Combat vehicles and their battle mechanics have been recreated with great accuracy. Many vehicles have historical prototypes; their complex physics systems will make you feel like a real tank commander.
There are still people who care about historical accuracy in WoT? XD
The T110E5 which was released in the game over 10 years ago exists only in blueprints. Nobody knows how it actually looks like because there was not even 1 protype. So it’s obviously a fake tank.
There are a trillion more fake tanks have been added to WoT in the last 10 years.
So I guess there are plenty more contents like this video await to be made XD
Little did I know this video tank game and historical accuracy are still together till this day =))))
so much to unpack there
1) not existing = not even have been projected
2) existing = being developed in some way, including drawings
3) everyone knows what the T110 was supposed to look like, although in game the model is wrong because the front plate should be like on the M60
4) the video is from the guy who did the research for WG, he’s just telling the GSOR 1010 does not resemble the material he gave WG
he is not going on some rant that tanks should be historical in WoT and does mention those changes were probably done for gameplay purposes, although he also mentions WG thinks their playerbase is too stupid to make use of the new mechanics they proposed
– WG does not believe the players can understand the advantages of DPM from a 30mm autocannon over high alpha of a main caliber weapon
– WG does not believe the playerbase can understand scouting gameplay with a mechanic similar to the radar in WoWs
– activate for 25 seconds then wait over a minute to activate again, can only be used X times in total –
Not to mention that they don’t think people are smart enough to use a key (say…. X key?) to go into a new mode on some tanks (cough STRV S1, cough EBR, etc).
the video claims the final talks about the line date back to 2020, by then WG already had enough data on tanks with “special” abilities
given their survival rate I think it is safe to assume WG was correct on that
last 60 days on EU (most played)
EBR 105 » 16th, survives <17%
Strv 103B » 41st, survives <37%
Strv S1 » 60th, survives <37%
Lynx 6×6 » 121st, survives <10%
T110E5 was intentionally changed to be curved as the flat proposal would have resulted in a weaker vehicle. Peeking a corner at an angle with the flat hull means the upper frontal plate can still be penetrated by TD’s. With the curved hull, this is no longer the case, and the American heavy tank player receives the full benefit of the M103’s sloped hull (which was fairly thick on introduction). This was reported by the Chieftain himself from his first visit to Minsk.
In other words, it was changed to improve the vehicle for the American HT driver at the expense of historical accuracy. The Pz III K is a very, very historically accurate vehicle. It’s a garbage tank that is genuinely only stronger than the Turan III because WG doesn’t believe the Hungarian ballistic tables. I wish the development team had compromised on accuracy for fun with it.
WoT’s shapes, data are not historical, though some figures are closer than others. The intent is that the battlefield role of the vehicle is historical. The British have been fairly firm on the role of their recon vehicles as infantry support, so I’m actually with WG on this case, too. 30mm would have only been effective vs vehicles HE could penetrate and as often as those vehicles are very strong, we’re already in a meta where walls of steel are just superior.
As for the model, it’s very important that the vehicle looks cool to your layman. The Rino is very interesting. It looks awful. Nobody spent any $ to unlock it. The Lion is not that different from the other tech tree tier 10 NATO mediums. It looks very cool. Very, very many people spent large amounts of $ to unlock it.
The turrets Armoured Archive turned over, while historically accurate, do not sell.
As for the hull: I’m completely on his side. It looks French. They all look French. It’s particularly damning because this exact vehicle already exists as the AMX-10RC and is older than one of the armored cars in the tree, so clearly age isn’t a reason to not implement it.
The only real question here is: does the 1010 accurately reflect the battlefield role?
No, not even a little bit. It does not quickly destroy light armored vehicles. The speed is slower than in reality. The gun is pathetic. The vision and camo are insanely bad, even for medium tanks. The turret is actually larger than the historical version, so while it looks better, it performs worse; they have done players a disservice in all ways here.
WG appears to have erred on the side of giving it a LT-like balance given the damage per minute, penetration, accuracy, and p:w ratio. These mistakes cannot be corrected until light tanks are appropriately balanced. Fix the one role and there will be room for vehicles like this to exist.
Let me clarify that given these vehicles are being implemented as medium tanks, I would consider ‘infantry support’ to mean ‘light tank support’. Someone who can help you avoid death from a MT rush or a particularly aggressive enemy LT, or keep a second pair of eyes on a different avenue so your scout doesn’t get lit and executed. This vehicle cannot perform this role with its current statistics. It would need LT camo (identical on the move and at rest) and a percentage closer to the Borassque, or slightly superior to the T-44-100; something like a 15 or 16%, with 390 or 400m base view range, not 380 with 13/10. It’s currently as blind as a T-44-100 while being less stealthy with even less health and armor.
I agree with almost everything, the thing I do not agree is the claim that the M103 like shape makes it stronger when peaking a corner
do remember that closer to the tracks the armor becomes “flatter” to things shooting you from the side, as for the M60 its armor is actually the strongest when moving around a corner
either will take massive damage if their idler is targeted, there’s no difference there
the US tanks are like that for 2 reasons
1) because their gameplay changes too much from tier to tier they tried to keep some commonality, like how the top tier TDs have the 155mm those were not supposed to have in order to keep some resemblance with the T30 and T95
2) to fabricate weakspots
also, in general the British tech tree is played mostly for their meme tanks (Sh*t Barn, etc), there’s nothing “sexy” or “cool” about the Tortoise or the GSOR 1008 and those are in the top 10 of most played British tanks, making the 1010 FB cool won’t make much of a difference in how many they sell so it is simply not worth the effort to change it, plus it will make it weird when they add the AMX 10RC as a premium/freemium
as for the 30mm RARDEN it can pen around 100mm of armor IRL, but since when did WG start adding guns with historical performance?
you even mentioned the Turan
plus the “ground surveillance radar” feature they proposed would make those great passive scouts, for a short period, while being less agile and larger than the French wheeled and other conventional LTs
when moving around a corner either will take massive damage if their idler is targeted, there’s no difference there
You’re thinking on the wrong side of the hull. The part that exposes first is the far side of the hull. With its round, cast shape, the T110E5’s first exposed point is virtually immune to gunfire. The point closest to the rubble or cover is the most vulnerable. This would not be the case with a flat hull.
the British tech tree is played mostly for their meme tanks (Sh*t Barn, etc),
The British tech tree is more popular than the French. They’re not all terrible, they just have a lot of standouts.
making the 1010 FB cool won’t make much of a difference in how many they sell
I mean, the Senlac looks dumb as hell and they’ve almost sold none of them. It’s true that you can’t sell a tank on purely aesthetics, the M41D is proof of that, but it’s a significant factor. It has nearly the same statistics as the Senlac as of right now and it will outsell it, I promise you.
I will hasten to add that they are technically medium tanks, and queue against medium tanks. The passive radar makes sense on a light… not so much a medium. Then again, the stats fit on a light, not a medium, so WG needs to correct one or the other.
as for the 30mm RARDEN it can pen around 100mm of armor IRL, but since when did WG start adding guns with historical performance?
WG made it clear during their ammo sandbox that the intended balance is that between your stock penetration and stock DPM, there is an intended amount of damage to target per minute for every vehicle in the game. 100mm becoming 150mm in-game means something like 4000 DPM, which won’t be particularly useful to anyone as that becomes 2000 DPM through misses and ricochets… with 100% facetime on target. It’s a car. It’s not a tank. It can’t take hits and everyone else is only going to see 2 second slivers of its DPM. Despite your concern to the contrary, putting a large gun on these vehicles will increase their average damage per game. My concern is that it’s basically an unarmored UDES with less firepower, armor, and camo. Why would you want to drive it?
Fart
Blurb from WoT main page:
Historical Accuracy
Combat vehicles and their battle mechanics have been recreated with great accuracy. Many vehicles have historical prototypes; their complex physics systems will make you feel like a real tank commander.
Bollocks!!
It is World of Fakes. 😆
and we havent seen the sturmtiger in techtree form..
it used to be there, but they deleted it because it was OP
what about T-34 and plenty more idiot?
There are still people who care about historical accuracy in WoT? XD
The T110E5 which was released in the game over 10 years ago exists only in blueprints. Nobody knows how it actually looks like because there was not even 1 protype. So it’s obviously a fake tank.
There are a trillion more fake tanks have been added to WoT in the last 10 years.
So I guess there are plenty more contents like this video await to be made XD
Little did I know this video tank game and historical accuracy are still together till this day =))))
so much to unpack there
1) not existing = not even have been projected
2) existing = being developed in some way, including drawings
3) everyone knows what the T110 was supposed to look like, although in game the model is wrong because the front plate should be like on the M60
4) the video is from the guy who did the research for WG, he’s just telling the GSOR 1010 does not resemble the material he gave WG
he is not going on some rant that tanks should be historical in WoT and does mention those changes were probably done for gameplay purposes, although he also mentions WG thinks their playerbase is too stupid to make use of the new mechanics they proposed
– WG does not believe the players can understand the advantages of DPM from a 30mm autocannon over high alpha of a main caliber weapon
– WG does not believe the playerbase can understand scouting gameplay with a mechanic similar to the radar in WoWs
– activate for 25 seconds then wait over a minute to activate again, can only be used X times in total –
Not to mention that they don’t think people are smart enough to use a key (say…. X key?) to go into a new mode on some tanks (cough STRV S1, cough EBR, etc).
the video claims the final talks about the line date back to 2020, by then WG already had enough data on tanks with “special” abilities
given their survival rate I think it is safe to assume WG was correct on that
last 60 days on EU (most played)
EBR 105 » 16th, survives <17%
Strv 103B » 41st, survives <37%
Strv S1 » 60th, survives <37%
Lynx 6×6 » 121st, survives <10%
T110E5 was intentionally changed to be curved as the flat proposal would have resulted in a weaker vehicle. Peeking a corner at an angle with the flat hull means the upper frontal plate can still be penetrated by TD’s. With the curved hull, this is no longer the case, and the American heavy tank player receives the full benefit of the M103’s sloped hull (which was fairly thick on introduction). This was reported by the Chieftain himself from his first visit to Minsk.
In other words, it was changed to improve the vehicle for the American HT driver at the expense of historical accuracy. The Pz III K is a very, very historically accurate vehicle. It’s a garbage tank that is genuinely only stronger than the Turan III because WG doesn’t believe the Hungarian ballistic tables. I wish the development team had compromised on accuracy for fun with it.
WoT’s shapes, data are not historical, though some figures are closer than others. The intent is that the battlefield role of the vehicle is historical. The British have been fairly firm on the role of their recon vehicles as infantry support, so I’m actually with WG on this case, too. 30mm would have only been effective vs vehicles HE could penetrate and as often as those vehicles are very strong, we’re already in a meta where walls of steel are just superior.
As for the model, it’s very important that the vehicle looks cool to your layman. The Rino is very interesting. It looks awful. Nobody spent any $ to unlock it. The Lion is not that different from the other tech tree tier 10 NATO mediums. It looks very cool. Very, very many people spent large amounts of $ to unlock it.
The turrets Armoured Archive turned over, while historically accurate, do not sell.
As for the hull: I’m completely on his side. It looks French. They all look French. It’s particularly damning because this exact vehicle already exists as the AMX-10RC and is older than one of the armored cars in the tree, so clearly age isn’t a reason to not implement it.
The only real question here is: does the 1010 accurately reflect the battlefield role?
No, not even a little bit. It does not quickly destroy light armored vehicles. The speed is slower than in reality. The gun is pathetic. The vision and camo are insanely bad, even for medium tanks. The turret is actually larger than the historical version, so while it looks better, it performs worse; they have done players a disservice in all ways here.
WG appears to have erred on the side of giving it a LT-like balance given the damage per minute, penetration, accuracy, and p:w ratio. These mistakes cannot be corrected until light tanks are appropriately balanced. Fix the one role and there will be room for vehicles like this to exist.
Let me clarify that given these vehicles are being implemented as medium tanks, I would consider ‘infantry support’ to mean ‘light tank support’. Someone who can help you avoid death from a MT rush or a particularly aggressive enemy LT, or keep a second pair of eyes on a different avenue so your scout doesn’t get lit and executed. This vehicle cannot perform this role with its current statistics. It would need LT camo (identical on the move and at rest) and a percentage closer to the Borassque, or slightly superior to the T-44-100; something like a 15 or 16%, with 390 or 400m base view range, not 380 with 13/10. It’s currently as blind as a T-44-100 while being less stealthy with even less health and armor.
I agree with almost everything, the thing I do not agree is the claim that the M103 like shape makes it stronger when peaking a corner
do remember that closer to the tracks the armor becomes “flatter” to things shooting you from the side, as for the M60 its armor is actually the strongest when moving around a corner
either will take massive damage if their idler is targeted, there’s no difference there
the US tanks are like that for 2 reasons
1) because their gameplay changes too much from tier to tier they tried to keep some commonality, like how the top tier TDs have the 155mm those were not supposed to have in order to keep some resemblance with the T30 and T95
2) to fabricate weakspots
also, in general the British tech tree is played mostly for their meme tanks (Sh*t Barn, etc), there’s nothing “sexy” or “cool” about the Tortoise or the GSOR 1008 and those are in the top 10 of most played British tanks, making the 1010 FB cool won’t make much of a difference in how many they sell so it is simply not worth the effort to change it, plus it will make it weird when they add the AMX 10RC as a premium/freemium
as for the 30mm RARDEN it can pen around 100mm of armor IRL, but since when did WG start adding guns with historical performance?
you even mentioned the Turan
plus the “ground surveillance radar” feature they proposed would make those great passive scouts, for a short period, while being less agile and larger than the French wheeled and other conventional LTs
You’re thinking on the wrong side of the hull. The part that exposes first is the far side of the hull. With its round, cast shape, the T110E5’s first exposed point is virtually immune to gunfire. The point closest to the rubble or cover is the most vulnerable. This would not be the case with a flat hull.
The British tech tree is more popular than the French. They’re not all terrible, they just have a lot of standouts.
I mean, the Senlac looks dumb as hell and they’ve almost sold none of them. It’s true that you can’t sell a tank on purely aesthetics, the M41D is proof of that, but it’s a significant factor. It has nearly the same statistics as the Senlac as of right now and it will outsell it, I promise you.
I will hasten to add that they are technically medium tanks, and queue against medium tanks. The passive radar makes sense on a light… not so much a medium. Then again, the stats fit on a light, not a medium, so WG needs to correct one or the other.
WG made it clear during their ammo sandbox that the intended balance is that between your stock penetration and stock DPM, there is an intended amount of damage to target per minute for every vehicle in the game. 100mm becoming 150mm in-game means something like 4000 DPM, which won’t be particularly useful to anyone as that becomes 2000 DPM through misses and ricochets… with 100% facetime on target. It’s a car. It’s not a tank. It can’t take hits and everyone else is only going to see 2 second slivers of its DPM. Despite your concern to the contrary, putting a large gun on these vehicles will increase their average damage per game. My concern is that it’s basically an unarmored UDES with less firepower, armor, and camo. Why would you want to drive it?
”you cant buy a tank on purely aesthetics” 🤓🤓🤓