropped the option from the BT-7 already IIRC as unnecessary but merrily kept using the suspension.)
DeleteThe idea was to improve strategic mobility without having to rely on separate transporter vehicles, not anything relevant to the context of the kind of tactical battlefield this game's about.
More practically I'd wager a "Christie" in wheel mode would be *painfully* cumbersome compared to a tracked vehicle - "wheels" tend to necessitate a rather wide turning radius anyway, and what little I know of the relevant steering designs inspires no confidence of the tanks in question being anything but very clumsy even by those standards.
You know that in WoT your crew can repair tracks in few seconds... from withing the tank? So fact that it couldn't be performed on the fly IRL is rather pointless. I think Christie suspension could be implemented similarily. You make your tank completely stationary, press key that "converts" suspension, wait few seconds (more like 20-30) while you cannot move and you have tour tank in roadwheel mode. Result is that you have substatnially better top speed and acceleration on good ground (mainly roads), but at the same time offroad is almost impossible, and turning circle substantially widens.
DeleteSounds worthless.
DeleteOn most maps, probably yeah, very situational at best... but Himmelsdorf?
DeleteStill, sounds quite worthless. I don't think any dev would give a damn, nor most of the players.
DeleteFake tits on zombie useless. All the relevant tanks are/would be plenty fast already AFAIK; what'd be the point of gaining some on-road speed at the expense of terribad off-road characteristics and the worst traverse rate like EVAR?
DeleteWe will see about that. Unique or not. They need to be enjoyable and playable tanks. I'm curios about their size in compare to current meds. Will the Leo be smaller than E50M ? Same with Indienpanzer and Panther2. Hope their not bigger at all.
ReplyDeleteWell the Leopard 1 is mass produced vehicle and the dimensions are well known. It has basically the same width and height as T-62A, only the length is 7.09 m compared to 6.63 of the russian.
DeleteE-50M has almost 1:1 hull of Tiger II, length 6.4 m (yes, it is actually shorter than the T-62A) and width 3.76 m.
The Tiger II is 3.09 m high, E-50M is less than this, but Leo and T-62A are even lower.
To sum it up, Leo should be quite compact compared to E-50M.
FWIW teh Wiki gives the Leo 1 a height of ~2.4m at turret roof; ditto the T-55 and T-62 (without specifying the point of measurement though).
Deletethese tanks existed in the $ whoring mind of WG, it's a digital construct.
ReplyDeleteexisted on paper, model, prototype, but these tanks do not share the same reality as WoT.
look mommy! a copy paste tank.
great job WG.
continue your excellent research work & modeling.
hurrah.
how much does one has to grind to use these ugly pieces of utter mind farts?
PS
I'm Mad (like mental case)
This was such a worthless comment. You wasted your time writing it and my time reading it.
Delete"how much does one has to grind to use these ugly pieces of utter mind farts? "
not very much.... unless you think tier 6 is a long grind (it isnt, you utter mind fart)
blah blah blah cry hurr durr blah blah whine blah...
DeleteSeriously, how can people complain about more content being added into the game... "Ooh someone's gonna own a tank that I don't, butt hurt!". Grow up.
Warning! Rage kid detected!
DeleteDude, whats your problem?...
You don't like the Daimler Benz's projects of PzIII and PzV Panther? Don't play them then.
Don't know if the VK2001DB hull prototype was produced but the 3001/2DB hulls existed. So don't tell us that this tank is a damn blueprinty fail project.
And if you rage like that for 2 tanks that look almost the same as 2 other tanks existing in game, I wonder what you did when chinese tech tree was introduced.
The 3001 hulls existed. I always get a kick out of people raging about things they know nothing about. Ah, the joys of public education.
DeleteThe DB has always been a marginal tier 7 tank, it will make an *excellent* tier 6 even if it's limited to the L/70. I will drive the crap out of one.
Its so cute :3
ReplyDeleteVK2001D looks like it wants to be a Tiger when it grows up >:3
DeleteHulls for both DB/D versions existed in metal.
ReplyDeleteI really used to praise WG for their quality of artwork in the past, but looks like this time is over... The 30.01 seems to be the most ugly, half-arsed piece of digital art I've seen for quite a long time now. I'm serious.
ReplyDeletewhat exactly is wrong with it?
Deletewhat happens after the update if we have an elite VK3002(DB) before the 8.5 patch?
ReplyDelete