Jump to content


Chieftain..... my hunt for you continues Part 2


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

Cornish_Pirate #1 Posted Feb 04 2016 - 09:16

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 36772 battles
  • 910
  • [NAAM] NAAM
  • Member since:
    04-26-2011

http://ritastatusrep...03022016-q.html

 

Splittng the conqueror into fv215b and the chieftain, same way the t-54 splits up.
-FV215b is a tank we had to invent back in the days, Chieftain is real.

 

The only info i can get from this is they plan on removing the FV215b and plan on replacing it with the Chieftain (probably)

 

How bad did the Chieftain armor have to be for them to hold off putting it in?
Just put it in. It's not like this will be the first time they put an underpowered tank in game... and they can always buff it.
-It’s bad enough, T-54 or is-3 can pen turret with regular ammo, not just cupola. You simply cannot tank enemy shells in tier X with this tank. We have enough of glass cannon tanks in the game, why add another?

 

Okay so i did not realise that the amour was that bad, i thought i was just the 76mm hull amour that was causing problems. One thing they could always do is put the stillbrew amour on the front of the tank as they have done in AW, but that amour is from the MK 10 Chieftain. Not sure what they will do but but if amour can get up to t110e5 level on the turret (not including the op week point) i would be okay with that, but i dont think i would have been okay with a glass cannon as a heavy tank



Legiondude #2 Posted Feb 04 2016 - 09:18

    Major

  • Players
  • 20336 battles
  • 23,172
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011
Composite armor is still one of the big no-no's as far as WG is concerned

SchnitzelTruck #3 Posted Feb 04 2016 - 09:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 43498 battles
  • 7,939
  • Member since:
    03-14-2013

The only weakpoint on the turret besides the hatch is a 220-240 effective section above the gun. If its bothering them that much they should just add 35 to the base thickness and it would be as strong as the rest of the turret. That way it would be 175mm angled like its surrounding armor zones instead of 140mm.

 

Doesnt solve the utter garbage frontal hull + overmatch sides though.

 

http://tanks.gg/wot/...ftain#tab:model

armor model for those interested.



GetToZeeChoppa #4 Posted Feb 04 2016 - 09:46

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 36157 battles
  • 250
  • [SUX] SUX
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010
Chieftain has great armor as I seen on tanks.gg however it has a hatch that is very weak. It just needs to play and use all of that 10 degrees of gun depression. Armor or not, it is supposed to have an even better gun than the 215b right now.

SourKraut13 #5 Posted Feb 04 2016 - 15:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 24190 battles
  • 9,271
  • Member since:
    12-14-2011

They have found a tuck away Conqueror variant that they want to replace the FV215b with. 

From Rita's blog awhile back:

 

"- Storm states that FV215b will be replaced. However, it is not certain that it will be replaced by Chieftain: "We will switch it. But for what and how - that we will have to think about" (RG: There is a chance that instead of Chieftain there will be Listy's "Super Conqueror", it's possible that the switch will not happen in 9.11 after all)"



KRISKRINGLE_ #6 Posted Feb 04 2016 - 17:18

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 2935 battles
  • 205
  • Member since:
    03-07-2015

View PostSourKraut13, on Feb 04 2016 - 06:10, said:

They have found a tuck away Conqueror variant that they want to replace the FV215b with. 

From Rita's blog awhile back:

 

"- Storm states that FV215b will be replaced. However, it is not certain that it will be replaced by Chieftain: "We will switch it. But for what and how - that we will have to think about" (RG: There is a chance that instead of Chieftain there will be Listy's "Super Conqueror", it's possible that the switch will not happen in 9.11 after all)"

 

Yep- I would not count on Chiefy for a long time, if ever.

 

Listy's Super Conq is my bet, but then again how long have they been saying the Waffle will be replaced..............:facepalm:






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users