Jump to content


Verified Tanker [NA]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Legiondude

  • Rank
    Fascist Box Tanker
  • Birthday 10/30/1993

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Server

Recent Profile Visitors

1,711 profile views
  1. Pankov goes by the alias "Evilly", according to Slava Makarov he's responsible for major changes to WoT's direction in 2015, or roughly patch 9.6 and onward
  2. Nope, Panther II was a Panther with more armor, that's it. The original plan was that Panther II would replace the just manufactured Panther D series with a small cushion of Panther A before switching to the PII A better analogy for the Panther II's relationship to the Panther is like the 76mm Jumbo's relation to it's fellow M4A3's @GehakteMolen Well there's reason for adding it. Besides the recently discovered Skoda proposal for mounting a 10.5cm L/40.5, Porsche was entertaining a 10.5cm L/47 and L/52 for the project. Technically they were being entertained as early as whe
  3. Well the in game IS-6 was actually designed to have -3, but it gets -6 for playability reasons. This trend is done to many Soviet vehicles in game, but only relatively recently permitted to the Chinese counterparts as well Daigensui actually responded to that claim on the NA forums, basically the 15cm has no breech so it can get away with crazier angles than one would normally expect Our IS-6 is the Object 252 that was built, this Object 252 is one of the preliminary designs
  4. The Chrysler K design was intended to make use of the remote driving mechanism tested on the T23 and would see later conceptual use on the MBT-70. Going by the scopes on the turret, it would probably be on the front left quadrant of the turret, and afforded the view from the rotating scope and possibly the loader's side periscopes behind him. However unlike the Object 416 because it was actually built, Hunnicutt doesn't specify if the turret design was limited in it's traversing ability because of the remote control. Referencing his book on the T20 series, the remote control syste
  5. It was designed for the 105mm in mind, so that's what it gets However there is plenty of room to rebalance the gun's pen for the better
  6. The_Chieftain did call it a "hero" tank, so that's probably it
  7. Real stats are the frame and foundation of the tank's concept, if there's a place where an outside observer might expect a "real" stat and in place is a "balance" stat it's not because WG necessarily had a historical stat and dumped in one of their own, it's because WG had already categorically designated that to be used as a balance stat(i.e. reload times) and researchers(paid employees like Yuri Pasholok or contributors like Ren and sp15) are already not necessarily focusing on collecting that data when they go archive mining.
  8. 90mm T15 is one option, however if they did that they'd probably use the T15E1's pen stats(T32, T25/2, T26E4) instead of the E2's(current M26) The other option we threw around the NA forum was using an intermediary M3 based cannon, which made perfect sense back when the STA-2's gun only had 185mm pen. The reason being that it would be perfect in designating an "early" M3 from a "late" M3 and then more advanced cannons(such as the Patton's 90mm guns, seen on the STA-1 when elite and the M56 Scorpion). But WG went with changing the jump from 160-185-219 to 160-212-219, so that's out the win
  9. Part of the problem is how strict WG is in gathering historical data(as relayed publicly by The_Chieftain) due to issues such as with the Super Pershing and the E 25, and this problem is compounded by how one-directional balancing premium tanks has become once they're released. Nerfing was pretty much completely off the table until WG dipped a toe back in the pool when they adjusted the STA-2. If the LS-50 is at such a paper level that WG has to really fill in the blanks(and Ren has hinted at it being around E-series level of paper-ness), then say if WG comes across some document o
  10. The T26E5's upper glacis is 152.4mm, it's hard to tell from the Tank Inspector image but I think the turret face just bordering the mantlet edge is 203mm with 191mm on the cheeks and radiating out from there(which would be consistent with Hunnicutt's data) In terms of effective armor, the T26E5's upper glacis is (assuming head on conditions) 152.4mm at 46 degrees, or 202mm vs AP and 219mm vs HEAT By comparison, the T32's glacis is 127mm at 54 degrees, or 194 vs AP and 216 vs HEAT The T26E5 is basically the American attempt to fit a Tiger II's armor scheme on a Pershing
  11. Just remembered they did the same thing with the Panzer IV H(and all subsequent HD models that use it as a base, so Pz3/4 next patch, Pz3K, Pz5/4, probably gonna hit Pz4D....)
  12. I'm betting they're just omitting that in the supertest notes in favor of actual features They started the HD conversions two and a half years ago, and by my estimates they still have at least another year before they finish
  13. Well the Chi-Ri is big because it uses big equipment.If they threw out the autoloader(belt fed or tray loading), the hull mounted 37mm, and the large gasoline engine, the Chi-Ri II ends up looking almost like the Chi-To
  14. The Leo is a half meter shorter in length(gun forward) and height, and roughly the same width as an M4A3E8
  • Create New...