- according to WG data, Lorraine and Batchat did historically have a crew of 3, it won't be changed
- tank-to-tank matchmaker (SS: as in "one IS-7 can only be matched to another IS-7", eg mirror teams) won't be implemented
- the decal size and color change won't come anytime soon
- there will be no special servers without gold ammo implemented
- tank armor will be rebalanced "when necessery, opinion of players about it is not taken into account"
- all the Chinese guns implemented developed the end of the 70's are Soviet copies or developed based on Soviet originals. After that, the Chinese started copying the West. However, you can't read about this anywhere for now - Chinese development is rather secret.
- there is no special coefficient implemented into the game, that would somehow average the XP gain of good and bad players, such averaging is done by general vehicle balance
- Jagdpanther II gun/mantlet model is not bugged, it can be penetrated
- Chinese tank destroyers might come this year, depends on the Chinese research partners
- Chinese SU-100 copy might appear in their TD tree, again depends on the Chinese partners
- according to SerB, the machinegun miniturret on Jagdpanzer E-100 was ordered specifically by Hitler (SS: can't remember, but there was some crap around that... I think it was removed because it messed with loading in the end, not sure)
- the bottom of the T110E4 turret is very thin, 20mm or so
- apparently the Redshire map won't be taken down for re-work
May 1, 2013
Marder III
Hello everyone,
today we are going to look at the upcoming Marder III tier 4 vehicle. Simple enough you say? Well... we'll see :)
First, a small history trip. I won't put here the detailed history of the Marder series, because it's well documented and even the wikipedia suffices for the basic idea. It's enough to say that the Marder vehicles were concieved as a cheap way to move PaK36(r) or PaK40 around withot having to tow it by horses, with some minor protection added as a bonus. It was a generally successful design line despite its obvious flaws. Basically it can be said that Marder I vehicles were based on captured French tanks, Marder II on Panzer II hulls and Marder III's on various types of the 38t chassis.
Marder I consisted of 3 basic variants: one was the conversion of the Lorraine tractor - this is the best known one, another was the conversion of the FCM 36 tank (that one is already in the game) and yet another was the Hotchkiss H39 conversion. They all carried the Pak 40 L/46 variant. Over a hundred vehicles were converted like this and some of them served until the end of the war. Marder I (39H) is depicted here:
Marder II also has its roots in Russia invasion and the need to get as many anti-tank guns to the frontline as possible. Self-propelled AT guns had one more "charm" too: in later years of war, it happened more than once that towed or even manpack AT guns had to be left behind, simply because no tractors or horses were available.This was especially a problem for very heavy AT guns, such as the PaK 43. Self-propelled AT guns such as the Marder series could simply drive away.
Marder II is already in the game, so there is no point in writing about it (the info about it is available anywhere, including wiki), BUT it wasn't the only Marder II. A perhaps lesser known, yet equally as important vehicle, designated Marder II (SdKfz 132) existed before the Marder II we know from World of Tanks. This is how it looked:
The ingame Marder II (SdKfz 131) was armed with a PaK 40 straight from the start and was built on the Panzer II Ausf.F/G chassis, while the SdKfz 132 was built on the earlier chassis (Ausf.D) and was armed with a captured Soviet 76,2mm gun (original Soviet designation: F-22). The earlier Marder II was shorter, but cca 1 ton heavier and also taller (earlier Marder II: 2,6m tall, later Marder II: 2,2m). It is worth noting that the later Marder was only ever equipped with the 75mm PaK 40, never with the Soviet 76,2mm, so the combination we have in game is not historical.
The earlier Marder II was faster too - 55km/h with the same engine as the later variant, but it also had one extra crewmember.
But now we will get to the vehicle this article is focused on, the Marder III.
When you say Marder III, most people will imagine two basic models: Ausf.H (as depicted on the first picture of this post) and Ausf.M with rear superstructure, that looks like this:
However, just like with the Marder II, neither of both is in fact the first incarnation of Marder III. The first Marder III has its roots - yet again - in the German invasion of Soviet Union. Just like with the early Marder II, it was equipped with the Soviet 76,2mm gun and was generally known as Panzerjäger 38(t) (do not mistake this for Jagdpanzer 38t, which is the "Hetzer") and it was based on the 38t Ausf.G chassis (in fact, all Marder III's were known as Panzerjäger 38(t), but the name is mostly used for this first one, with the latter types being mostly referred to simply as Marder III). It was a bit taller than the later Ausf.H but (like both the other variants) was propelled by the 150hp Praga engine. It carried the same armor as Ausf.H (50mm in the front, 15mm on the sides of both hull and superstructure). Around 344 were made between April 1942 and October 1942 (this number includes the 84 refits of obsolete Panzer 38t's between November 1942 and November 1943). This is how it looked.
By now, it is practically clear that the vehicle included as Marder III into the game will be the Ausführung H however. It was a later variant, produced in huge numbers (around 1100 pieces) from November 1942 to September 1943.
What can we expect from this vehicle in game?
Well, for starters, for the same weight (10,8 tons), it was equipped with more powerful engine (150/160hp Praga AC). Ingame Marder II also has a 160hp engine, so in stock configuration (Marder III's gun was the 75mm PaK 40) the vehicles will most likely perform equally. The frontal armor is a bit thicker (50mm compared to Marder II's 30mm), but at tier 4 it doesn't make that big of a difference, as T5-T6 vehicles will penetrate it with ease. Historically, Marder III Ausf.H carried a crew of 4 (compared to the 3 of the Marder II) - whether that's an advantage or not for World of Tanks is disputable.The vehicle is taller (2,5m compared to 2,2m of Marder II), so we can expect a bit worse camo factor.
What is the main reason I consider Ausf.H pretty much a done choice? Well, obviously apart from the leaked icons that hinted at Ausf.H - two things: first - in 1942, a prototype Ausf.H was made carrying the 76,2mm gun, making it the only Marder III model to historically carry both 76,2mm F-22 and the 75mm PaK. Second reason is even more interesting. There was a project to refit the Marder III with the 75mm PaK42 L/70. No prototype was ever built, the project ended on paper.
A lightweight vehicle with a very accurate and high-pen gun (the L/70) could fit tier 4 perfectly. Compared to the contemporary Hetzer, Marder III would be far worse protected and it would lack 105mm derp, making the "sniper" L/70 quite fitting. The weapon is heavier though, with it (in case the current ingame weights are kept), the weight of the vehicle would rise by 220kg to rougly 11 tons).
Other Marder III's
The second major variant (Ausf.M) had its superstructure shifted to the back and the engine to the middle. One of the main reasons for this is better engine access (resulting in less maintenance time) and easier and faster production (the model was simplified). It also carried one less crewmember. It carried the PaK 40 and from April 1943 to May 1944, around 975 were made and they served until the end of the war. Its inclusion (despite being the latest Marder III model) is unlikely, mostly because of the limited weapons options (it never carried the 76,2mm) and because of extremely thin armor (20mm instead of the 50mm of Ausf H).
Apart from the mentioned 76,2mm Ausf.H prototype, another vehicle was proposed: the mid-casemate Marder III with 75mm StuK 40, designated Sturmgeschütz 38(t). A prototype was made:
It is not clear whether this project has anything to do with the Marder III development, or it came to be separately. Some sources (I.Pejčoch) claim to former while others claim the latter and some sources (Doyle) claim the name Sturmgeschütz 38t was used for something else entirely (namely an assault gun based on the Hetzer).
Yet another variant was proposed (for training) - it was a regular Marder III, powered by a woodgas generator. Not very safe for combat.
What is not a Marder
Occassionally in various internet quizzes and "what's this" threads, several pictures pop up and various posters claim them to be Marders or even some new Marder prototypes. I have seen random claims saying that Marder I vehicles were at first equipped with 50mm L/60 PaK's. They were not. One picture exists but it's just a field conversion. This picture was taken in France and it shows a converted Marder I vehicle belonging to the French resistance. Whether this modification was done by the Germans or the French is not known.
Another picture that sometimes pops up is the "50mm Marder II" - but everyone can see the superstructure is different.
It's not really a Marder II, it's a field conversion of an original Panzer II with a Marder-inspired casemate structure attached. This vehicle belonged to the PanzerjägerAbteilung 128 of 23rd Panzer Division, the photo was taken in Summer 1943. This vehicle was led as active from 6/43 to 11/43.
A third special vehicle that is not a Marder is located on this picture, right behind the two tank wrecks.
Despite the casemate, it's in fact a Grille, refitted with a 75mm PaK 40. Probably one-time field conversion. And - last but not least - there was a Marder-ish proposal for a tank destroyer based on everyone's favourite scout, Panzer 38t n.A. Not much is known about it apart from the fact the engine was moved to the middle, so it probably resembled the Marder Ausf.M. No prototype was ever built.
today we are going to look at the upcoming Marder III tier 4 vehicle. Simple enough you say? Well... we'll see :)
First, a small history trip. I won't put here the detailed history of the Marder series, because it's well documented and even the wikipedia suffices for the basic idea. It's enough to say that the Marder vehicles were concieved as a cheap way to move PaK36(r) or PaK40 around withot having to tow it by horses, with some minor protection added as a bonus. It was a generally successful design line despite its obvious flaws. Basically it can be said that Marder I vehicles were based on captured French tanks, Marder II on Panzer II hulls and Marder III's on various types of the 38t chassis.
Marder I consisted of 3 basic variants: one was the conversion of the Lorraine tractor - this is the best known one, another was the conversion of the FCM 36 tank (that one is already in the game) and yet another was the Hotchkiss H39 conversion. They all carried the Pak 40 L/46 variant. Over a hundred vehicles were converted like this and some of them served until the end of the war. Marder I (39H) is depicted here:
Marder II also has its roots in Russia invasion and the need to get as many anti-tank guns to the frontline as possible. Self-propelled AT guns had one more "charm" too: in later years of war, it happened more than once that towed or even manpack AT guns had to be left behind, simply because no tractors or horses were available.This was especially a problem for very heavy AT guns, such as the PaK 43. Self-propelled AT guns such as the Marder series could simply drive away.
Marder II is already in the game, so there is no point in writing about it (the info about it is available anywhere, including wiki), BUT it wasn't the only Marder II. A perhaps lesser known, yet equally as important vehicle, designated Marder II (SdKfz 132) existed before the Marder II we know from World of Tanks. This is how it looked:
The ingame Marder II (SdKfz 131) was armed with a PaK 40 straight from the start and was built on the Panzer II Ausf.F/G chassis, while the SdKfz 132 was built on the earlier chassis (Ausf.D) and was armed with a captured Soviet 76,2mm gun (original Soviet designation: F-22). The earlier Marder II was shorter, but cca 1 ton heavier and also taller (earlier Marder II: 2,6m tall, later Marder II: 2,2m). It is worth noting that the later Marder was only ever equipped with the 75mm PaK 40, never with the Soviet 76,2mm, so the combination we have in game is not historical.
The earlier Marder II was faster too - 55km/h with the same engine as the later variant, but it also had one extra crewmember.
But now we will get to the vehicle this article is focused on, the Marder III.
When you say Marder III, most people will imagine two basic models: Ausf.H (as depicted on the first picture of this post) and Ausf.M with rear superstructure, that looks like this:
However, just like with the Marder II, neither of both is in fact the first incarnation of Marder III. The first Marder III has its roots - yet again - in the German invasion of Soviet Union. Just like with the early Marder II, it was equipped with the Soviet 76,2mm gun and was generally known as Panzerjäger 38(t) (do not mistake this for Jagdpanzer 38t, which is the "Hetzer") and it was based on the 38t Ausf.G chassis (in fact, all Marder III's were known as Panzerjäger 38(t), but the name is mostly used for this first one, with the latter types being mostly referred to simply as Marder III). It was a bit taller than the later Ausf.H but (like both the other variants) was propelled by the 150hp Praga engine. It carried the same armor as Ausf.H (50mm in the front, 15mm on the sides of both hull and superstructure). Around 344 were made between April 1942 and October 1942 (this number includes the 84 refits of obsolete Panzer 38t's between November 1942 and November 1943). This is how it looked.
By now, it is practically clear that the vehicle included as Marder III into the game will be the Ausführung H however. It was a later variant, produced in huge numbers (around 1100 pieces) from November 1942 to September 1943.
What can we expect from this vehicle in game?
Well, for starters, for the same weight (10,8 tons), it was equipped with more powerful engine (150/160hp Praga AC). Ingame Marder II also has a 160hp engine, so in stock configuration (Marder III's gun was the 75mm PaK 40) the vehicles will most likely perform equally. The frontal armor is a bit thicker (50mm compared to Marder II's 30mm), but at tier 4 it doesn't make that big of a difference, as T5-T6 vehicles will penetrate it with ease. Historically, Marder III Ausf.H carried a crew of 4 (compared to the 3 of the Marder II) - whether that's an advantage or not for World of Tanks is disputable.The vehicle is taller (2,5m compared to 2,2m of Marder II), so we can expect a bit worse camo factor.
What is the main reason I consider Ausf.H pretty much a done choice? Well, obviously apart from the leaked icons that hinted at Ausf.H - two things: first - in 1942, a prototype Ausf.H was made carrying the 76,2mm gun, making it the only Marder III model to historically carry both 76,2mm F-22 and the 75mm PaK. Second reason is even more interesting. There was a project to refit the Marder III with the 75mm PaK42 L/70. No prototype was ever built, the project ended on paper.
A lightweight vehicle with a very accurate and high-pen gun (the L/70) could fit tier 4 perfectly. Compared to the contemporary Hetzer, Marder III would be far worse protected and it would lack 105mm derp, making the "sniper" L/70 quite fitting. The weapon is heavier though, with it (in case the current ingame weights are kept), the weight of the vehicle would rise by 220kg to rougly 11 tons).
Other Marder III's
The second major variant (Ausf.M) had its superstructure shifted to the back and the engine to the middle. One of the main reasons for this is better engine access (resulting in less maintenance time) and easier and faster production (the model was simplified). It also carried one less crewmember. It carried the PaK 40 and from April 1943 to May 1944, around 975 were made and they served until the end of the war. Its inclusion (despite being the latest Marder III model) is unlikely, mostly because of the limited weapons options (it never carried the 76,2mm) and because of extremely thin armor (20mm instead of the 50mm of Ausf H).
Apart from the mentioned 76,2mm Ausf.H prototype, another vehicle was proposed: the mid-casemate Marder III with 75mm StuK 40, designated Sturmgeschütz 38(t). A prototype was made:
It is not clear whether this project has anything to do with the Marder III development, or it came to be separately. Some sources (I.Pejčoch) claim to former while others claim the latter and some sources (Doyle) claim the name Sturmgeschütz 38t was used for something else entirely (namely an assault gun based on the Hetzer).
Yet another variant was proposed (for training) - it was a regular Marder III, powered by a woodgas generator. Not very safe for combat.
What is not a Marder
Occassionally in various internet quizzes and "what's this" threads, several pictures pop up and various posters claim them to be Marders or even some new Marder prototypes. I have seen random claims saying that Marder I vehicles were at first equipped with 50mm L/60 PaK's. They were not. One picture exists but it's just a field conversion. This picture was taken in France and it shows a converted Marder I vehicle belonging to the French resistance. Whether this modification was done by the Germans or the French is not known.
Another picture that sometimes pops up is the "50mm Marder II" - but everyone can see the superstructure is different.
It's not really a Marder II, it's a field conversion of an original Panzer II with a Marder-inspired casemate structure attached. This vehicle belonged to the PanzerjägerAbteilung 128 of 23rd Panzer Division, the photo was taken in Summer 1943. This vehicle was led as active from 6/43 to 11/43.
A third special vehicle that is not a Marder is located on this picture, right behind the two tank wrecks.
Despite the casemate, it's in fact a Grille, refitted with a 75mm PaK 40. Probably one-time field conversion. And - last but not least - there was a Marder-ish proposal for a tank destroyer based on everyone's favourite scout, Panzer 38t n.A. Not much is known about it apart from the fact the engine was moved to the middle, so it probably resembled the Marder Ausf.M. No prototype was ever built.
Apr 30, 2013
30.4.2013 part 2
- the Chinese Type 100 tank destroyer is nothing else but a Soviet SU-100, license-manufactured (or perhaps only imported to) in China
- some time ago, the game mechanics allowed the engine to burn after any hit (regardless how small), it was changed (a threshold for needed damage per hit was added) because lowtier vehicles burned too much after being hit by rapidfire autocannons
- the Maus speed was set "according to the data coming from its developers"
Storm confirmed this is completely correct - a player called Crueldwarf explains how the mantlet works:
This post was related to the tier 8 medium tank mantlets (specifically Indienpanzer mantlet thickness whine). Basically, all tanks have "empty space" (a zone with very thin armor) behind their mantlet, as demonstrated by the picture above. The difference is, Pershing has much thicker mantlet than other tier 8 meds and T-44 has only a small "empty" space behind the mantlet.
Basically, Pershing second turret has a 203mm thick mantlet in the center and 57mm thick on the rims, but the rims overlap with the turret armor that is 101mm thick, making the armor there 158mm thick in effect. The thickest parts (where the mantlet center overlaps with the turret armor - very thin), the armor is 304mm thick.
The T-44 (both turrets) has only a 120mm thick mantlet, but the "hole" behind it is relatively small. Only the center of the mantlet is completely penetrable. The rims that overlap with the turret armor make the armor effectively 240mm thick - and that is difficult to break.
The Indienpanzer has a 130mm thick mantlet (in the center), but the hole behind it is very large. Additionally, the mantlet rims are only 100mm (inner rim) and 55mm (outer rim, as shown on the picture) thick. The huge "hole" is the price to pay for very good elevation and depression. In effect, only a very small part of the mantlet is cca 170mm thick, the rest (notably the center) is 120-130mm thick. Generally, the mantlet of the Indienpanzer is very thin for its size.
- some time ago, the game mechanics allowed the engine to burn after any hit (regardless how small), it was changed (a threshold for needed damage per hit was added) because lowtier vehicles burned too much after being hit by rapidfire autocannons
- the Maus speed was set "according to the data coming from its developers"
Storm confirmed this is completely correct - a player called Crueldwarf explains how the mantlet works:
This post was related to the tier 8 medium tank mantlets (specifically Indienpanzer mantlet thickness whine). Basically, all tanks have "empty space" (a zone with very thin armor) behind their mantlet, as demonstrated by the picture above. The difference is, Pershing has much thicker mantlet than other tier 8 meds and T-44 has only a small "empty" space behind the mantlet.
Basically, Pershing second turret has a 203mm thick mantlet in the center and 57mm thick on the rims, but the rims overlap with the turret armor that is 101mm thick, making the armor there 158mm thick in effect. The thickest parts (where the mantlet center overlaps with the turret armor - very thin), the armor is 304mm thick.
The T-44 (both turrets) has only a 120mm thick mantlet, but the "hole" behind it is relatively small. Only the center of the mantlet is completely penetrable. The rims that overlap with the turret armor make the armor effectively 240mm thick - and that is difficult to break.
The Indienpanzer has a 130mm thick mantlet (in the center), but the hole behind it is very large. Additionally, the mantlet rims are only 100mm (inner rim) and 55mm (outer rim, as shown on the picture) thick. The huge "hole" is the price to pay for very good elevation and depression. In effect, only a very small part of the mantlet is cca 170mm thick, the rest (notably the center) is 120-130mm thick. Generally, the mantlet of the Indienpanzer is very thin for its size.
30.4.2013
Thanks to *anonymous guy* for showing me that livejournal.ru post - you guys should really sign so I know who to thank occasionally :)
So, I think we do know another part of what will come in 0.8.6: equipment rebalance. See further.
- so, the Russian (yet another) World of Tanks ripoff is getting sued by Wargaming for plagiarism (SS: TBH, quite rightfully so)
- the devs did think about limiting the maximum amount of gold ammo carried by a tank, but decided not to do it in the end
- T32 and M46 are considered balanced
- when setting the landscape on minimum settings, you might get glitches, such as shells flying into the ground because on higher setting, there is some terrain mold or something, which is invisible in lowest settings. The reason for it was that the developers discovered that on some very weak computers, players modified the ingame settings manually in game files to reach the same thing: a significant FPS increase. That's why it was implemented officially, despite the fact it can cause terrain bugs. Storm states that if this setting is too buggy for you (despite the fact Wargming fixed the worst bugs), move the landscape graphics setting up one point.
- an engine can catch fire on any damage (above some - small - threshold, f.x. lowtier machineguns and autocannons), it doesn't have to be yellow to catch fire
And now Storm's answers from the livejournal post:
- detailed armor scheme for each tank will eventually be implemented into the hangar
- breakable objects that cause vehicles to slow down a lot (fences, walls) will be fixed
- railways will be "sunk" into the ground so they don't limit tank movement in any way
- the base structure (SS: that crap in the middle of each base that blocks shells) won't be removed
- the mechanism for (AP/APCR) shells to actually punch thru soft cover (fences, etc.) instead of being eaten by it will be implemented in 0.8.6, but the covers itself will be fixed in separate patches (SS: eg. the mechanism will be only programmed, but not activated)
- spall liner will be re-made in 0.8.6 (it will be different for various tanks, it will absorb from 15 to 30 percent HE/ramming damage)
- there will be "other options" for those who fear arty (artyphobes)
So, I think we do know another part of what will come in 0.8.6: equipment rebalance. See further.
- so, the Russian (yet another) World of Tanks ripoff is getting sued by Wargaming for plagiarism (SS: TBH, quite rightfully so)
- the devs did think about limiting the maximum amount of gold ammo carried by a tank, but decided not to do it in the end
- T32 and M46 are considered balanced
- when setting the landscape on minimum settings, you might get glitches, such as shells flying into the ground because on higher setting, there is some terrain mold or something, which is invisible in lowest settings. The reason for it was that the developers discovered that on some very weak computers, players modified the ingame settings manually in game files to reach the same thing: a significant FPS increase. That's why it was implemented officially, despite the fact it can cause terrain bugs. Storm states that if this setting is too buggy for you (despite the fact Wargming fixed the worst bugs), move the landscape graphics setting up one point.
- an engine can catch fire on any damage (above some - small - threshold, f.x. lowtier machineguns and autocannons), it doesn't have to be yellow to catch fire
And now Storm's answers from the livejournal post:
- detailed armor scheme for each tank will eventually be implemented into the hangar
- breakable objects that cause vehicles to slow down a lot (fences, walls) will be fixed
- railways will be "sunk" into the ground so they don't limit tank movement in any way
- the base structure (SS: that crap in the middle of each base that blocks shells) won't be removed
- the mechanism for (AP/APCR) shells to actually punch thru soft cover (fences, etc.) instead of being eaten by it will be implemented in 0.8.6, but the covers itself will be fixed in separate patches (SS: eg. the mechanism will be only programmed, but not activated)
- spall liner will be re-made in 0.8.6 (it will be different for various tanks, it will absorb from 15 to 30 percent HE/ramming damage)
- there will be "other options" for those who fear arty (artyphobes)
Ensign's Q&A Answers #3
By EnsignExpendable
Continuing my Q&A feature, here is the #3 batch of questions!
Q: Can you list all the proposed KV-4 blueprints, their implementations in-game, their actual speed, and armour schematics? What tiers can they be implemented in?
A: I don't have all of them, but I do have some. Data on the designs is a little sparse. For some, not even their creator is known. There are twenty of these things, so I'll cover the interesting ones.
In game, Fedorenko's design would be roughly the same, except with a bigger weak spot where the 45 mm turret is. It is hard to talk about viability of the design in-game, as armour layouts are unknown.
This tank has a bit more data on it. Also similar to the current KV-4, with a bit less gun depression due to the center turret. The armour and weight are about the same as the current in-game KV-4. The speed is a little higher.
This KV-4 is a little faster and shorter than the one in game. The designer apparently hated gun depression with a passion, as none is found here.
Shashmurin's design takes an M3 Lee-like approach: big gun in the hull, small gun in the turret. This thing had little advantages over any of the other designs.
This is another TD-like project. The armour is reduced to 125 mm. Maybe this can be a tier 7, if it doesn't get the huge gun.
Mihailov's project combines speed with firepower. The useless 45 mm gun is removed, along with its weak spot. The tank itself is lighter than the one in the game, at 86.5 tons. This isn't even the fastest project, Sychev's KV-4 would go 55 kph (sadly, no blueprint is provided).
As you can see, all KV-4s are roughly the same. Some of the weaker armoured ones might do well at tier 7, but there is not very much spread.
Q: Is the current 107 mm top gun on the KV-4 close to reality?
A: Let's take a look at Soviet 107 mm guns. The top gun is the "107 mm high power gun". It gets a pretty impressive 188 mm of penetration at 1000 meters, against armour sloped at 30 degrees. Since WoT measures penetration against flat armour at 100 meters, I'm going to have to do some approximations.
The ZiS-6 gun in game gets 167 mm of penetration. The ZiS-6 in that document gets 115 mm of penetration. Assuming the ratios hold, the longer gun in WoT should have about 273 mm of penetration. The in-game gun only has 227 mm of penetration. Russian Bias, why have you abandoned me!?
Q: Are there Russian tanks similar to the Sturmtiger? I have read about the RBT-5 and a KV variant with Katyusha rockets.
A: There were self propelled T-34 mortar projects, both less than and greater than the Sturmtiger caliber. There was also a 400 mm mortar project for the T-34 and KV-1S, but they didn't have the armoured casemate of the Sturmtiger. A project existed to mount the BM-13 rockets on a KV-1, but it never went anywhere.
Continuing my Q&A feature, here is the #3 batch of questions!
Q: Can you list all the proposed KV-4 blueprints, their implementations in-game, their actual speed, and armour schematics? What tiers can they be implemented in?
A: I don't have all of them, but I do have some. Data on the designs is a little sparse. For some, not even their creator is known. There are twenty of these things, so I'll cover the interesting ones.
 |
| Fedorenko's design. 107 mm gun in the turret, 45 mm gun in the dome turret. Speed: 21.6-38 kph |
 |
| Kruchenyh's design. 107.7 tons, 107 mm gun in the turret, 45 mm in the smaller turret. Speed: 35 kph. Front armour: 180 mm. |
 |
| Buganov's design. 107 mm gun, 45 mm gun in the smaller turret. Speed: 36 kph. |
 |
| Shashmurin's design. 107 mm gun in the hull, 76 mm gun in the turret. Speed: 35 kph. |
 |
| Tarapatin's project. 107 mm gun in the turret, 45 mm gun in the upper turret. Speed: 35 kph. |
 |
| Mihailov's project. 107 mm gun in the turret, 45 mm gun in the hull. Speed: 50 kph. |
As you can see, all KV-4s are roughly the same. Some of the weaker armoured ones might do well at tier 7, but there is not very much spread.
Q: Is the current 107 mm top gun on the KV-4 close to reality?
A: Let's take a look at Soviet 107 mm guns. The top gun is the "107 mm high power gun". It gets a pretty impressive 188 mm of penetration at 1000 meters, against armour sloped at 30 degrees. Since WoT measures penetration against flat armour at 100 meters, I'm going to have to do some approximations.
The ZiS-6 gun in game gets 167 mm of penetration. The ZiS-6 in that document gets 115 mm of penetration. Assuming the ratios hold, the longer gun in WoT should have about 273 mm of penetration. The in-game gun only has 227 mm of penetration. Russian Bias, why have you abandoned me!?
Q: Are there Russian tanks similar to the Sturmtiger? I have read about the RBT-5 and a KV variant with Katyusha rockets.
A: There were self propelled T-34 mortar projects, both less than and greater than the Sturmtiger caliber. There was also a 400 mm mortar project for the T-34 and KV-1S, but they didn't have the armoured casemate of the Sturmtiger. A project existed to mount the BM-13 rockets on a KV-1, but it never went anywhere.
As for the RBT-5, it was an interesting tank indeed. While keeping its 45 mm gun, it was equipped with two 250 kg "tank torpedoes", capable of the same destructive power as 305 mm guns, capable of taking out enemy heavy tanks and concrete bunkers. The rockets were aimed with the standard gun sight. The 45 mm gun was used to acquire the range, and then the rockets would be fired after converting it using a table. The range of these rockets was up to 1500 meters. However, the rockets were vulnerable to bullets, shells, and shrapnel, so the project was axed.
Another rocket BT project was developed, a BT-5 with 132 mm rockets. Rather than being produced for some combat purpose, it was produced to determine the effect of rocket exhaust on the tank and its crew. Turns out that it was harmless, but was unacceptable in terms of fire safety. The project was discontinued, but the data gathered was used in the Katyusha program.
As for direct equivalents of the Sturmtiger, I don't know of any. The largest caliber the Soviets put in a tank expected to participate in close combat was 203 mm.
Q: I heard about the successor of the T-39, the T-42, and I was wondering if there is any info about it.
A: The T-42 was not a successor, but a predecessor to the T-39 (the T indexes are not sequential). The story of the T-42 begins in 1930, when the USSR invited foreign specialists to consult with on tank building. One of these specialists was German engineer Eduard Grote. The, as SerB puts it, "gloomy Teutonic genius" seems to be set on ridiculously heavy tanks, as Grote proposed a 1000 ton tank in 1931 with either three or six turrets, two 304 mm guns, four 152 mm and 76 mm guns, and two 45 mm guns, with a crew of 40 people. This proposal was denied. Grote proposed a slightly more reasonable tank, only 75 tons. There were only three guns, two 45 mm, and one 76 or 100 mm. The tank crew was 10 people. Based on this project, he also designed a heavier tank, the T-42. The tank's mass was 100 tons, armour up to 70 mm. The main gun, 107 mm in caliber, would be placed in a center turret, that could rotate 270 degrees. A 76 mm gun was placed in the front turret, which could rotate 202 degrees. A 45 mm gun was placed in the rear turret, which could rotate 278 degrees. The tank was planned to be accelerated to 30 kph with a 2000 hp engine. It could also cross up to 2 m deep rivers with a watertight hull and turrets.
As of fall of 1931, it was decided that Grote's services are no longer required.
That's it for now! Keep sending those questions in to tankarchives@gmail.com, or post them in the comments.
Apr 29, 2013
The_Chieftain on 8.6
First, a quote from The_Chieftain on 8.6 (27th April, 12:05):
Well, I've seen the 8.6 notes, and they are far more significant than I
had been led to believe. Arty is, as the devs on the Russian forum
reported, getting a major re-work, some things I think are good, some
not so good. We'll see how it pans out. Arty isn't the only thing
getting significantly changed either. The 'nuclear' comment is somewhat
justified.
Now I am curious :) Truth to be told, I expect some change of gold-ammo-for-creds type: useful for some but controversial for others. Sexton I and Excelsior are also scheduled to appear.
29.4.2013
- 0.8.6 confirmed to come out in June 2013 (on RU server anyway)
- there is no difference between early (pre-war), wartime and post-war armor quality in game
- there will be some upcoming changes in mods (SS: related to the new artillery hack mod), "follow the news" (SS: one proposed solution was a "mod certification", without which the mod won't be accepted)
- the fact that when your game client crashes and your tank gets destroyed by leaving the battle even if the victory is certain (for example, last enemy tank just died) resulting in a loss/draw is fine according to devs
- US "Hunter" tank destroyer won't be implemented
- SerB regarding the players actually being able to make money while using exclusively tier 5 gold derp shells: "Good players have the right not to lose credits while shooting gold shells. And the bad players must either train harder or not use gold shells at all."
- if you dismissed some crews until now, you won't get them back even if the option to buy back the dismissed crews is introduced, because data about them are not being stored
- Q: "We want better quality models" A: "Want realism? Join the army."
- the next global update (SS: as big as for example the patch that introduced physics) will be 0.9.0
- no plans to introduce 100 percent crew training for credits
- if you experience lag when switching from arcade to sniper mode and vice versa, apparently your computer is at fault, there is no such bug in WoT
- it's possible that there will be some special company-level archivements ("awards") implemented in time
- devs do track the amount of various tanks sitting in player garages
- tier 10 Chinese vehicles are doing fine statistically
- Historical battles will come eventually. Hardcore mode: "Want hardcore? Join the army."
- maps bigger than 1x1 introduction is limited by the existence low-end player computers
- German M10 Panther will recieve the US Star as its emblem instead of the cross, it's planned
- there is no difference between early (pre-war), wartime and post-war armor quality in game
- there will be some upcoming changes in mods (SS: related to the new artillery hack mod), "follow the news" (SS: one proposed solution was a "mod certification", without which the mod won't be accepted)
- the fact that when your game client crashes and your tank gets destroyed by leaving the battle even if the victory is certain (for example, last enemy tank just died) resulting in a loss/draw is fine according to devs
- US "Hunter" tank destroyer won't be implemented
- SerB regarding the players actually being able to make money while using exclusively tier 5 gold derp shells: "Good players have the right not to lose credits while shooting gold shells. And the bad players must either train harder or not use gold shells at all."
- if you dismissed some crews until now, you won't get them back even if the option to buy back the dismissed crews is introduced, because data about them are not being stored
- Q: "We want better quality models" A: "Want realism? Join the army."
- the next global update (SS: as big as for example the patch that introduced physics) will be 0.9.0
- no plans to introduce 100 percent crew training for credits
- if you experience lag when switching from arcade to sniper mode and vice versa, apparently your computer is at fault, there is no such bug in WoT
- it's possible that there will be some special company-level archivements ("awards") implemented in time
- devs do track the amount of various tanks sitting in player garages
- tier 10 Chinese vehicles are doing fine statistically
- Historical battles will come eventually. Hardcore mode: "Want hardcore? Join the army."
- maps bigger than 1x1 introduction is limited by the existence low-end player computers
- German M10 Panther will recieve the US Star as its emblem instead of the cross, it's planned
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)