Jump to content
N00BSAIB0T

FV215B being replaced with the Chieftain

Recommended Posts

1. Not only that, but a front-mounted turret means a huge, huge buff versus arty compared to what the 215b currently has to deal with

 

3. Top speed > hp/t, especially as a heavy

An IS-7 will always be faster than a T110E5 despite the latter having better "mobility"

4. Losing an equipment piece most people don't use or shouldn't use? It's a shame for the few that do, but for most people there won't be any difference

5. The 215b already has extremely weak side armor, maybe not so weak it will get overmatched by most guns but either way sidescraping with it is effectively useless, the "loss" of side armor will barely even be noticeable

To add to that, HESH does not overmatch, it explodes on impact with any spaced armor

 

Unless they really screw up the gun stats, this is overall a clear huge buff for the soon-to-be-215b-replacement

If they make it a British T110E5 with higher top speed, better gun and better gun depression, and a better armor layout, you can bet your ass this thing will be meta

I can only think of 4 ways in which they can screw it up totally or make it not as good as it's hyped up to be:

 

1. Mobility is complete trash even with the higher top speed, WG will give it garbage TR and it will move like a Maus everywhere but on a downwards slope

2. Gun soft stats are worse than even the Conqueror, I mean stuff like TD-hull turning levels of bloom

3. Gun hard stats are worse than the current 215b, 6.9 ROF is barely cutting it as it is and it certainly doesn't need worse accuracy, aim time, or rate of fire

4. They give it HEAT instead of APCR

.

Mobility trash... I can beleive that.

Trash soft gun stats? Nah, I don't think so, though given the TD line went from pewpew to 183... maybe.

Worse gun hard stats? I can believe this in terms of ROF, but alpha I think should be around 410 to reflect the power of the L11A1 gun

HEAT instead of APCR? I doubt.

.

Right, should be 0.9.1. Forgot about it.

.

What happened in 9.1? HEAT autobounce nerf? Interesting....

.

Please tell me which character from what work your avatar is, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iirc yeah, this was the patch.

The girl in the avatar is entropy in a webcomic called Lessa/Lessa the crimson knight. Check it out, imho it is worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iirc yeah, this was the patch.

The girl in the avatar is entropy in a webcomic called Lessa/Lessa the crimson knight. Check it out, imho it is worth it.

.

Ah if only they'd used a modified version of that face for Tali's photo from Mass Effect 3 the rage would have been far less. Thanks for the info, I need to note that HEAT is even worse than before now... ugh.

 

In other news I hope the roof on the Chieftain isn't too weak, because I'm starting to really HATE my M103's butter turret, my E50 turret bounces way more due to angles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current 215B (120) is a tank that, IIRC, has no historical basis. The 215B was trialed with a 183 mm gun, and we have that in game as the FV215B (183). WG created the 120 mm variant to fit the top of the British tree, and in their move towards historical accuracy (as evidenced by them introducing the Waffle-E-100, a tank that fought at the Normandy landings), they will replace the 215B with a Chieftain prototype.

 

Won the internet. 

 

you_have_won_the_internet_by_spencershot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[snip]

If they make it a British T110E5 with higher top speed, better gun and better gun depression, and a better armor layout, you can bet your ass this thing will be meta

I can only think of 4 ways in which they can screw it up totally or make it not as good as it's hyped up to be:

 

1. Mobility is complete trash even with the higher top speed, WG will give it garbage TR and it will move like a Maus everywhere but on a downwards slope // you put a lot of faith in simple top speed; 50 120 has an amazing top speed but passability so trash you wouldn't know it

2. Gun soft stats are worse than even the Conqueror, I mean stuff like TD-hull turning levels of bloom // uh, the Conqueror is the BEST; it easily exceeds the 215b; do you just mean "worse than current 215b bloom?"

3. Gun hard stats are worse than the current 215b, 6.9 ROF is barely cutting it as it is and it certainly doesn't need worse accuracy, aim time, or rate of fire

4. They give it HEAT instead of APCR

I don't share your faith in WG.net bequeathing a non-Russian tank gaudy parameters. And so what if they do? It'll have to be nerfed. They've double proven unable to really release "sweet spot" parameter tanks. Probably one of the few is the Leopard 1. A very, very potent tank in good hands, but almost impossible-to-be OP on server win rates because it's soft as shit, and can't just DPM / overpen / overkill things like TD's. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mobility on a heavy comes in 3 forms: "mobile" fast, "downhill" fast, and Maus

Examples of a mobile tank would be the E5 and IS-8, they have decent top speeds and good mobility for a heavy

Examples of a downhill tank would be the AMX 50B and the IS-7, they only reach their top speeds (and for that matter, any respectable form of speed) when going down a slope, otherwise they are for the most part not much better off than a mobile heavy

Maus heavy is self-explanatory

 

Given that heavies can rely on their armor, seldom will they ever need to relocate

The times when they DO need to relocate they just need to find the lowest depression to travel by and they're almost like a medium tank, something a top-speed restricted tank will never experience

Why top speed > mobility is the reason why the T-62A will never beat an E 50 M in a race

 

-

 

Believe it or not, the Conqueror actually has worse soft stats than the 215b!

215b has 0.08 turret, 0.10 hull

Conqueror has 0.10 turret and 0.12 hull

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that the 215B is a tier 10, that's perfectly believable. Those are still really impressive stats though. Maybe I should start my slog through the Churchills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The grind is terrific. But the T9 and T10 imho are worth it even now. If the FV gets replaced with a chieftain and they don't massively screw it... Well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally a reason to continue this grind. I like BP, but had no intention on going further because i had no interest in tier 10 (because it looked unappealing), but now.... mmmmm oh yeah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, I'm afraid they will replace it for what will be a 215b gun and turret, moved forward, with the drivetrain of a Tortoise.  Or a slower Conq with more armor.  Or maybe a Conq with a 215b turret, 10* depression, and a wicked UFP/LFP? (Better)    

 

The above Tort mobility comment might not be true (IRL at least), looking at write-ups from trials with the 550 HP engine.  The cross-country mobility was only equal to the Mk. 7 Centurion due to low power, and after the ground clearance was increased from 17" to 22", for muddy spring thaw conditions.  This was done by replacing the Road Wheels with Centurion Road Wheels, and increasing the suspension trim height by only 1".

 

So if they give us the early model, we 'could' have similar offroad to the Mk. 7, with less swamp mobility, and be 5" lower than the final tank.  OR, give the ground clearance and be the same.  (The semi-auto hot shift trans gave a big chunk of the mobility improvement, vs. the poor HP/Ton.  Understandable, if you ever waddled around with a poor shifting manual tank in the mud and crud.)  

 

 

This was another fun exerpt, "They culminated the trial with a 72 hour closed-down exercise, where the hatches were sealed and the vehicle did 10 hours of cross-country each day with all systems on, being fueled and serviced from an outside crew."  Nothing like a good  three day NBC shakedown.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/07/30/interview-with-evilly-qa/

 

 

- FV4202 will be replaced along with the Firefly branch, close to the end of the year, either with Vickers MBT or Chieftain prototype, FV4202 will be changed because it’s the worst tank of its tier

- it’s not decided yet whether the FV215b will be replaced by something else

- FV4202 will be turned into tier 8 premium tank, owners of the tier 10 FV4202 will most likely get the premium tank for free (!!!) the way it happened before with the T34

 

Looks like they can't make up their fucking minds or they simply don't talk to each other. Good thing I haven't started grinding either line yet. No time and no desire whatsoever to grind both lines just to get a Chieftain.

 

 

EDIT: lol, barely an hour later, comes this:

 

http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/07/30/british-tanks-final-decision/

Edited by Vilshofen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be a reason to grind the brit lines. The lack of a serious hulldowner at T10 was unacceptable

Working as intended I'm sure. Ultimate Western Trump Card has to be kept in check. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was another fun exerpt, "They culminated the trial with a 72 hour closed-down exercise, where the hatches were sealed and the vehicle did 10 hours of cross-country each day with all systems on, being fueled and serviced from an outside crew."  Nothing like a good  three day NBC shakedown.....

 

 

Good lord, the smell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I work on an army proving ground and 72-hour close-down exercises are standard tests when evaluating new vehicles like this.

 

Yea, but they probably don't call it NBC anymore.  Went to NBCR, then CBRN, now, I believe.  I imagine NBC (the broadcasters) didn't care for the logo.  

 

 

Gotta love 72 hours of baby-wipes....  At least you can sorta move around in an IFV, but I'd HATE to be stuck in a T72 for three days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, but they probably don't call it NBC anymore.  Went to NBCR, then CBRN, now, I believe.  I imagine NBC (the broadcasters) didn't care for the logo.  

 

 

Gotta love 72 hours of baby-wipes....  At least you can sorta move around in an IFV, but I'd HATE to be stuck in a T72 for three days.

 

I honestly can't remember what they call it, it's been a while since we've done one. Although it is a Chem/Bio proving ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I work on an army proving ground and 72-hour close-down exercises are standard tests when evaluating new vehicles like this.

 

No matter how many times I do it, my car stinks of people after a 4-hour roadtrip, and I can roll the windows down. I guess army men must be used to their tanks smelling like a teenager's sneaker. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter how many times I do it, my car stinks of people after a 4-hour roadtrip, and I can roll the windows down. I guess army men must be used to their tanks smelling like a teenager's sneaker. 

.

Worse than that, diapers much? And the length of time means feces too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we get some 1980's vintage digital camo, since China does? 

brit13.jpg

And of course, that's not the only one: 

19714d1268697994-cool-vehicle-camo-patte

 

Also, can they fix the Taiwanese flag in the client? Currently it's another Mexico flag -- I therefore cannot put the Republic of China's banner all over my Type 59, which distresses me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...