Jump to content


M110 and M103 hull armor


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

BriteYelloGy #1 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 01:52

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 6946 battles
  • 24
  • [CE] CE
  • Member since:
    06-20-2011
DO we know what the hull armor of the m110 and m203 wil lbe yet?

Mow_Mow #2 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 01:56

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12058 battles
  • 14,881
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    10-25-2010
127 sloped at 60 degrees for M103. IIRC. It is also sloped in a rounded nose kind of like IS-3.

XenomorphZZ #3 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 01:56

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12556 battles
  • 4,665
  • [RSRC] RSRC
  • Member since:
    01-24-2011
Wait RL values or ingame values?...

BriteYelloGy #4 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 01:57

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 6946 battles
  • 24
  • [CE] CE
  • Member since:
    06-20-2011
Thanks for the reply now to go get the t34 so i can have a free prem tanks =)

Dominatus #5 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 02:01

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,793
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010
Well, the M110's armour values are listed in Wiki I think but it's an SPG so it's not much. M203, well, I have no idea how much hull armour a grenade launcher has.

In all seriousness though, The M103's values should be around that of what Mow_Mow said. We're have no real understanding of the T110's armour yet, but I'm going out on a limb to say that it has better hull armour than the T30 but lower turret armour. It will have the 'pike' shaped hull as well though I believe.

XenomorphZZ #6 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 02:04

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12556 battles
  • 4,665
  • [RSRC] RSRC
  • Member since:
    01-24-2011
Its the T110 (for the Tier 10 HT) and the M103 for the tier 9 heavy tank replacing the T34...

Mow_Mow #7 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 02:18

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12058 battles
  • 14,881
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    10-25-2010
I've been told that T110 a cross between M48 Patton and M103... so probably it will have similar armor (127mm at 60 degree rounded slope) but since it is a paper tank there is a chance that the devs will increase it. (or decrease it)

FaustianQ #8 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 02:25

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18727 battles
  • 7,726
  • Member since:
    07-13-2010
The T110 was planned with 127mm at 60 degrees, and virtually every mock up makes it look like an M60 Patton or T54 prototype.

opposum #9 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 03:11

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19201 battles
  • 173
  • [SKTS] SKTS
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011

View PostBriteYelloGy, on Oct 06 2011 - 01:52, said:

DO we know what the hull armor of the m110 and m203 wil lbe yet?

Yes we already know what the hull armor will be, it will be pathetic. Everyone knows the developers will unfairly give the american tanks a disadvantage. It's a proven fact. I have broken down and came to the conclusion many many many moons ago that the american tree is NEVER going to get a tank that can hold its own. The developers are not going to be that fair...... sucks really.

Arzoo #10 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 04:33

    Captain

  • Players
  • 6061 battles
  • 1,780
  • [SF-G] SF-G
  • Member since:
    05-09-2011
M103 was a real tank so they'll stick to the real values for armor; 127mm at 60 degree slope is kind of lame but if you angle a bit you should be safe from the US 105mm at least.

The T110 was planned to have the same armor, but since it never got made and since it's REALLY pushing the point in history where armor was much more advanced there's a chance they'll increase it to maybe 140-150ish, though that's probably just wishful thinking (150 at 60 degrees without the silly IS-7 shape would be very nice actually).

I'm more interested in the T110's RoF and engine power honestly; it got an auto-loader and unless they cheap out and give you the crappiest engine it could mount it SHOULD be about as good as a medium tank movement-wise. I can deal with no armor if I get really high dpm and medium tank movement (as opposed to the T34's "slightly faster heavy" movement that does nothing to make up for its long list of flaws).

Overall I'm optimistic for the T110 mostly because there's a lot of things it could be good at so unless they decide to go with the weakest option for every single statistic (unfortunate possibility) it'll be good for SOMETHING.

SFC_Storm #11 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 08:13

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 15366 battles
  • 3,855
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010
M103 Heavy Tank:

Upper Glacis = 127mm at 60 degrees from vertical

Effective protection versus AP = 206mm
Effective protection versus APCR/APDS = 190mm
Effective protection versus HE/HEAT = 254mm

Lower Glacis = 114mm at 50 degrees from vertical

Effective protection versus AP = 153mm
Effective protection versus APCR/APDS = 145mm
Effective protection versus HE/HEAT = 177mm

This is hull Armor guys, the Turret will be about same as T32/T34, So its a big step up IMO, also it had same deppression as T29, so that will be awesome as of now T34 Dep Sucks.

Also imagine its Gun being a huge Ez8 cannon hi ROF Pen and Accuracy making it king of the DPM war.

Arzoo #12 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 12:32

    Captain

  • Players
  • 6061 battles
  • 1,780
  • [SF-G] SF-G
  • Member since:
    05-09-2011
M103 has -8 degrees of gun depression, T34 has -10. The M103 has the same gun depression the IS-4 has.

Jensen_Blayloc #13 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 13:57

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 12201 battles
  • 598
  • [GANG] GANG
  • Member since:
    08-07-2010
The only thing that gives me hope is that they said they would be "substantially" more durable.

opposum #14 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 14:19

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19201 battles
  • 173
  • [SKTS] SKTS
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011

View Postloregothe, on Oct 06 2011 - 13:57, said:

The only thing that gives me hope is that they said they would be "substantially" more durable.


Trust me, they lied.

VirgilHilts #15 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 14:24

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16650 battles
  • 3,417
  • Member since:
    07-31-2010

View Postloregothe, on Oct 06 2011 - 13:57, said:

The only thing that gives me hope is that they said they would be "substantially" more durable.

They also said "I don't know why everyone is so anxiously waiting for the M103, the armor is not going to be substantially better than the T34".

That was actually from a "developer", not a "developer liaison".

opposum #16 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 15:28

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19201 battles
  • 173
  • [SKTS] SKTS
  • Member since:
    02-19-2011

View PostVirgilHilts, on Oct 06 2011 - 14:24, said:

They also said "I don't know why everyone is so anxiously waiting for the M103, the armor is not going to be substantially better than the T34".

That was actually from a "developer", not a "developer liaison".


yep, just more proof the russians are going to screw us over AGAIN



1 day RO for insulting remarks...

ARGO


SpectreHD #17 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 18:28

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16844 battles
  • 17,167
  • [TT] TT
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010

View PostVirgilHilts, on Oct 06 2011 - 14:24, said:

They also said "I don't know why everyone is so anxiously waiting for the M103, the armor is not going to be substantially better than the T34".

That was actually from a "developer", not a "developer liaison".

Yeah, if the devs know that the armour is not going to be better, then at least buff the homogenisation that would make it challenging for at least Tier 6s to penetrate or make the gun really good. God damn, are the devs really that dense?


Insulting others is definitely NOT the way to go...

3 day RO

ARGO


XenomorphZZ #18 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 18:46

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12556 battles
  • 4,665
  • [RSRC] RSRC
  • Member since:
    01-24-2011
I cannot tell if we should ever take Serb seriously though...

SFC_Storm #19 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 20:44

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 15366 battles
  • 3,855
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostArzoo, on Oct 06 2011 - 12:32, said:

M103 has -8 degrees of gun depression, T34 has -10. The M103 has the same gun depression the IS-4 has.

Where did you see this?

Because if you talking about Wiki stats that was the stock turret, and one of the reasons it was replaced was the US love using Defilade attacks, and the New Turret was a little higher, and had alot more Deppresion

Homeles #20 Posted Oct 06 2011 - 23:26

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 6388 battles
  • 394
  • Member since:
    01-27-2011

View Postopposum, on Oct 06 2011 - 03:11, said:

Yes we already know what the hull armor will be, it will be pathetic. Everyone knows the developers will unfairly give the american tanks a disadvantage. It's a proven fact. I have broken down and came to the conclusion many many many moons ago that the american tree is NEVER going to get a tank that can hold its own. The developers are not going to be that fair...... sucks really.
You sound like the delusional German tankers.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users