The Type 3 Chi-Nu Kai: Easy to Learn, Hard to Master
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 20:37
Full news text
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 20:44
Interesting review of my daughter.
Aspects that I cannot agree with: "Chi-Nu Kai's high level of hit points for a medium", "excellent gun depression". Are you kidding me? Her sister Chi-Nu has the same health and better depression.
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 20:46
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 20:47
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 20:52
Its nothing like a tiger, thats a complete fallacy and will be exceptionally misleading. It lacks the premium HP boost that other tanks have, is slow, its not maneuverable and has paper armour. Think of it as a t49 with a broken engine and a dead driver and you are on your way to mastering it. Get the camo crew skill, a camo net and binocs and find a good bush to hide in.
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 21:01
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 21:07
The power-to-weight ratio is excellent
lololololol have you ever actually driven this tank?
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 21:15
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 21:32
What was not mentioned about this tank is that it regularly see tier 7 tanks. A Tiger 1 destroys the Chi-Nu-Kai in ~7 seconds. It takes about (minimum) 45 seconds to kill a Tiger 1. Meaning that it can kill you over six times in the period you have to kill it. Even a VK3601H takes about 20 seconds to DPM down. (It can kill you in less than 12.) The KV-1 can destroy a Chi-Nu-Kai in less than 8 seconds, while the reverse is twice as long at over 16 seconds.
Overall, the tank does not have the survivability to engage enemy targets with its DPM. Unlike many flanking tanks, it also does not have the speed or maneuverability to rely upon. Further compounding this is that the tank has normal matchmaking, allowing it to see some rather deadly tanks. The only reason for this tank is that it is the only Japanese tank. The puff piece published on the front page, is mainly disinformation.
Edited by Tyben, Dec 16 2013 - 21:33.
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 21:35
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 21:41
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 21:46
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 21:55
It's actually almost all wrong. He even acknowledges it (or it's shitty editing, WHO CAN SAY?).
"high level of hit points for a medium" + "Decent maintained acceleration" = "450 HP is a bit low for a slow medium"
"slower, slightly better-armored Wolverine" -- Wolverine has better armor
"utilize good turret traverse ... to provide second-line support" -- wat?
"Excellent gun depression" -- ...
"High-seated gun" -- ????????
"I played two rounds in this tank, and here is my incredibly informed and informative review. Note that I am an idiot."
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 22:08
Its a gimped T-25.
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 22:15
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 22:17
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 22:20
no i say other wise it doesnt mean 450 hp it means 450 horse power my god look at the stats and compare.
That's an even worse mistake then as it only has 240hp in-game. And really, you should be directing your annoyance at Wargaming not me. I was at least giving them the benefit of the doubt for a lesser mistake.
Can we get WellingtonBoot in here to actually clarify why he signed off on such an article?
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 22:38
Wait, so a crappy article making a mediocre tank (that just so happens to cost money) look better than it is?
Wargaming would never do that. Cash grabs are for less principled companies.
Posted Dec 16 2013 - 22:52
No way this is legit. The Chi-Nu Kai is very sluggish on hills and rough terrain and has a terrible power-to-weight ratio.