23 thoughts on “WoT Blitz: The K-91

  1. Looks way too normal for a Russian prototype. An IS-3 turret with modern MBT chassis.

    1. with Obj.777 II being the tier 10 of the T-10 line and Obj.257 being the replacement for the T-10 at tier 9 in the IS-7 line, I can only see the K-91 (if it becomes a researcheable tank) as either part of the IS-4 line post ST-I split OR being on it\’s own with it\’s rear-turreted variant at tier 10
      either way I believe that due to the increase of the number of tier 10 heavy tanks they will need to add a 3rd grind line, the same for the mediums because 5 or 6 tier 10\’s are way too many mini-branches

        1. here, for example, that\’s what the latest rumors suggest and they don\’t tend to be too far off from reality
          like this article from the insider

          «-The tier 10 following the T-10 will be the Obj. 777 II
          -The tank following the Obj. 430 II will not have a fully traversable turret.
          -Both tanks will come in 9.22.»

          if you check both tanks characteristics they do seem to come from a similar design philosophy, both vehicles are only \”well\” armoured in the front and have medium tank level armour (for a tier 9 or 10) on the side and rear, they just make sense to be together under WG claim for

          «logical gameplay progression» (the \”excuse\” they gave for the soviet TT rework)

          1. This was a fake rumor. The two tanks won\’t even be released in 9.22.

            Obj. 777 II has nothing to do with the development of the T-10. Bot the Obj. 277 and the 770 have way more common things with the T-10 and would be suitable to end the line.

            1. just because the Obj.277 and the T-10 look similar on the outside does not mean the Obj.777 II cannot be the tier 10 for the T-10 line, especially since they follow a similar design philosophy way closer to a MBT than an actual heavy tank, on the other hand the Obj.277 would fit even better with the Obj.770 (also rumored as possible tier 10)
              in my opinion the Obj.277 or even the Obj.770 should in reality be part of the plan for the IS-4 line split since both tanks are on the compact side and would fit the IS-4 gameplay a bit better than any other high tier tank currently in the game
              even in that aspect it makes more sense to have the T-10 with the Obj.777 II or the K-91 since all 3 are rather \”long\”

              1. \”just because the Obj.277 and the T-10 look similar on the outside\”

                It was designed by the same people who designed the T-10 and the 277 used ideas both from the T-10 and the IS-7 so it\’s more than \”look similar on the outside\”…

                On the Obj. 777 II the turret is placed on the middle of the hull not in the front like on the T-10 so it would have a different playstyle compared to the T-10 and the tanks before the T-10.

                Also the length difference is too minimal to be considered as drastically as you say.

  2. it actually looks larger than the schematic found online, compared to hobbyist 3D models the turret seems to hve been modified to make it \”bouncier\”
    I also wonder what they are planning for the rear turreted variant

      1. The Obj 263 doesn\’t exactly fit the line with its gun mantlet and open casement design either but it;s staying in the line.

        And I don\’t think WG cares enough about historical accuracy to be concerned with removing the autoloader from it for the PC version. Wouldn\’t be the first time WG gave tanks unhistorical guns

          1. People wouldn\’t have been so pissed with the changes if they had done that, the 263 could have just stayed at tier 10 as a special reward tank.

            WG gets to change the line and players get to keep the 263 at tier 10. Win Win for everyone

            Not like I haven\’t been suggesting this since the changes were announced


Comments are closed.