Jump to content


Just a tid bit to share


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
9 replies to this topic

FaustianQ #1 Posted 12 March 2012 - 12:04 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 29
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011
I was rifling around in the files looking up angles, armor, and guns, when I cam across the curious fact the T110E5 hit public testing with 8 available guns. Interested, I did some model swapping to figure out what they were all about. it appears the T110E5 is first and foremost a copy pasted M103 (still has the M103 turret available for it, and all it's guns), but it did have 2 guns on it that made no sense to be there and at least 1 of those guns has future implications for WoT.

The first, is the T7 155mm gun from the previous T10, the T30.
http://i189.photobuc...07/shot_003.jpg
The T110E5 was likely tested with this gun at some point, since the gun manlet has been properly modeled for the 155mm gun. Little known fact, the mantlet is not part of the turret model but part of the gun model. Goes to show you the devs were really considering any method to balancing the T110E5 at T10.

The second gun is far more interesting.
http://i189.photobuc.../shot_004-3.jpg
That is a T210 105mm smoothbore cannon, and was mounted specifically on 2 tanks, and no others - the T96 heavy tank, and the T95 medium tank. The implications are thus

T96 was considered very early in the development of replacement heavies, then scrapped in favor of the T110E5.
OR
The T95 is planned sometime in the future as a T10 medium, since the penetrative power is prohibitively large for even a T9 heavy tank.


What is the EU forums thoughts on the matter?

Beesonsticks #2 Posted 12 March 2012 - 12:37 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 14422 battles
  • 246
  • [QUAKE] QUAKE
  • Member since:
    01-15-2011

View PostFaustianQ, on 12 March 2012 - 12:04 PM, said:

T96 was considered very early in the development of replacement heavies, then scrapped in favor of the T110E5.
OR
The T95 is planned sometime in the future as a T10 medium, since the penetrative power is prohibitively large for even a T9 heavy tank.


OR
WG decided to give the T110E5 a gun that was never actually mounted on it, as is the case with many other tanks in the game.



Shootingstarr #3 Posted 12 March 2012 - 12:46 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27850 battles
  • 1,093
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011
nice find
we'll see about the future then :)

Boomer7 #4 Posted 12 March 2012 - 01:26 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9439 battles
  • 368
  • [BM] BM
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011
Hmm ok so now we have finally left the 40s and 50s in tank design.

Wonder what that thing is firing, you cant fire regular AP shells from a smoothbore you need Armour-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot (APFSDS), they have a much higher muzzle velocity and penetration then the APshells from the 40s. Talking about 300mm-400mm penetration.

The first tank to mount a smoothbore was the russian T62 from 1961.

well at least there is now less reason not to add the Leopard 1 to the german line :D

FaustianQ #5 Posted 12 March 2012 - 01:27 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 29
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

View PostBeesonsticks, on 12 March 2012 - 12:37 PM, said:


OR
WG decided to give the T110E5 a gun that was never actually mounted on it, as is the case with many other tanks in the game.


That's a bit backwards, considering at one time or another, most tanks have planned guns, not guns with no historical or experimental precedent. Yes, lots of tanks get what might be considered "fantasy" guns, but it's fantasy in the sense that they were never production tanks. A T210 105mm on the T110E5 is less fantasy and more like a an 75mm KwK42 L/70 on a King Tiger, WarGamings poor handling of the L/70 not withstanding.

The T210 historical performance also runs counter-intuitive to this idea, since the T210, although possessing great penetration, had some serious accuracy issues and both it and the 90mm T208 were shelved because their advantages were useless at range, where hits on target were below minimum requirements acceptable to the US Army. So in more ways then one, the T210 105mm would have inferior performance to the T110E5.

Finally, the T110E5 is an end tier tank, and thus is the least likely tank to receive an extended tech tree. The E-100 gets the 128mm and 150mm for the express reason that both were "historical", and that the 150mm was intended to have poor "public game" performance so the 128mm was kept to correct this.

I can give you though that they modeled the M103 mantlet around the T210, but images of the T110 mock up show a very similar gun shield to the T96/T95 tanks - the devs were extremely lazy on modeling the T110E5, so I'd expect them to be just as lazy with a T96 or T95.


View PostBoomer7, on 12 March 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

Hmm ok so now we have finally left the 40s and 50s in tank design.

Wonder what that thing is firing, you cant fire regular AP shells from a smoothbore you need Armour-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot (APFSDS), they have a much higher muzzle velocity and penetration then the APshells from the 40s. Talking about 300mm-400mm penetration.

The first tank to mount a smoothbore was the russian T62 from 1961.

well at least there is now less reason not to add the Leopard 1 to the german line :D
The T95 was a mid 50's project (54-57, completely discontinued by 59), and both of it's smoothbores predate the Russian 115mm.

Yea, if the T210 105mm were to make it into the game, it'd be a derp/gold gun, as it only ever had APFSDS and HE.

Boomer7 #6 Posted 12 March 2012 - 01:50 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9439 battles
  • 368
  • [BM] BM
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011
True to that, but seems the smoothbore of the T95 did not work as intended.

If Wikipedia is right, the 105 smoothbore was never fitted, only the 90mm on the first prototype.

Anyway, I have the feeling its time for a split of the game into WWII and later.

Designs as the T95 with composite armor and firing APFSDS need either to be toned down a lot to work with the old tanks or if using their real stats are way too powerful.

FaustianQ #7 Posted 12 March 2012 - 01:55 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 0 battles
  • 29
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011

View PostBoomer7, on 12 March 2012 - 01:50 PM, said:

True to that, but seems the smoothbore of the T95 did not work as intended.

If Wikipedia is right, the 105 smoothbore was never fitted, only the 90mm on the first prototype.

Anyway, I have the feeling its time for a split of the game into WWII and later.

Designs as the T95 with composite armor and firing APFSDS need either to be toned down a lot to work with the old tanks or if using their real stats are way too powerful.

I personally would not mind a WoT from 1950-1990, if such dates are not unfair to certain countries, but one of the main issues would likely be the lack of continually evolving and differentiated weaponry, as this was where guns were peaking and armor and engines were playing catch-up, so something like WoT tiering system would just not work.

Tank_Killer1 #8 Posted 12 March 2012 - 01:59 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 62169 battles
  • 1,640
  • [ASOSX] ASOSX
  • Member since:
    07-24-2010
Since you have access to the files, do you know how to disable smoke?

69thBuLLeT #9 Posted 14 March 2012 - 02:35 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9419 battles
  • 206
  • Member since:
    06-17-2011
Bumping this to highlight the importance!

We REALLY would like to have a choice between the two top guns for the T110E5!

CandyVanMan #10 Posted 14 March 2012 - 03:07 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27570 battles
  • 1,032
  • [KAZNA] KAZNA
  • Member since:
    05-15-2011
T110E5 with the T7 155mm... *drool*
Unfortunately, I highly doubt we'll ever see that, but damn that would be fun!




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users