Jump to content


News about 9.20.2: Replacement of the FV 215B 183, the FV 217 and new french HT

FV 217 AMX 65t replacement FV 215B 183 9.20.2

  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

RagingRaptor #1 Posted 15 September 2017 - 01:50 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 40106 battles
  • 496
  • [OM] OM
  • Member since:
    03-10-2012

Holla dear tankers :honoring:

 

I wanted to make a little info dump about some news which just came from the supertest out about the upcoming patch 9.20.2

Things could get very interesting very soon.

We might get a replacement for the FV 183: https://thearmoredpa...83-replacement/

New French HT's incomming: https://thearmoredpa...9-french-heavy/

 

I put all of this together in a handy little video with my commentary to those certain things:

#yes I did just some shameless self advertisement...

 

What is also really interesting in my opinion is that 1 year ago news about the AMX 65t arrived ( t8 french HT, link to the video:https://www.youtube....ncHifN3I&t=424s)

And 6(!) years ago in a Trailer you can see the T10 french HT !!!

 

 

This is at minute 1:38

 

Anywho thank you for your attention and have fun discussing. I certainly look for the opportunity of seeing a T10 Tortoise, either with a 120mm gun or a 183mm gun 

 

Cheers

RagingRaptor



Balc0ra #2 Posted 15 September 2017 - 02:58 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67404 battles
  • 17,139
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Well they have been changing tier X's around that don't fit the rest of the line of late. So the 183 kinda makes sense, as it's the only one on the line with a turret, vs slow non turreted armored assault TD's. Just like the IS-4 don't really fit in that HT line of slow, heavily armored tanks that they might change to.

 

Tho if you search for the FV217 on most archive sites. it's listed as having a 120mm gun. So if it's non turreted, and a tier above the Tortoise that has 4K dpm. Then this will be even more nuts, if it's armor holds up that is. Tho if you search for FV217 on wot related sites, it turns out it's been a hot topic on the forum even as far back as 2012. Even found a Q&A from 2014 about it. Then they said they knew nothing about it to make it. Guess that changed.


Edited by Balc0ra, 15 September 2017 - 03:00 AM.


leggasiini #3 Posted 15 September 2017 - 06:13 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 15233 battles
  • 6,240
  • [-GLO-] -GLO-
  • Member since:
    12-01-2012

This is I believe the tier 10:

This hull combined together with the TCB turret and unidentified gun. Look at the armor.


Edited by leggasiini, 15 September 2017 - 06:17 AM.


jack_timber #4 Posted 15 September 2017 - 07:59 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 34549 battles
  • 2,251
  • Member since:
    07-26-2014
Looks like it could be a  British T95 with the 183mm now that would be 'interesting', let's wait and see:)

tajj7 #5 Posted 15 September 2017 - 09:56 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25830 battles
  • 13,836
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

Meh more credits to grind then if they are replacing the 183, have to buy the useless thing back. All these crap tier 10s WG keeps replacing....

 

Be interesting to see if the replacement has a 183 gun or something smaller, hope it has something smaller but I can see people moaning about it, but I suppose if they keep the 183 as a 'reward' tank then it doesn't matter. 



MrEdweird #6 Posted 15 September 2017 - 09:59 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 20255 battles
  • 368
  • [CIRC2] CIRC2
  • Member since:
    08-19-2011

View Posttajj7, on 15 September 2017 - 08:56 AM, said:

Meh more credits to grind then if they are replacing the 183, have to buy the useless thing back. All these crap tier 10s WG keeps replacing....

 

Be interesting to see if the replacement has a 183 gun or something smaller, hope it has something smaller but I can see people moaning about it, but I suppose if they keep the 183 as a 'reward' tank then it doesn't matter. 

 

My guess is they're gonna give it the 5.5-inch that the Conway is getting. 600 alpha, 260 pen. I think that's a caliber of 140mm?

Edited by MrEdweird, 15 September 2017 - 10:00 AM.


tajj7 #7 Posted 15 September 2017 - 10:36 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25830 battles
  • 13,836
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostMrEdweird, on 15 September 2017 - 08:59 AM, said:

 

My guess is they're gonna give it the 5.5-inch that the Conway is getting. 600 alpha, 260 pen. I think that's a caliber of 140mm?

 

Yeh about 140mm, that would be fine, it's an interesting gun and I'm looking forward to playing that on the Conway as I have the tank unlocked for ages but never bothered with it because it led to the FV4005 and the Conqueror has the same gun on a much much better platform with much much better gun handling. 

 

I really like the approach they have with that gun, it is something I think they should do with all TDs, especially tier 9/10 ones with high alpha.  Instead of having massive premium ammo penetration like the 268's 395mm HEAT round they should have a round that does more damage for less pen.  (but then their main alpha damage gets dropped with a ROF buff).

 

So say on the 750 alpha tier 10s, they have a 650 alpha standard round with 300 pen, make it APCR as standard with good shell velocity, and then a 'premium round' with 850 alpha, but say 230 pen, that is AP with lower shell velocity. 



roachex #8 Posted 15 September 2017 - 11:00 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 20261 battles
  • 607
  • [RIGA] RIGA
  • Member since:
    06-01-2012
Waiting for those french HT some time.

That FV 217 looks interesting. Tier X british T95 like tank. If it has high dpm 140mm gun, it could be in a way unique.

The pen/dmg changes could work, though then all clases needs some revision.

Lord_Edge #9 Posted 15 September 2017 - 11:25 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 5991 battles
  • 834
  • Member since:
    11-26-2016

Seems a mistake IMO to remove the FV215B 183.  I'm all for replacing it with something that fit's the line better but instead of removing it surely they could move it to the other TD line so the Conway branches into both the FV4005 and the FV215B 183.  Or maybe they could have the Conqueror branch into both the Super Conqueror and the FV215B 183.

 

I can understand removing fictional WG tanks like the FV215B and the AMX 50 Foch (155) and making them special vehicles.  But the FV215B 183 was a real design that would have seen full production had it not been for the dawn of cheaper anti tank RPGs capable of destroying IS tanks with ease.



tajj7 #10 Posted 15 September 2017 - 11:49 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25830 battles
  • 13,836
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

View PostUbersonic, on 15 September 2017 - 10:25 AM, said:

Seems a mistake IMO to remove the FV215B 183.  I'm all for replacing it with something that fit's the line better but instead of removing it surely they could move it to the other TD line so the Conway branches into both the FV4005 and the FV215B 183.  Or maybe they could have the Conqueror branch into both the Super Conqueror and the FV215B 183.

 

I can understand removing fictional WG tanks like the FV215B and the AMX 50 Foch (155) and making them special vehicles.  But the FV215B 183 was a real design that would have seen full production had it not been for the dawn of cheaper anti tank RPGs capable of destroying IS tanks with ease.

 

FV 4005 is the more real design as it reached prototype stage, the 183 is a paper design and WG fudged it about IIRC so it's about as real as the FV217 which seems to fit the line better. 

Spurtung #11 Posted 15 September 2017 - 12:28 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 66033 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Posttajj7, on 15 September 2017 - 11:36 AM, said:

Yeh about 140mm, that would be fine, it's an interesting gun and I'm looking forward to playing that on the Conway as I have the tank unlocked for ages but never bothered with it because it led to the FV4005 and the Conqueror has the same gun on a much much better platform with much much better gun handling. 

Biggest issues I have with Conway, as it is, are the horrid gun depression and elevation.



Balc0ra #12 Posted 15 September 2017 - 01:52 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 67404 battles
  • 17,139
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View PostUbersonic, on 15 September 2017 - 11:25 AM, said:

Seems a mistake IMO to remove the FV215B 183.  I'm all for replacing it with something that fit's the line better but instead of removing it surely they could move it to the other TD line so the Conway branches into both the FV4005 and the FV215B 183.  Or maybe they could have the Conqueror branch into both the Super Conqueror and the FV215B 183.

 

I can understand removing fictional WG tanks like the FV215B and the AMX 50 Foch (155) and making them special vehicles.  But the FV215B 183 was a real design that would have seen full production had it not been for the dawn of cheaper anti tank RPGs capable of destroying IS tanks with ease.

 

The idea now it's not about it being fictional. It's about it fitting in on the rest of the line. That are slow armored, non turreted assault TD's with high ROF. 183 is none of those. Just like why the Lorr 40t was removed. Vs the 13 90 and BC. It was the odd one out in some aspects. And it's more or less confirmed in the new video today that the 183 will become a special vehicle. Sure you could split the Conway into two tier X's. But tbh... it don't really fit into the Conway line either. As that's all about mobility, no armor etc.

 

View Posttajj7, on 15 September 2017 - 11:49 AM, said:

 

FV 4005 is the more real design as it reached prototype stage, the 183 is a paper design and WG fudged it about IIRC so it's about as real as the FV217 which seems to fit the line better. 

 

FV217 was binned rather fast after the drawings and idea was done. As I hardly found anything about it on even old British army sites last night, besides the name and the planned gun. No armor layout or nothing. They all said the same thing. Short idea, quickly binned. But then again WG did have plans to remove fictional tanks at some point. But considering most of that staff is not working on WOT anymore. It's not about it being real, but it fitting it that's the new thing it seems.

 

View Posttajj7, on 15 September 2017 - 09:56 AM, said:

Meh more credits to grind then if they are replacing the 183, have to buy the useless thing back. All these crap tier 10s WG keeps replacing....

 

Be interesting to see if the replacement has a 183 gun or something smaller, hope it has something smaller but I can see people moaning about it, but I suppose if they keep the 183 as a 'reward' tank then it doesn't matter. 

 

On the new patch video today they showed it. Don't look like a 183. Either 120mm or a 5.5 inch like the Conway. Tho on the Conway the new gun has way way less DPM. And since the AT line is mostly about ROF and not alpha. I'm leaning more towards the 120. Or maybe it will have both as an option?

Edited by Balc0ra, 15 September 2017 - 01:59 PM.


Lord_Edge #13 Posted 15 September 2017 - 03:08 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 5991 battles
  • 834
  • Member since:
    11-26-2016

View PostBalc0ra, on 15 September 2017 - 01:52 PM, said:

The idea now it's not about it being fictional. It's about it fitting in on the rest of the line. That are slow armored, non turreted assault TD's with high ROF.

I do understand that, but it just seems a bit strange that they are trying to make the lines feel similar all the way down when they didn't work like that in reality.  The reason there's such a difference between the Tortoise and the FV215B 183 is because we took a step back and said "This isn't working, let's stop polishing this turd design and make a new one".  It's similar to where the cruiser line dies with the Comet and then the superior Centurion line takes over.  Or where the T-10 feels radically different to both the IS-3 before it and the IS-7 that follows it, because it was a generation ahead of both those tanks.

 

I'm not saying that they shouldn't balance the lines with loads of fake tanks to make everything feel uniform if that's what the game needs (although I am saying I don't like that idea).  I am just saying that in the case of "real" tanks like the FV215B 183 that made it past the blueprint stage into the model stage and would have been prototyped had the advent of newer post-WoT stuff not made them redundant, those tanks should remain available to acquire in game, either by branching off one of the lines to create a new one or by having a T9 split to two different tier X options (like they just did to the Chinese HT line).

 

I am of course fine with tanks WG made up becoming special tanks as they hold no real intrigue or interest to me from a collecting PoV.

 

 

 

View Posttajj7, on 15 September 2017 - 11:49 AM, said:

 

FV 4005 is the more real design as it reached prototype stage, the 183 is a paper design and WG fudged it about IIRC so it's about as real as the FV217 which seems to fit the line better. 

Well, technically speaking, considering the FV4005 uses the gun originally designed/built for FV215b 183 it is obviously more real than the FV217 because part of it at least made it into existence (also it had blueprints and a model created whereas the FV217 was apparently just an idea somebody had).

 


Edited by Ubersonic, 15 September 2017 - 03:21 PM.


Mr_Beefy #14 Posted 16 September 2017 - 06:59 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23798 battles
  • 654
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

Time to rebuy the AMX M4 45 tier 7 I suppose.

Didn't really like it the first time around, although the guns are excellent.  (tier 7 HT with guns from tier 8 premiums, obviously the tier 6 with same guns which make the arl44 quite op even though they are rare)

Figure what, 80K XP? like the AMX 50 100?



Schepel #15 Posted 16 September 2017 - 07:08 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 61695 battles
  • 3,172
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-13-2013

View PostMr_Beefy, on 16 September 2017 - 06:59 AM, said:

Time to rebuy the AMX M4 45 tier 7 I suppose.

Didn't really like it the first time around, although the guns are excellent.  (tier 7 HT with guns from tier 8 premiums, obviously the tier 6 with same guns which make the arl44 quite op even though they are rare)

Figure what, 80K XP? like the AMX 50 100?

 

Excellent? That gun is terrifyingly bad. Low DPM, low alpha, horrible aim time and the soft stats give me nightmares years after I went through it.

monthey_ #16 Posted 16 September 2017 - 07:14 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 36379 battles
  • 701
  • [MAROC] MAROC
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011
I would like to know what will happen with the FV183 once it gets replaced, will it dissapear like the WT E100 or become a Premium tank like the Foch 155? Any info on that?

Edited by monthey_, 16 September 2017 - 07:15 AM.


Mr_Beefy #17 Posted 16 September 2017 - 07:14 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23798 battles
  • 654
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

View PostSchepel, on 16 September 2017 - 08:08 AM, said:

 

Excellent? That gun is terrifyingly bad. Low DPM, low alpha, horrible aim time and the soft stats give me nightmares years after I went through it.

 

It could be worse.....

Mr_Beefy #18 Posted 16 September 2017 - 07:14 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23798 battles
  • 654
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

View Postmonthey_, on 16 September 2017 - 08:14 AM, said:

I would like to know what will happen whith the FV183 once it gets replaved, will it dissapear like the WT E100 or become a Premium tank like the Foch 155? Any info on that?

 

special status, like CW revard tonk.  

monthey_ #19 Posted 16 September 2017 - 07:16 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 36379 battles
  • 701
  • [MAROC] MAROC
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011
Then ill def. Start grinding that line ^^

Mr_Beefy #20 Posted 16 September 2017 - 07:20 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 23798 battles
  • 654
  • [OZ77] OZ77
  • Member since:
    09-13-2015

View Postmonthey_, on 16 September 2017 - 08:16 AM, said:

Then ill def. Start grinding that line ^^

 

I have 3 words for you (or 2 depending on tier).

SUPER

HEAVY

SPALLINER






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users