Jump to content


Why is the T25/2 so heavy?

T25/2 Tank Destroyer Noob Question

  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

Gigginoxious #1 Posted 15 April 2016 - 11:31 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 5819 battles
  • 49
  • [GIGGI] GIGGI
  • Member since:
    08-25-2015

Is it just me being dumb or does the T25/2 weigh too much?

 

The T25/2 weighs about the same as a SU-152 or Jadgpanther, both equal teir Tank Destroyers. These Tank Destroyers have a much larger profile as a T25/2. The Hellcat weighs in at about 20 tons and has a very similar profile to the T25/2, But the T25/2 weighs more than double the amount of a Hellcat, It even has the same gun. Can anyone explain this strange mystery to me?


Edited by Gigginoxious, 15 April 2016 - 11:32 PM.


zansibar #2 Posted 15 April 2016 - 11:48 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 8815 battles
  • 5
  • Member since:
    05-23-2011

You gotta store the burgers somewhere according to WG logic :^)



Jimbodiah #3 Posted 15 April 2016 - 11:52 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 12962 battles
  • 2,217
  • [B00TA] B00TA
  • Member since:
    04-28-2015

Because, reasons.

 

This is WG, logic is not part of the equation.



SuedKAT #4 Posted 16 April 2016 - 02:42 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 7,990
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

Some quick searching showed me that the T25/2 is a T23 chassi with a M36 turret on top and that it's most likely something that WG have made up albeit they claim it existed in blueprints in the wiki. From what I can tell the T23 is an upgraded T20 which have a weight of around 30 tons and according to WoT's wiki about the T25/2 it's max weight is a bit above 43 tons, if you consider that removing the turret from the T23 would bring it under 30 tons and an entire M36 tank weighs about 30 tons (with turret and all) as well it's a bit far fetched to assume that a T23 chassi with an M36 turret would bring the weight up to 43 tons.

 

I then checked if the engine could have anything to do with it, but the same engine that is used in the T23 is the stock engine in the T25/2 and the upgraded engine weighs the same as the stock engine. 

 

So yeah it's most likely something puzzled together by WG due to "reasons". 

Sources:

http://wiki.wargamin...t/en/Tank:T25_2

https://en.wikipedia...Tank#T23_series

https://en.wikipedia..._tank_destroyer

Edit: There is also blog post about this on FTR which cowers this, but apparently you ain't allowed to link FTR, sigh WG....


Edited by SuedKAT, 16 April 2016 - 02:44 AM.


Enforcer1975 #5 Posted 16 April 2016 - 02:43 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 21949 battles
  • 10,971
  • [DID0] DID0
  • Member since:
    05-04-2014

You can't really apply logic to tanks that didn't really exist in f.e. the form of the T25/2.

The M36 has the M10 hull while the T25/2 judging from pictures was based on the T23 hull which mounted a 3" gun iirc. They simply blended this and that together and tossed 3D6 to get a few stats.



douglarse #6 Posted 16 April 2016 - 03:29 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 63560 battles
  • 1,035
  • Member since:
    11-22-2011
WG call it Balance I believe

Homer_J #7 Posted 16 April 2016 - 03:56 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 33364 battles
  • 36,967
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostSuedKAT, on 16 April 2016 - 01:42 AM, said:

 

So yeah it's most likely something puzzled together by WG due to "reasons". 

 

A quick look at the stats suggested someone at WG took the weight of the T25 AT hull and used that for the T25/2 hull forgetting about the added the weight of the turret.  Job done, time for a cuppa.

Edited by Homer_J, 16 April 2016 - 03:58 AM.


SuedKAT #8 Posted 16 April 2016 - 04:03 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 7,990
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

View PostHomer_J, on 16 April 2016 - 03:56 AM, said:

 

A quick look at the stats suggested someone at WG took the weight of the T25 AT hull and used that for the T25/2 hull forgetting about the added the weight of the turret.  Job done, time for a cuppa.

 

Perhaps, but since both are built with the T23 chassi as base which I didn't find the exact weight for, but with the turret included a T23 weighs around 30 tons, so it's less than that at least, especially considering they also have the same engine weight. A fair guess would be that the turret weighed a few tons and so did the M36 turret that they put onto the T23 chassi to create the T25/2, what exactly do the extra 10 tons account for?

Homer_J #9 Posted 16 April 2016 - 04:13 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 33364 battles
  • 36,967
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

T25 AT total weight with top gun - 38829
Weight of top gun - 2400

Weight of turret module - 50 

(you don't see this in game but even turretless tanks have a turret module with a nominal weight, you can see the weight of it on tanks.gg)

Weight minus gun + turret - 36379

 

T25/2 total weight with top gun + turret - 43929

Weight of gun - 2050

Weight of turret - 5500

Weight minus gun and turret - 36379

 

Everything else weighs the same (engine, tracks, radio).

 

I'm sure if you dig in tankinspector or something with more detailed info than tanks.gg you'll find they both have a hull weight of 25500

 

Case closed, just lazyness.


Edited by Homer_J, 16 April 2016 - 04:21 AM.


SuedKAT #10 Posted 16 April 2016 - 04:30 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 7,990
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

Well yes, that's the tanks and numbers that is in-game, but were did they get 36379 from when the entire tank they used the chassi and engine from just weighs 30 tons, actually slightly below it. The turret they removed weighs 8.4 tons and the turret they added weighs 4.8 tons so 26.4 tons + ~2 ton gun would make the tank weigh about 28.5 tons.

 

However I found the answer to why it weighs more, the T23 had 62mm armor, both the T25/2 and T25 AT have more, which could explain the 10+ ton extra weight WG have added to the tanks.


Edited by SuedKAT, 16 April 2016 - 04:36 AM.


Homer_J #11 Posted 16 April 2016 - 04:37 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 33364 battles
  • 36,967
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostSuedKAT, on 16 April 2016 - 03:30 AM, said:

but were did they get 36379 from

 

Hull 25500

Tracks 10200

Engine 569

Radio 110

 

Total 36379



SuedKAT #12 Posted 16 April 2016 - 04:48 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 7,990
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014

View PostHomer_J, on 16 April 2016 - 04:37 AM, said:

 

Hull 25500

Tracks 10200

Engine 569

Radio 110

 

Total 36379

Yes the in-game tanks I get that as I've mentioned above, however those numbers are fictional what I'm trying to do is to explain how it could weigh as much as it do in-game using the actual weight of the tank if it had existed and had used the components that it is based on, the T23 chassi and the M36 turret. Combining those two together is rather far from the weight the T25/2 have in-game, however as I mention above the T25/2 and the T25 AT both have additional armor compared to the T23 so that most likely accounts for a lot, not to mention that I overlooked that the T23 had a 76mm gun, but the T25/2 gets an 90mm. So the numbers in-game is perhaps not as far from how it wold be if the tank existed in real life.



Homer_J #13 Posted 16 April 2016 - 05:15 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 33364 battles
  • 36,967
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

Ah I see.

 

It's just lazyness that the two hulls weigh the same though, there's no way the T25 AT hull with casemate weighs exactly the same as the T25/2 hull without turret.

 

Same as the days when the JP had camo values copy pasted from the Panther.



SuedKAT #14 Posted 16 April 2016 - 05:29 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 12154 battles
  • 7,990
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-21-2014
Yeah most likely, must admit though at first the T25/2 and the stats it comes with looked more fictional than it perhaps is (it's not WT Auf E100 level at least), with the extra armor and larger gun it's not that impossible that it would have behaved kinda like how it's represented in-game, it's plausible at least. I guess that lazyness, due to balancing reasons and similar reasons either alone or combined make up for a lot of the tank stats we have in-game and as long as it's not game breaking I guess it's ok.

InDeutschlandPride #15 Posted 16 April 2016 - 07:51 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 323 battles
  • 942
  • Member since:
    07-22-2015


malachi6 #16 Posted 16 April 2016 - 08:35 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 51309 battles
  • 4,425
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011
It's probably just to prepare you a little for the super slow tanks in the rest of the line.  A logical progression of weight, if you will.

Gigginoxious #17 Posted 16 April 2016 - 02:20 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 5819 battles
  • 49
  • [GIGGI] GIGGI
  • Member since:
    08-25-2015

View PostSuedKAT, on 16 April 2016 - 05:29 AM, said:

Yeah most likely, must admit though at first the T25/2 and the stats it comes with looked more fictional than it perhaps is (it's not WT Auf E100 level at least), with the extra armor and larger gun it's not that impossible that it would have behaved kinda like how it's represented in-game, it's plausible at least. I guess that lazyness, due to balancing reasons and similar reasons either alone or combined make up for a lot of the tank stats we have in-game and as long as it's not game breaking I guess it's ok.

 

My personal opinion is that the T25/2 really doesn't need balancing in the fact of being slow. They essentially gave the tank the same gun as the Hellcat, Which is a good gun on the Hellcat but it has the 3rd worst DPM for teir 7 tank destroyers that have a much better DPM than the T25/2. The T25/2 Has an under-powered engine, an under-powered gun, and the only armor it has is on its mantlet (Even that isn't very much) I don't hate the T25/2, I actually like it but other people must seem to do really badly in it due to it being quite easy to get 'Ace Tanker' in it a lot. In most battles I am the only T25/2 in the match. Are WG purposely trying to deter people from grinding up to the T28 Prototype? Because I am very close to just using gold to free exp my way up to the T28 Prototype...

 

I guess you may need to kemp bush a lot to make up for its lack of mobility. I hate kemping bush in T25/2.


Edited by Gigginoxious, 16 April 2016 - 02:20 PM.


Jimbodiah #18 Posted 16 April 2016 - 02:38 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 12962 battles
  • 2,217
  • [B00TA] B00TA
  • Member since:
    04-28-2015

View Postdouglarse, on 16 April 2016 - 03:29 AM, said:

WG call it Balance I believe

 

I thought they just used the same RNG to create tanks as they use in the game.

Jigabachi #19 Posted 16 April 2016 - 02:44 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17948 battles
  • 21,021
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011
Ist't it obvious? It's because of the "2".

Desyatnik_Pansy #20 Posted 16 April 2016 - 02:50 PM

    Bartender

  • Moderator
  • 19036 battles
  • 27,302
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    04-19-2013

View PostGigginoxious, on 16 April 2016 - 02:20 PM, said:

Because I am very close to just using gold to free exp my way up to the T28 Prototype...

 

Save that Free XP For use on the T28 Prot. mate, it'll save you a lot of pain. :teethhappy:






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users