hall0

Verified Tanker [EU]
  • Content count

    1,829
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About hall0

  • Rank
    Pours HE Over Waffles

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Server
    EU

Recent Profile Visitors

24,411 profile views
  1. You mean spaced part? Ehm no. 90° direct into the sides tanks.gg gives you ~220-258mm. And this is totally non angled. Above the spaced you get your 200 pretty much the same as on the IS-7. Spaced armor is as blackholy as it is on all Russky Heavys. Just below the spaced there is a small area with ~200mm. A bit lower and the fun with the angling starts. Only a fool would call this a weakspot. Angle a bit and you get numbers up to 500 and more. Cool story. This side armor is flat out better than the IS-7s and it is a tier lower. And as usual pike noses get worse if you angle it. But hey. Even angled too hard, it still gives you 250-260mm protection without the flater shoulders the IS-7 has to deal with. Facing an enemy who is not willing to shoot gold you are safe. Not being able to get tracked with dmg is just the cherry on top. But hey it has an overmatchable roof. Definitely balanced. We are discussing numbers here and not feelings. And just by the stats comparing it to other tanks we can already see a picture. And just because there are no "going ham" videos of a tank which has been released just one day ago that does not mean the tank is good to go. I don't even know why this should be an argument at all.
  2. Meanwhile the chineses T34-2 sits in the corner and cries.
  3. I saw Anfields pen test video on the Obj 257 yesterday and I am concerned. The 430U he used to pen it wasn't able to pen the sides reliable. (I tell you nothing new here :P) But why I am concerned is the following. WG can't really change this. Unlike the German box tanks or this turret bug one post above, the armor does not come from thickness. It is just ridiculous angled. And I can't think of a case WG changed the angling of armor plates. At least not in a huge amount like it would be necessary here. So what can they do? Change the whole model or at least the hitbox model to an unrealistic but gameplay acceptable level? Make the sides overmatchable? This whole angled sidearmor, spaced armor bullshit which creates blackholes eating all the shells was always on of the reasons Russian tanks forgive mistakes and make it perfect beginners. But this is a whole new level of bullshit.
  4. I drove several rounds with the SU76 on a community event. It was fun, but not 300€ fun
  5. Don´t bitch about 777v2 stats which are about 2 years old
  6. So my first guess was correct. Even though the Obj 277 looked a bit more fitting. Maybe they are gonna change it again in the future.
  7. Thank god for this 2x event on the EU Server. 

    Because of this I could finish the AMX 65t grind without going completely insane. 
    This piece of garbage is the worst T8 heavy I ever drove. It even makes the unbuffed Caernarvon look good. 

  8. Can somebody plz tell me which role this tank should fulfill? As I usually do I play it stock to elite no free XP (yeah I am retarded I know). But so far this tank has nothing to go for it and I don't see it will ever will. The hull is absolutely trash, so far everything penned me there. Gun handling is shit. DPM is not very good either. Stock turret is OK if they wont hit the cupola. Speed is atrocious and top engine does not seem to make it any better (friend has it already unlocked but it did not turn the tank into a speed beast). Top turret will increase your weakspot, lessens your gun depression but gives you bit better gun handling. And not to forget it turns the tank into a ugly duckling. Is the 120mm worth the XP? 46k XP is almost a third of what I need to get to T9 and I don't rly feel I want to play this tank any longer. This tank has to be one of the worst T8s maybe even the worst T8 out there. Ok maybe it shares this place with the TVP.
  9. If you want weakspots use gold. That's WG's doctrine for over a year now. - Found something interesting about the Obj 277 in the War Thunder Forum. It was based on ideas from the Is7 and T-10. Hmm I want to change my bet from Obj 777 to 277. https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/258986-soviet-heavy-tank-object-277/& Development: "In 1957 the Object 277 was developed by J.Y. Kotin's design bureau. The new tank was based on the ideas from the IS-7 and the T-10. Object 277 was armed with a 130 mm M-65 gun and a coaxial 14.5mm KPVT machine-gun. The gun was equipped with a Groza (Thunderstorm) 2-plane stabilizer and a night vision system. Ammunition consisted of 26 shells for the main gun and 250 rounds for the machine-gun. The tank had a diesel engine of 1,090hp. The Object 277 was equipped with an anti-nuclear defense system, a system of clearing the sights and a system for underwater river crossings. The crew consisted of four men, and the tank had good maneuverability. Two tanks were built in 1958."
  10. Obj 277 seems OP? Boys I think we found the new T10 tank.
  11. By bets for the new Tier X tank after the T10: Obj 777 It is im the game files for a long time. And it looks like a fast heavyum so it would make a logical successor.
  12. But why does the Mauerbrecher again has this weakspot? An outlier from the outlier? WG is missing a common thread. Sometimes they do it this way, the next time the other. And this makes WGs policy so weird.
  13. The thing is. Having this flat MG ports on the ufp on the visual model but not modeling them in the collision model is one of the worst moves WG did in the last years.
  14. Well with the removal of the Su 122 54 the line makes at least sense Gameplay wise. Everything has the gun in the back now and the Su 122 54 makes a good T8 premium.
  15. I wonder what the T10 will be. The only thing what seems to be certain, is that it will have the turret in the back.