Jump to content


TYPE 5 HO-RI: why don't we have it?


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

qpranger #1 Posted 07 September 2017 - 10:07 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 30767 battles
  • 5,061
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013

Would be so cooler than the Chinese TD clones.

Ahem, I am disappoint.


Edited by qpranger, 07 September 2017 - 10:08 AM.


GalmTwo #2 Posted 07 September 2017 - 10:54 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 7304 battles
  • 237
  • [F-A-D] F-A-D
  • Member since:
    08-28-2014
Yeah, especially since War Thunder is getting it soon. But then again, Japanese TDs are a thing and will appear at some point in the future.

Spurtung #3 Posted 07 September 2017 - 11:09 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60160 battles
  • 5,528
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013
Are there more for a line, or would it be a single child?

CaptainThunderWalker #4 Posted 07 September 2017 - 11:12 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 18937 battles
  • 1,297
  • Member since:
    09-25-2015
A full Japanese TD line is possible, including some leftover premiums.

G01ngToxicCommand0 #5 Posted 07 September 2017 - 11:55 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 37465 battles
  • 727
  • Member since:
    11-03-2011

I'd rather have the Type 5 Edited 

 

This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inappropriate remarks. 


Edited by VMX, 07 September 2017 - 03:53 PM.


Spurtung #6 Posted 07 September 2017 - 12:04 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 60160 battles
  • 5,528
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postatomskytten, on 07 September 2017 - 12:55 PM, said:

I'd rather have the Type 5 Edited 

 

You'd still be clueless about what to do with it.

Edited by VMX, 07 September 2017 - 03:53 PM.


qpranger #7 Posted 07 September 2017 - 12:20 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 30767 battles
  • 5,061
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013

View PostSpurtung, on 07 September 2017 - 01:04 PM, said:

 

You'd still be clueless about what to do with it.

 

Fumble in bush and miss the shot.

leggasiini #8 Posted 07 September 2017 - 12:21 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 9675 battles
  • 5,827
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

Yes it should be implemented. Japan actually had quite alot of TD designs and the line should be quite easy to implement. The only problem in the line is the tier 9 (yes, 9, not 10) but its not gonna stop implementing the line

 

Im planning to update my TD proposal soon. Here is the layout of revised version:

 

  • Tier 2: Type 5 Ho-Ru
  • Tier 3: Type 1 Ho-Ni I
  • Tier 4: Type 3 Ho-Ni III
  • Tier 5: Type 5 Na-To
  • Tier 6: Type 5 Ka-To
  • Tier 7: Chi-Ri casemated TD 
  • Tier 8: Ho-Ri concept I
  • Tier 9: Type 5 Ho-Ri prototype
  • Tier 10: Type 5 Ho-Ri

 

  • Tier 5 premium: Ro-Go 12 cm
  • Tier 7 premium: Chi-Ha long 12 cm
  • Tier 8 premium: Ho-Ri concept II

Edited by leggasiini, 07 September 2017 - 02:07 PM.


qpranger #9 Posted 07 September 2017 - 12:23 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 30767 battles
  • 5,061
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013

View Postleggasiini, on 07 September 2017 - 01:21 PM, said:

  • Tier 6 premium (released before the branch to train crews): Chi-Ha long 12 cm

 

Since when is 12 cm long?

Bad premium, no buy.



leggasiini #10 Posted 07 September 2017 - 12:28 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 9675 battles
  • 5,827
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View Postqpranger, on 07 September 2017 - 01:23 PM, said:

 

Since when is 12 cm long?

Bad premium, no buy.

 

Not surprising, 12 cm is too big for hamsters anyways :trollface:

G01ngToxicCommand0 #11 Posted 07 September 2017 - 12:29 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 37465 battles
  • 727
  • Member since:
    11-03-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 07 September 2017 - 12:04 PM, said:

 

You'd still be clueless about what to do with it.

 

I'd pimp it and make money on it from M-ESOHORNY light tanks. No way I'll hit a Type 5 Edited 

 

 

This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inappropriate remarks. 


Edited by VMX, 07 September 2017 - 03:57 PM.


Derethim #12 Posted 07 September 2017 - 12:46 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 16434 battles
  • 1,717
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

View Postatomskytten, on 07 September 2017 - 11:55 AM, said:

I'd rather have the Type 5 Edited 

 

Edited  huh? Something for the Sabaton singer.

 

This post has been edited by the moderation team due to inappropriate remarks. 


Edited by VMX, 07 September 2017 - 03:58 PM.


Nishi_Kinuyo #13 Posted 07 September 2017 - 05:48 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 6985 battles
  • 3,475
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

By the eight million I find myself agreeing with the hamster. :amazed:

But yeah, plenty of historical Japanese TDs that were actually built.

Enough, like tovarisch leggasiini put so eloquently, to make an entire line of with some to spare as premiums.

 

And yet, WG keeps mentioning "super-heavy" Japanese TDs... :angry::sceptic::facepalm:

 

As for that Long 12cm Chi-Ha; its basically a Japanese Waffenträger.


Edited by Nishi_Kinuyo, 07 September 2017 - 05:50 PM.


leggasiini #14 Posted 07 September 2017 - 09:34 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 9675 battles
  • 5,827
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostNishi_Kinuyo, on 07 September 2017 - 06:48 PM, said:

As for that Long 12cm Chi-Ha; its basically a Japanese Waffenträger.

Depends, its still uncertain if the gun was fully traverseable or if it was just jammed to the hull backwards with very little traverse.

 

It would be quite unique regardless because it would have much higher alpha at tier 7 than any other turretted TD, assuming if they chose to give it full gun arc.



Axarn #15 Posted 07 September 2017 - 09:37 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 26255 battles
  • 874
  • [D-N-F] D-N-F
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

Hold on...

Japan did not even had any TD's?!?1?//?

 

https://en.wikipedia...of_World_War_II



UrQuan #16 Posted 07 September 2017 - 09:45 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 19049 battles
  • 5,807
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-19-2011

View PostAxarn, on 07 September 2017 - 09:37 PM, said:

Hold on...

Japan did not even had any TD's?!?1?//?

 

https://en.wikipedia...of_World_War_II

 

Check section 'self-propelled guns', it contains a few TD's, experimental section also has a few.. This isn't unique to Japan, Self propelled guns is a designation that encompasses both artillery (the ones that could drive by themselves, without the need to be towed) as Tank destroyers.

In WoT, Self Propelled guns became the designation for artillery, albeit various artillery units were also used in the tank destroyer role & vice versa (several tank destroyers also functioned as artillery)


Edited by UrQuan, 07 September 2017 - 09:46 PM.


leggasiini #17 Posted 07 September 2017 - 09:46 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 9675 battles
  • 5,827
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

View PostAxarn, on 07 September 2017 - 10:37 PM, said:

Hold on...

Japan did not even had any TD's?!?1?//?

 

https://en.wikipedia...of_World_War_II

 

Even with Wikipedia information you can build more than half of the TD line, just saying.


Edited by leggasiini, 08 September 2017 - 06:10 AM.


Axarn #18 Posted 07 September 2017 - 09:51 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 26255 battles
  • 874
  • [D-N-F] D-N-F
  • Member since:
    03-29-2013

View Postleggasiini, on 07 September 2017 - 09:46 PM, said:

 

Even with Wikipedia information you can build more an half of the TD line, just saying.

 

Its just a bit weird to have to check the Arta sub to find the Japanese TD's..

But then again, T95 American TD makes perfect skaut in Malinovka






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users