Wargaming’s Hilarious VK 168.01 Backstory

The VK 168.01 received a hilarious backstory with a new name and paint job to go with it. According to Google translate, ‘Mauerbrecher’ means ‘wall breaker’ which fits with the theme of the tank. According to the description, the Wargaming claims that the VK 168.01 was built to defend Berlin around April-May in 1945. Then, it happened to sink into a subway tunnel until it was found again in 1989 and was used as a ram by the West Berliners to demolish the Berlin wall separating East and West Berlin.

This, as you likely know, is a load of absolute BS.  Not only was the VK 168.01 not built (it was an earlier design of the Maus), the whole nonsense story is false. Normally, I wouldn’t be making this post, but since WG omitted a confession in the description saying it was false or alt-history, I felt inclined to give my opinion and make people aware.

The cynical part of me wants to think that this is a way for WG to prey on the less historically oriented or children.


25 thoughts on “Wargaming’s Hilarious VK 168.01 Backstory

  1. Like the untold story of the squad of Mexicans that pushed up Juno beach on D-day? Its kinda important to keep this part of history intact. A lot of our men and women fell around this period,on all sides.Lets not crap on they’re memories with bullshit like this. Its a paper tank. Just call it what it is
    . Just my 2 cents.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. If it’s slated to appear for Console WoT, then it’s possible that this tank is part of the current on-going thing called “War Stories” for wot-console. One of the alternate history scenario there is what if the soviets attack through the berlin wall, and this tank might be part of that alternate history scenario.

    Otherwise, (and if my statement above turns out to be false and its actually a tank to be released as a prem or a regular tank in wot pc), its mostly what OP said.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. This is very bad. The average ppl who never interested in tank history before but learn them from the game by playing and reading these descriptions alerady have serious issues and confusion and it’s WG’s responsibility that they teach bullshit for players.
    The bigest confusion ever what WG caused is the T28/95 tank, while in real life they are exactly the same tank just got renamed at a certain point thanks to WG many ppl belive they are different, and the main difference is “but the T28 doesn’t have the extra pair of tracks herp derp”

    When I attend at a military epxo last time, there was some WWII USA military equipents exhibited, there was an old pre-war 37mm AT gun too. And there were some highly intelligent wot armchair experts who started to insult the gun like, it can’t pen shit, why even make such weak gun at all when it can’t pen anything. Why would you use it again like a panzer IV H? The soldier looked like at them “are you fucking kidding me?”
    Yeah what they missed is when that AT gun made it was sufficent against armors from that time.

    Liked by 6 people

    1. “The bigest confusion ever what WG caused is the T28/95 tank, while in real life they are exactly the same tank just got renamed at a certain point thanks to WG many ppl belive they are different”

      Small nitpick but while the SD T28 was pretty much an admitted fabrication/speculation, The_Chieftain has made claims that there are in fact prototype hulls that differ from the final T95 hull. And those might in fact what the new HD T28 is.


      1. Yeah but the naming is still off imo. Originally called T95 GMC then renamed the tank in 1946 to T28 super heavy tank.

        So why would the early concepts called T28 when the final product named T95 just to be readdress again to T28 a year later.


        1. Because the original name was T28 Heavy Tank? It was renamed T95 GMC because of it’s lack of turret, and eventually re-renamed back to T28


  4. I think the alternate history story might have something to do with this

    While those campaigns are only on console right now, they might also appear on PC and that’s the only way this description would make any sense.


  5. So this is how WG justifies the ‘hero’ (read: clown) camo on this one.
    Hopefully there will be an option for the tank without the shitty camo.


  6. A part of me still thinks that japanesse heavy tank history (not including Type 91 and Type 95) were similar mock – ups to justify unhistorical tanks in the game.


  7. As the Donald would say….

    It is fake, It is fake news
    It is not even a tank

    It is Melanie’s mother nobody breaks walls like she does

    And we will let Mexico pay for it….


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.