Tips

Please take your time and read the blog rules

Apr 10, 2013

Fake American Vehicles

Author: Priory_of_Sion

The American Tech Tree is full of limited production vehicles, prototypes, and paper tanks. However there are 5 tank destroyers that push the limits of reality. They are the T25, T25/2, T28 Prototype, T28, and the T110E4.

The T25 tank destroyer comes from 1943 models of a T23 medium tank chassis mounting a modified version of a 90 mm AA gun which eventually became the M3 90 mm gun. The model shown might not look exactly like the T23 chassis(looks like an T1/M6) but it is according to the Bible of Americans: Hunnicutt's Pershing: A History of the Medium Tank T20 Series. For some reason or another WG decided not to call the T25 the T23 AT which would be a much more fitting name IMO.


The T25/2 is different. There is no documentation anywhere that I have looked that shows a T23 chassis mounting an M36 turret. This combination is possible however(69 inch turret ring is the same for the T23 and the Jackson) and the M36 turret was designed in the same time frame as the T20 series and variants were being proposed. The T25/2 is still hypothetical IMO. The actual T25 medium tank mounted the M3 90 mm gun in a fully enclosed turret and would obsolete the T23 w/ M36 turret immediately. This T25 medium led to the Pershing. In conclusion the T25/2 should be removed until/if further information surfaces.

To replace the T25/2 WG should look at the actual 90 mm armed T25, specifically the T25E1 #13 which was a modified T25 using a range finder system. The redesignation of the T25E1 from medium to TD won't be new (T30) and the T25E1 would be able to mount the 105 mm T5E1 gun.

This is the T25E1 #13 fitted with a new range finder system.

This is a proposal for mounting the T5E1 gun in a modified T25E1 #13. The T25E1 #13 could be an adequate tier 8 TD if given good enough mobility, turret armor, and better gun characteristics than the T32(the same tier heavy tank). 

Since I hinted at a tier 8 T25E1 #13 that leaves a gap at tier 7, well the T78 could fill that role. The T78 was a proposed TD based on the T24 light tank chassis using the M36 turret. If upgraded to a better 90 mm the T78 would be a fine tier 7 TD. The_Chieftain has informed me that WG is apparently aware of the T78 tank destroyer, I am not 100% sure what this means though. No pictures exist as far as I know but I am sure someone could model a T24 Light Tank with an M36 turret fairly easily.


The T28 Prototype is a tank called a complete fake by many but it does have some basis in the real world. The T28 Prototype was in reality a conceptual drawing for the T28 project in 1943. No real plans were ever made of this Concept T28 as far as I know. However recently a model of a vehicle was sold over the Internet might be related to the T28 Prototype, this model is extremely likely to be a model made for the T28 in the developmental stage in early 1943. This model seems to use the T5 105 mm gun which was originally planned and should have very thick(200 mm+) armor.
WG took this concept and ran with it.


I am not 100% sold on the validity of this model, but I am fairly sure it is not a fake. Looks cooler than the T28 Prototype IMO.

WG should consider removing the model we have in WoT and replacing it the more concrete model if we can find any specifications on it.

The T28 is not a fake tank, however WG screwed it up. You see the T28 and the T95 were the exact same vehicle. The model we have shows how a T28/T95 would look without the tracks.

Still the T28 is wrong...

Look at the frontal armor, that frontal glacis plate has been added for no reason. 

WG could do two things to make the T28 (more) accurate. First they could just remove that glacis plate, pretty easy change. Or they could however remove the T28 we have entirely, rename the T95 the T28/T95 and have the T28 Prototype (the model) become tier 8 since the T25E1 #13 is tier 8 in the other line. I would like the 2nd to happen, but that isn't likely to happen.

Now the T110E4 was a real design, however in WoT that design is called the T110E3. The T110E3 and T110E4 were almost identical and only slight changes were made for the T110E3 to become the T110E4. There has never been an attempt to mount a turret in any T110 vehicle besides the T110E5. The T110E4 in WoT and its turret is WG's creation. WG also forgot that all the T110 tanks used the 120 mm gun, there was never any proposed 155 mm armed T110s.
This is the T110E4, a turret would be impossible for this vehicle.

So what could be a tier X TD besides the fake T110E4? Well if you want a turreted TD you have a really good option with the H2. The H2 was a heavy tank project from one of the Question Mark Conferences. The H2 was to have similar armor to the M103 and the frontal armor was a negative slope. The gun was to be a modified 155 mm gun. So with the H2 you practically get an M103 with a T30 turret with tier X TD stats. A second choice would be the T58. The T58 was a 155 mm armed T57 in a new oscillating turret. I would think the H2 would be more practical to balance and implement. 
This is actually the H1, which is the same vehicle but mounts the 120 mm gun instead of the 155 mm.

This is the T58, I would advice against this vehicle for balance purposes.

The US TD line has some hypothetical and fake vehicles. Some are close to reality, some are perversions of what they were IRL. WG has the ability to create a historical accurate US TD line but so far no change is coming. 


This is my revised US TD tree from tier 6. I am planning a 3rd TD line but it isn't complete.


Sources:
Pershing
Stuart
Firepower
all by R. P. Hunnicutt



59 comments:

  1. Interesting stuff. :)

    What is that strange model what you mentioned at the T28 proto? Does it have a name or a story (even if it's fake).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe it popped up a year ago on Ebay from some guy in Ohio or Pennsylvania. It is unlike many other models so its true identity is sorta a mystery. More likely than not it is a model of T28 Prototype from 1943. I think it was sold for less than $300.

      Delete
    2. If it's legit it makes me think the designers may have been puffing from the same bong those Nuffield guys smoked - you know, the ones who dreamed up the AT series.

      Delete
  2. Which tank tree in current WOT, would you say is the most "imaginative". Is it US TD tree?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'd say the E-50M

      Delete
    2. He's talking about the "tree" (although I'm sure he ment "branch"). E-50M is a single vehicle, while the vehicles before him eighter existed (Panther I & II) or were projects (E-50).

      Delete
    3. He also asked "American" tree.
      In which case it might be the T110E4 line.

      Delete
    4. As of now the US TDs 7-10 are the most imaginative IMO.

      Delete
    5. Both US T9 TDs are 100% OK. 7-8 and 10th tier are made up.
      Tier 10 US heavy (T110E5)is actually made up it the form it exists in the game currently. The hull shape, engine compartment, armour and fire rate are far from reality.

      Also all German top vehicles except Maus are at least highly speculative, JgdPz E-100 being mostly and GW-E totally made up.
      Foch155 is made up since no proof has yet been delivered by WG.

      And the story continues....

      Delete
  3. How many more fake/made up tanks are we likely to see after WG say they have now 5 years worth of tanks to implement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Surprisingly few. There are legitimately that many tanks they could still implement.

      The problem, as always, is with the completeness of their research. People don't seem to realize that the biggest stumbling block for tank line development in WoT is the research.

      Delete
  4. It's clear WG does that shit for balance anyway. And that's where power creep comes in and makes good old tanks a complete garbage. IS-7, IS-4 for example.

    Balance gets screwed because fake tanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The IS-7 and IS-4 are still great tanks, the real problem is the IS-7 isn't used because the E5's gun is more reliable and it has gun depression.

      The IS-4, while being a great tank in itself isn't used generally due to being in sort of limbo; it's a well rounded heavy heavy, so it's average speed, average armor, nice gun, etc... But, the E-100 and E3 are better a tanking damage while still being useful and the E5's is more flexible due to its speed, so the IS-4 ends up having limited applications.

      The real victim is the Maus, between gold ammo for credits, tanks with massive alpha, artillery, and the E-100 being almost as effective at tanking while having a nice gun to boot, the Maus really has no place anymore, which is ashame.

      Delete
    2. Maus was always last place even when you had just the IS-7 and T30 to compete with it because mobility and firepower will always trump straight up armor.

      With the E-100 you at least bring firepower and 'sufficient' mobility. Maus just brings armor.

      Delete
  5. I rather feel that allowing the 90mm on the Hellcat unbalances there line as elsewhere the non-turreted/heavier tank has a slighly better gun than the turret line. The 90mm varient would have done fine as a T7 premium wiht a bit of tweaking.

    However what's done is done and I can't see them going back on this as the Hellcat is very popular in-game. I'm not sure where they're looking for the Premium TD. It could be T88 Hellcat varient with the 105 but I'm not sure how great it would be.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are u implying that the 90mm is to powerful for a turreted TD.

      If so then no, 90mm M3 is fine where it is, you might as well remove it from the Jackson as well if thats the case.

      But both the Hellcat and the Jackson would be sub par tds.

      LPDC89

      Delete
    2. Hellcat is fine where it is, even with the 90mm.
      It is a high risk tank to play and requires a lot of cunning to play.
      A tier 7 version with better turning and turret traverse would fit fine, probably would need to upgrade the guns pen for that tier though.

      Delete
    3. I'm happy with my hellcat, but was pointing out that the T40, M10, T25AT etc all have slightly better guns than the M8A1, T49, T25/2. The T49 and M8A1 actually have the same gun as the non-turret tank of the tier below.

      Delete
    4. That is because of the turrets.
      The turrets give them more flexibility thus they are compensated for by having slightly weaker guns.

      Delete
    5. Turrets AND speed. The M8A1 is probably one of the best tier 4 tanks in the game because it's small, fast, and mounts a powerful gun (57mm being better than the other option)

      Delete
    6. Exactly, that is why I was surprised they gave the Hellcat the 90mm rather than just the M1A2.

      Delete
    7. Because its historical and because the 90mm is balanced for tier 6 and 7.

      And to be honest the hellcat needs its 90mm to compete with other tanks on its tier because while it has speed, its armour is paper thin and can be penned nearly every shot, keeping its at the M1A2 would make it easy prey because of the low alpha and pen.

      The M18 is a perfect at hit and run and the 90mm makes it work, using its speed and the nice alpha really can but a nice dent in most players tank.

      If any tank spoils a line its the jagdpanzer IV

      LPDC89

      Delete
    8. The M1A2 would not cut it for the Hellcat at tier 6. That's a buzzsaw gun at that tier for circling. There's a reason the only two tanks that successfully carry it as a top gun in that tier are the E2 and the E8.
      Hellcat needed that pen and alpha increase.

      Delete
  6. The T78 is the tier 7 premium td.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps he meant T88 from:
      http://worldoftanks.eu/media/show/300/

      Delete
  7. very interesting!
    can't wait for your 3rd TD line :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Very interesting! I just wonder - what about the Yoh tanks? There has been a talk about them being implemented, were they heavy tanks or tank destroyers?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. heavy tanks on lsd

      Delete
    2. The Yoh tanks were a mix between Heavy and Medium designs. I don't think Yoh made any casemate concepts.

      Delete
  9. Regarding T58 - its already in game in shape of T58 turret and 155mm gun modeled for T57 Heavy. Unavailable tho, for a good reason.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I saw that somewhere and was going to mention that in the article. Do you have a link to it?

      Delete
    2. Dig in the game files.
      In the .pkg file for American tanks you'll find all kinds of stuff (like the 105mm and 155mm gun models in the T110E5s model folder.

      Delete
  10. I love you man, I was just going to send you a mail or leave a comment about the T-25/2 and the other American fake tanks but it's like you read my mind, thanks a lot!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Thx for this article. It's nice.

    ReplyDelete
  12. How about the M56 Scorpion?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've suggested it to Chieftain already, we shall see.

      Delete
  13. Nice article. :)

    ReplyDelete
  14. This is so cool!

    ReplyDelete
  15. T58 really looks interesting and would give the F155 serious contender ;)

    GradiusZA

    ReplyDelete
  16. I made this a moment ago:
    http://historicalrealism.blogspot.com/2013/04/t25e1-by-elmis66.html

    I think that changing T20 into T25E1 has more sense than changing T25/2.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The T20 was a real tank and was built, I believe the 1st turret is from the T20 and the 2nd turret is from the T22(modified T20). I do not see the reason to get rid of the T20.

      The T25/2 is a hypothetical concept.

      Delete
    2. yeah, but placing Pershing's prototype in TD line?

      Delete
    3. The T25E1 #13 was modified as late as 1948, it wasn't a precursor to the T26/M26.

      I also know it is a medium tank, but the T30 is a heavy tank. Wouldn't be the first time a tank is called something it is not. Plus if the T25E1 #13 with the 105 mm would act as a TD instead of a medium.

      Delete
    4. T25E1 was the Pershing's prototype, T25E3 (E1 with some changes) was named T26 or M26

      Delete
    5. You're mixing up the T25E1 and the T25E1 #13 (the "#13" standing for the turret upgrade in the gun mounting).

      Also T25 was dropped very early, never made it to an "E3" variant. For that you are thinking of the T26E3.

      Delete
  17. There might be a few other valid TDs to consider. Take a look at the TDs in the following video:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FA98vrHl5YI

    At around 2:15, there appears to something that looks like the H1. Was there ever one produced?

    ReplyDelete
  18. The T28 on the picture is actually T95 with the second pair of tracks detached and towering behind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "You see the T28 and the T95 were the exact same vehicle. The model we have shows how a T28/T95 would look without the tracks."

      Delete
    2. Yup, I misread that. Thanks for correcting me =)

      Delete
  19. The T28 in game is horrendous with that extra frontal plate. If they're going to add imaginary stuff to the tank, why not boost its speed at least to 25km/h? Armour weaknesses combined with a lack of mobility basically makes the gun the only good thing about this tank (that, and the situation where you can actually hide your frontal plate assuming you can even get into position fast enough). Not to mention it is again outgunned by its Russian counterpart, the ISU-152, which also somehow has a bigger bonus in camo despite having comparable size to other vehicles.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am under the belief that the fake plate was added to the T28 so it would not be too powerful frontally for tier 8.
      This is just my speculation though.

      Delete
    2. And the AT-2 isn't too powerful frontally at tier 5?
      WG bases their work priorities on global win rates and numbers that are completely idiotic for gauging a tank. I've said this already in my original post, the speed of the thing is already enough of a crutch for this tank. Rendering its armour insignificant is both inconsistent with other tanks' performance as well as making its supposed "advantage" null. Even if you fix the frontal plate, the weak points that you can hit from the front will still allow for enemy tanks to have a way to repel your tank. The commander's hatch is huge mind you.

      Delete
  20. The model picture below the T28 Proto concept photo looks to be the Hunter heavy tank project that's been butchered to look like a TD. For those that have "Firepower" by Hunnicutt, it starts on page 177. For those that don't it is one fugly lookin tank with dual 105mm rocket guns as its main armament. Oh its also half the size of the M103.

    BlazeZero

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Hunter is not a heavy tank.
      It was conceived as a tank hunter/destroyer.

      This also evidently predates it quite a bit.

      Delete
    2. Everything I've read about it states that it was born out of a request to american industrial companies to come up with something to succeed the M103. But you're right it does seem to fit the TD role far better. I was just trying to identify a tank in one of those pictures since there seemed to be some questions as to its validity.

      BlazeZero

      Delete
    3. The Hunter was more like the M50 Ontos than anything else.

      Delete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.