Jump to content


Japanese Super Heavy Tank

japanese japan heavytank

  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

MontageIdiots #1 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:48

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 81
  • Member since:
    05-13-2012

O-I Super Heavy Tank

Type 100.JPG

[Picture of O-I compared to the Maus]

This Super-Heavy Tank was proposed heavy tank to help fight in the Pacific Theater. It was 100-120 tons (which is 90 tons less than the Maus and was supposedly bigger). It had a 542 hp engine. It would have a horrendous power-to-wait ratio of around 5.52 (according to the article the power-to-weight ratio is 8.82), comparable to that of a T95. It had a 105mm gun and a maximum of around 200mm of armor. 2 were built, but one was 100 tons and the other was 120 tons. They weren't recorded to fight in any battle. Top speed was around 25 km/h. This would probably be a tier 10 tank if implemented into the game, but I can't imagine how it would stand in a match with other tier 10s.

[Source]



CanadianGuitar #2 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:50

    Major

  • Players
  • 33488 battles
  • 13,598
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    01-24-2012
Dont forget, it also had rockets

MontageIdiots #3 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:50

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 81
  • Member since:
    05-13-2012

View PostCanadianGuitar, on Dec 14 2013 - 22:50, said:

Dont forget, it also had rockets

I wouldn't think that would be implemented though



Lert #4 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:51

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 44728 battles
  • 25,716
  • Member since:
    09-02-2010

View PostMontageIdiots, on Dec 15 2013 - 03:48, said:

This would probably be a tier 10 tank if implemented into the game

Why? Just because it's big? What's wrong with putting it at, say, tier 8?



Yeremenko #5 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:53

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22656 battles
  • 534
  • Member since:
    08-26-2011
Looks like a TOG II* and KV-5 had a baby.

A_Defenseless_Kitten #6 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:53

    Major

  • Players
  • 30260 battles
  • 6,429
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011
If this tank was a tier 10 it's hp will need to be monstrous and have a very fast reload.

MontageIdiots #7 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:54

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 81
  • Member since:
    05-13-2012

View PostLert, on Dec 14 2013 - 22:51, said:

Why? Just because it's big? What's wrong with putting it at, say, tier 8?

Hey Lert! The maximum armor is 200mm and would have a tier 10 105mm gun so it would be one OP tank at tier 8 even with how maneuverable it is... I could see it at tier 9 though and could see it being a great tier 8.



Sarge127 #8 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:54

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 11322 battles
  • 123
  • [SON5] SON5
  • Member since:
    11-23-2012

Lets not forget their tank destroyer! Experimental Type 5 Ho-Ri tank destroyer. :)



Buffalo444 #9 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:55

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 20855 battles
  • 411
  • Member since:
    08-06-2013

Tier 8 premium. Like a Lowe, but instead it has even worse mobility and size/profile, but with better armor and a similar gun (would imagine 2000-2200 hp pool) And being larger than a Maus but weighing 90 tons less, that armor would be there, but it wouldn't be plentiful (I would imagine 200mm front and turret front, 100mm sides, 80mm rear. both mini turrets would probably be weakspots, as well as drivers port and massive turret cupola) Probably be like someone hacked apart a KV-5 and a Lowe and built a whole different tank with the parts.

 

And seriously, look at the size of the cupola! It's like the size of R2D2 on the KV-5, maybe bigger!


Edited by Buffalo444, Dec 15 2013 - 04:58.


MontageIdiots #10 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:55

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 81
  • Member since:
    05-13-2012

View PostSarge127, on Dec 14 2013 - 22:54, said:

Lets not forget their tank destroyer! Experimental Type 5 Ho-Ri tank destroyer. :)

do you have an article i could read for that?



MontageIdiots #11 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:57

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 81
  • Member since:
    05-13-2012

View PostBuffalo444, on Dec 14 2013 - 22:55, said:

Tier 8 premium. Like a Lowe, but instead it has even worse mobility and size/profile, but with better armor and a similar gun (would imagine 2000-2200 hp pool) And being large than a Maus but weighing 90 tons less, that armor would be there, but it wouldn't be plentiful (I would imagine 200mm front and turret front, 100mm sides, 80mm rear. both mini turrets would probably be weakspots, as well as drivers port and massive turret cupola) Probably be like someone hacked apart a KV-5 and a Lowe and built a whole different tank with the parts.

 

And seriously, look at the size of the cupola! It's like the size of R2D2 on the KV-5, maybe bigger!

yeah now i definitely see where Lert was getting at with it being a tier 8. It has a plentiful amount of weakspots that would eliminate the OP factor in tier 8 games.



Buffalo444 #12 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:58

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 20855 battles
  • 411
  • Member since:
    08-06-2013

View PostMontageIdiots, on Dec 14 2013 - 20:54, said:

Hey Lert! The maximum armor is 200mm and would have a tier 10 105mm gun so it would be one OP tank at tier 8 even with how maneuverable it is... I could see it at tier 9 though and could see it being a great tier 8.

 

Less armor than a T28, lots of weakspots, the 105 doesn't have to be a tier 10 gun (could be though, look at the T34), top speed is probably downhill and extremely optimistic, would probably have manuevrability close to that of a TOG II*. Not to mention it is boxy as hell, so the 200mm isn't angled at all...



Legiondude #13 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 04:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 20522 battles
  • 23,192
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostLert, on Dec 14 2013 - 21:51, said:

Why? Just because it's big? What's wrong with putting it at, say, tier 8?

View PostMontageIdiots, on Dec 14 2013 - 21:54, said:

Hey Lert! The maximum armor is 200mm and would have a tier 10 105mm gun so it would be one OP tank at tier 8 even with how maneuverable it is... I could see it at tier 9 though and could see it being a great tier 8.

Chances are that we'll see several versions of the O-I

 

 

View PostMontageIdiots, on Dec 14 2013 - 21:55, said:

do you have an article i could read for that?

Poking your head around here would save you alot of posting time



Buffalo444 #14 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 05:00

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 20855 battles
  • 411
  • Member since:
    08-06-2013

View PostMontageIdiots, on Dec 14 2013 - 20:57, said:

yeah now i definitely see where Lert was getting at with it being a tier 8. It has a plentiful amount of weakspots that would eliminate the OP factor in tier 8 games.

 

Would still seem OP to the scrubs, just like the KV-5.... lol

 

Btw, if WG *were* to implement this tank like I just laid out... I'd buy it. Just saying...



MontageIdiots #15 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 05:03

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 81
  • Member since:
    05-13-2012

View PostLegiondude, on Dec 14 2013 - 22:59, said:

Poking your head around here would save you alot of posting time

thank you dude +1



MontageIdiots #16 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 05:03

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 81
  • Member since:
    05-13-2012

View PostBuffalo444, on Dec 14 2013 - 23:00, said:

 

Would still seem OP to the scrubs, just like the KV-5.... lol

 

Btw, if WG *were* to implement this tank like I just laid out... I'd buy it. Just saying...

as would I seems like a tank that would have some great games



Buffalo444 #17 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 05:04

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 20855 battles
  • 411
  • Member since:
    08-06-2013

View PostLegiondude, on Dec 14 2013 - 20:59, said:

Poking your head around here would save you alot of posting time

 

Gud poast

 

I didn't read it that thoroughly (so if I missed it, my bad) but even a 140 ton variant would either have lots of weakspots or nothing but front armor... If they extrapolated it to maybe a 200 ton variant, I could see it, but it would still be sub Maus in armor unless it got shrunk for some reason.



Daigensui #18 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 05:04

    Major

  • Players
  • 30632 battles
  • 29,990
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012
I'll be nice: Mind not posting the same old misinformed things when people who actually do research for WG are around?

Buffalo444 #19 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 05:06

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 20855 battles
  • 411
  • Member since:
    08-06-2013

View PostMontageIdiots, on Dec 14 2013 - 21:03, said:

as would I seems like a tank that would have some great games

 

KV-5 does. Its a pub stomper, and this one would be too, because most players wouldn't bother to learn the weak spots and it would seem just as OP as it does on paper. Good players would own (as in kill easily) it though, just like the KV-5.



MontageIdiots #20 Posted Dec 15 2013 - 05:06

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 9366 battles
  • 81
  • Member since:
    05-13-2012

View PostDaigensui, on Dec 14 2013 - 23:04, said:

I'll be nice: Mind not posting the same old misinformed things when people who actually do research for WG are around?

yeah sorry i didnt just found out about the amount of research has already went into this tank and tanks like this







Also tagged with japanese, japan, heavytank

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users