Jump to content


On Track to the FV215b Historic Discussion


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

Major_Rampage #1 Posted Jan 30 2014 - 00:58

    Game Events Manager

  • Players
  • 17484 battles
  • 3,766
  • [R__R] R__R
  • Member since:
    01-04-2012

Howdy Tankers!

 

As you know we are currently On Track to The FV215b.  While you are On Track you might also find our On Track Premium Shop Bundles helpful.

 

I know we have some amazing history buffs here in the NA World of Tanks community.  I have seen you folks pull out seldom know fact about tanks.  

 

Does anyone have any interesting historic facts or stories they would  like to share about the tanks involved in our current On Track to the FV215b?  

 

Note:  This is a strictly moderated thread.



Dominatus #2 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 00:47

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,793
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010

Hehe, this will partially resemble the JPE thread I feel.

 

The FV215b is a semi-fake tank that WG sort of created. It's an amalgamation of the real FV215b, a Conqueror based self propelled heavy tank destroyer with the L4 183mm gun, but with the regular Conqueror turret instead. A while ago, WG even made up a fake history for it, including that it was tested with the 133mm naval gun, but I don't recall seeing that recently.



Slakrrrrrr #3 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 01:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 22233 battles
  • 6,435
  • Member since:
    07-16-2011

It would be nice if WG replaced it with this beauty:

 

 

144mm frontal hull armor (130 +14), 166mm frontal turret armor (152 + 14). Not only is it a legitimate vehicle, it has the engine in the back and it wouldn't need any unrealistic armor buffs.



ramlaen #4 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 04:43

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 24045 battles
  • 259
  • Member since:
    11-13-2012
What historical discussion, its fake. If we are going to discuss it like it is real we might as well be discussing that KV-VI made by the modeler.

Okinoshima #5 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 05:27

    Captain

  • Players
  • 22571 battles
  • 1,687
  • Member since:
    08-24-2012

Is.... this thread a joke? Because I laughed for about 2 minutes reading the title! :veryhappy:

 

The FV215b was indeed a real project, but in WoT it's called the FV215b (183) ;)



Major_Rampage #6 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 06:52

    Game Events Manager

  • Players
  • 17484 battles
  • 3,766
  • [R__R] R__R
  • Member since:
    01-04-2012

This thread is dedicate to all of the tanks involved in the event, so there are a few options: 

The conversation doesn't have to be limited to a single tank.



7_11_Was_A_Part_Time_Job #7 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 09:13

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 30799 battles
  • 136
  • [CUBE] CUBE
  • Member since:
    11-13-2011
The Matilda was an awesome tank. The only thing the germans had that could pen it was their infamous 8.8 AA guns.

DracoArgentum #8 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 09:29

    Major

  • Players
  • 14673 battles
  • 3,033
  • [IOC] IOC
  • Member since:
    09-25-2011

View PostLordEdwardthefith, on Feb 04 2014 - 09:13, said:

The Matilda was an awesome tank. The only thing the germans had that could pen it was their infamous 8.8 AA guns.

 

It was pretty dang slow though.

 

The best part about the tilda is the Australian Hedghog version. Everything should have spigot mortars strapped to it.

 

And I second Slakarr's proposal, although perhaps WG is keeping that as a hull module.



EatMyAmmo #9 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 13:31

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 56409 battles
  • 24
  • Member since:
    11-23-2012

At some point in this discussion it will be suggested that British tanks were XXXX-boxes, pieces of XXXX, or, indeed, piles of unadulterated XXXX. Ok, well, that's pithy, if not entirely accurate.

As a nation of eccentrics we applied several design constraints to our combat vehicles, constraints which may have seemed particularly bizarre to the Germans.

We were quite concerned that we designed tanks that could be built. Then, once built, would go. If they stopped going, we wanted the capability of making them go again. In addition, we specified that these tanks should be supplied with ammunition. This could be fired at an enemy to do damage , when needed.

Of course, in the inter-war years, design constraints were different. Tanks had to look nice in a parade and fit on a railway carriage (so they wouldn't have to "go", at least not far). Very tall tanks with lots of guns on them look fabulous in a parade. This design had to be modified slightly. It was realised the existence of VERY tall tanks on railway carriages wasn't entirely compatible with the existence of bridges. Clearly, the presence of belligerents at parades wasn't anticipated. The presence of infrastructure was. Thus, British tank design was no longer constrained by the need TO damage an enemy. It was, however, constrained by the need NOT TO damage the town hall should you run into it. This presented our design engineers with a seemingly unsolvable conundrum: a tank that dents easily yet can still be made to look nice in time for the next parade? How the Eureka! moment came we'll never know. I imagine some eccentric tinkering in his shed when it came. "That's it! The shed!" Like all great genius it's obvious now. By replacing those great slabs of metal ("armour" (( yes and that is how you spell it can you imagine how appalling it is to be the home of great literature yet have spawned a nation of illiterates that, anyway, I digress))) with bits of shed ... Eureka! A lightweight material, easily hammered back into shape yet capable of taking a dink from a lamp post without harm to the latter! Plus, the lighter vehicle was now much more cheaply transported by rail!

Thus, we reach the apogee of British tank design as we enter the second world war. It's three meters high with the armour of a family saloon. Bristling with guns of varying calibre whose purpose is entirely decorative. The operational range is 800 meters. It's required to be operational for two hours every six months. Never, in the annals of human history, has a vehicle been more fit for purpose than this. Nazi Germany never recovered from its impact.

For the true purpose of the early British tanks was not as a fighting vehicle. Throughout the 1930's the British government raised the height of bridges throughout the country, allowing taller tanks to be transported by rail. Taller than anything that could be safely transported on continental Europe. The B.E.F is hurled into Belgium with vehicles that won't go anywhere and can't be taken anywhere else. It's inevitable they'll fall into enemy hands but that's ok because they're not dangerous. In a remarkably short space of time the B.E.F. transported vast quantities of this materiel onto Belgian roads, whereupon, they swiftly left.

Far from being unprepared for war, we had been building, secretly, under the cover of parades, for over a decade, the worlds first: rapid response traffic jam.

The Germans, thinking they'd won a great victory, became complacent in their superiority. A complacency that lead to the invasion of Russia.          



MisterPatriot #10 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 13:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 17538 battles
  • 6,661
  • Member since:
    01-19-2011

View PostSlakrrrrrr, on Feb 03 2014 - 19:32, said:

It would be nice if WG replaced it with this beauty:

 

144mm frontal hull armor (130 +14), 166mm frontal turret armor (152 + 14). Not only is it a legitimate vehicle, it has the engine in the back and it wouldn't need any unrealistic armor buffs.

Can't have logic in this game man.



vonluckner #11 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 14:36

    Captain

  • Players
  • 14235 battles
  • 1,716
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011
Interesting historical fact about the FV215b(120): It's a completely fake tank that was invented by Wargaming.

Dominatus #12 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 15:07

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,793
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010
Other tanks, well, I have to say I have a particular hatred for the Churchill I. Winston Churchill himself made a speech in Parliament outlining all the many faults of that tank, and how they were totally corrected by later marks. It's a tank with essentially zero historical significance, and without multi-gun, should be replaced with the Mark III or IV.

Xlucine #13 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 15:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 7663 battles
  • 7,603
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    03-03-2011
Why does the fake tank have the fv215b name, yet the real fv215b has (183) tacked on the end? And where did the idea for the fv215b (234) come from?

MisterPatriot #14 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 15:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 17538 battles
  • 6,661
  • Member since:
    01-19-2011

View PostXlucine, on Feb 04 2014 - 09:27, said:

Why does the fake tank have the fv215b name, yet the real fv215b has (183) tacked on the end? And where did the idea for the fv215b (234) come from?

We have a special name for the Conqueror GC

 

You should be hired to revise all of these fake atrocities in the British tree though. What do you think is best to replace the 4202 with?



Dominatus #15 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 15:56

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,793
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010
SS already posted the best options on FTR.

DeathbyLOLTRAKTOR #16 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 15:56

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22176 battles
  • 530
  • [OKH] OKH
  • Member since:
    11-28-2012

Im surprised that the Churchill AVRE wasn't added as a 'british KV-2' due to its significance and premium tank potential...

 

Besides that - WG, if you read this, PLEASE add the Chieftain to the game! it would make a great real - life alternative to the 215b and might even open up the 215b as a possible t8 heavy (with significant HP and gun nerfs of course) 

 

I would also like to suggest a Churchill "inside the hatch" episode, and perhaps more of the american early-war tanks too…. you can't tell me you got Mr. Moran access to a Maus but not a churchill 1… 

 

Aside from that…. i like that the Black Prince is the tier 7 successor to the churchill 7, and that it actually existed...

 

The Caernarvon was named after a Welsh castle (which was weird considering all preceding vehicles were named after important historical figures) and was the first in a line of tanks that were named with names that begin with a 'c' which continues to this day in the form of Challenger 2. 

 

Im not sure how reliable the caern/Conquror chassis is however, but it was quite amusing to watch it break down at tankfest :P

The video of that is online and i recommend that you watch it… it docent sound too good 



Slakrrrrrr #17 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 16:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 22233 battles
  • 6,435
  • Member since:
    07-16-2011

View PostMisterPatriot, on Feb 04 2014 - 06:46, said:

What do you think is best to replace the 4202 with?

My personal opinion: Centurion Mk.10.

 

The FV4202 would make a good tier 8 medium tank with historic armor and armament.



Erichkruger #18 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 16:18

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 12835 battles
  • 1,793
  • [NTR] NTR
  • Member since:
    12-14-2010

View PostDeathbyLOLTRAKTOR, on Feb 04 2014 - 09:56, said:

Im surprised that the Churchill AVRE wasn't added as a 'british KV-2' due to its significance and premium tank potential...

 

The AVRE would not hit like a KV-2 at all.  The AVRE shot 18 kg mortars while the M-10's shells weighed 40 kg.



Dominatus #19 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 17:31

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,793
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010

View PostErichkruger, on Feb 04 2014 - 10:18, said:

The AVRE would not hit like a KV-2 at all.  The AVRE shot 18 kg mortars while the M-10's shells weighed 40 kg.

The majority of the Petard mortar's shell was HE filler, while for the M-10, only about 5kg of the 40kg shell was HE filler.



Erichkruger #20 Posted Feb 04 2014 - 17:49

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 12835 battles
  • 1,793
  • [NTR] NTR
  • Member since:
    12-14-2010

View PostDominatus, on Feb 04 2014 - 11:31, said:

The majority of the Petard mortar's shell was HE filler, while for the M-10, only about 5kg of the 40kg shell was HE filler.

 

It it potentially can be one of the highest HE damage in the game but it would probably travel as slow as the 3 pound howitzer and have some of the lowest pen in the game?






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users