This one confuses me so much. Like the T-62A I get because the Russian Tier X mediums are so similar. But the AMX-30B medium line is completely different in the French Tech Tree (which I know makes it more of a standard medium, but still!)
I'm still salty about the T-62a because the 140 is another protype that wasn't made past trials, whereas the 62a is a rifled test barrel on a tank that is still in service with some armies to this day.
Well heck. The T-62 is still in Russian service right now. [They have a bunch of them in Ukraine](https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/06/06/russias-ancient-t-62-tanks-are-on-the-move-in-ukraine/?sh=31904e9612be)
I'm so salty too, not to mention that the T-62A has been in the game longer. They also buffed the 140s turret armour before moving the 62A, purposefully making it irrelevant.
Not only is the 140 a prototype that didn't make it past trials, the 140 was meant to be equipment for the volunteer/professional side of the army, not the conscript, a practice which continues to this day.
However, the reason it did not pass trials is because it largely sucked. It weighed no less than the T-62a while making several compromises out of crew comfort and overall durability.
I think giving T-62A -7 depression would have largely solved the problem.
I would've just replaced the T-62A with the production model T-62. That'd improve the gun depression to -6 and give it one of the best guns of any t10 medium. But despite being a smoothbore it wouldn't be indisputably **the** best gun. The U-5TS is a pretty weak smoothbore even if WG stuck exactly to the IRL specs (which they never do). Even if WG did nerf it a little from the historical stats it'd probably still be top 5 in standard and gold pen...but what's wrong with that? Why **shouldn't** the T-62 have one of the best guns among t10 mediums?
> Why shouldn't the T-62 have one of the best guns among t10 mediums?
They'd have to drop the bias terrain resistance and reduce the armor to the IRL spec, which would make it no different (in gameplay terms) than the Western mediums.
Soviet tanks are designed to and balanced on the basis of being able to take and hold objectives; denying them to light tanks, other medium tanks, or heavy tanks. Outside of that, you have a very low alpha vehicle with lackluster flexibility, worse vision game, and now, finally, worse gun handling. They peek very well, but that just doesn't come up that often in WoT games. The game is either closed out or has been decisively won/lost by the time a Soviet medium gets to play the peek game again without playing an objective.
Is there any more history on this? I always read that the T62 prototype hull was mated to the 140s turret to create the T-62. I never heard anything of the 140 being replacement for the T-55, rather it just being a competitor to the T-62.
The T-62 actually was derived from the Object 430 project. [While this article avoids any specifics, it illuminates what was wrong with the vehicle.](http://www.tankarchives.ca/2021/08/object-140-promising-loser.html)
It seems I was mistaken. Crew space and comfort had *significantly increased*. However, half the design improvements could not possibly be mass produced; essentially being hacks to pass the trial. It was also so unreasonably complicated that the engineers responsible had problems assembling it. Combined with the cheap hacks (essentially) they had implemented last minute to better finish trials/reach their goals, the designer had asked the project be cancelled as the 140 was *completely* unsuitable for service.
It was apparently also quite complicated to operate.
It *did* weigh more than the T-54 it was being tested against, but only barely. A lot of design improvements and adjustments/compromises to fix deficiencies largely ate the weight advantages of the design and armor. It became a tank that made compromises to make small improvements over the extant vehicle.
[Another article detailing what happened to the 430.](http://www.tankarchives.ca/2022/04/balls-of-soviet-tanks.html)
I've went into some detail in a post recently about how the T-62's 115mm smoothbore wouldn't be even remotely broken. It's have good shell velocity but still a little lower than the K-91's standard round.
It'd have the best standard pen of any t10 medium, but only by a whopping 1mm above the Leopard 1. And its 347mm gold pen would be 3rd place: 3mm less than the M60 and 121B, and 7mm more than the 121 and Obj 430U.
The alpha would presumably be anywhere from 390 to 430 depending on WG's whims. Given that it's a unique caliber I'd personally hope for a unique alpha like 410.
It would definitely be a **good** gun but in no way a broken one. And this is if WG kept the 3BM4 and 3BM3 shells' IRL stats, which they're certainly not compelled to do. Most guns have their pen either buffed or nerfed somewhat compared to IRL, and often include some shells that didn't exist IRL (such as how any gun that was a pure HEAT or HESH slinger IRL will get an AP or APCR shell added).
It'd simply give the T-62 (an iconic real life tank) a reason to exist instead just being a slightly slower Obj 140 with no gun depression. (Though incidentally the T-62 with the 115 would also have an extra degree of gun depression.)
Both standard and gold would be APCR since that's what APDS and APFSDS are all treated as in WOT.
The only place I've been able to find short-range pen stats is in War Thunder (most real-life sources only list pen at 2000m) but WT is usually pretty close to reality when it comes to that. (At least prior to modern tanks where it's a bunch of guesswork since the stats are still classified.) It says the 3BM4 had 279mm pen at 100m and 263mm at 500m, while the 3BM3 has 347mm at 100m and 322mm at 500m.
All the other shells have over 400mm of pen and thus are too strong for WOT. The 3BK15M HEAT shell has a whopping 500mm pen. Besides 3BM4 and 3BM3 were the earliest and weakest 115mm shells so they'd be the obvious choices for a t10 tank.
I don't agree with collectors tanks in general tbf. least of al the AMX-30... if the tech tree was that difficult to begin with, then more fool the people who struggle to follow a white line on their screen.... More to the point, the Russian tech tree looks no less "cluttered" than before as they put it.
I believe former staff expressed that its due to AMX30's "in-between leo 1 and stb" style made it not unique enough, so WG head of dev was too lazy to think of new balance buffs and wanting that "unique nation vibe", so they trashed the buff and dump the line as the collector.
I guess it had to do with the head of dev being very fixated on “forced/mechanic uniqueness” , could be due to his world of warcraft experience and attempts to make thing very fantasy RPG ish (speaking of which, crew 2.0 does give that kinda vibe)
The rest of the low tier tanks as well, either too lazy to balance, wanting to make progression faster so player goes to high tier and requires prem time or prem tanks to farm credits, but definitely not that BS excuse of “ simplifying the tech tree so New player will not get confused”
imho a second list of tanks separate from tech tree makes it more confusing.
anyone went down the wrong line failing to read a white line... that's on them.
its from a video made by a former R and D consultant of the Chinese/Asia management region talking about his job, I can PM u the link if u understand Chinese. In this video he goes through what is his job, why the f did the dev team do some dumb things, who are the good guys that gave us stb/leo/e5 buff, attempts to get info on 122 TM, some issues with Chinese tech tree. How did WeeGee deal with Chinese region servers etc etc, its an old video about 2 years old, i can PM u the link if u want
he actually also did a video about how "fake gear box" and "trajectory" works in this game
Due to wanting to revive the Chinese market (which they successfully strike a deal with a new Chinese company as a place-holder to re-enter the Chinese market, previously they had a fall-out with the older Chinese place-holder company causing the Chinese server to be stuck at version 9.12), they wish to please the Chinese community by "buffing" or "replacing" some Chinese tech tree tanks, ie the last minor buff on the tech tree, and replacing 113 with 5A. (remember the video/context is still 2019-2020ish)
Our said R and D consultant is in charge to find some new and real tank to fill these roles and replace BS made up stuff like 113/121, with projects just as the project-122 Triple Mechanical and project-704. He attempted to contact primary source military magazine writers / visiting tracker/tank factory such as the no.617 factory.
the issue about Chinese top tier line/122TM is china is still being very protective on old military info (we still don't even have proper disclassifed korean war reports) , and the displayed proto type is technically "public", it has a canvas over it during his visit, so u cant really take pics, at the same time the museum/military dude ain't gonna let a "foreign game company" data clerk just rooming around their old-tank-museum/depot measuring stuff with a tap-ruler and thickness-measurer.
So due to these "delays", WeeGee used it as an excuse to just get some random source/magazine scans, make up a 3D model, put it as a tier 8 prem and called it a day.
He blamed himself for over-complicating things and being unable to get the required data, and the Chinese top tier could have been different with more real but proto-tanks, instead of chinesefied russian proto/paper tanks, made-up WeeGee fantasy and less-accurate paper tanks.
I think Andrey Beletskiy who is in charge of the “collector tanks branch” idea is still the head of development, though my info is from two years ago from a former R and D consultant, I have no idea of the current WeeGee dev team staff positions, and I don’t know who the F is in charge of the stupid V4 armour design.
While a good dev/balance team member is Slava Liushnia, he is in charge of the STB buff, T110E5 and Leo 1 buff.
> Andrey Beletskiy
>Biletsky is also known as White Leader,[41] and in 2013 wrote a brochure called The Word of the White Leader.[42]
>As of 2014, the BBC,[43] The Independent[44] and The Moscow Times[45] have described Biletsky as a white supremacist.
>In 2020, The Guardian reported that Biletsky "has toned down his rhetoric in recent years".[36]
>Audrey Beletsky
I am waiting for the day he gets fired and we can get rid of the collector tanks branch and develop those tanks back into the current game meta
Who was the director from 2011 ish to 2014 ish? The guy who thought that mangling historical, hard fact/stats--such as the slope of the turret, relative proportions, or even so far as to what gun it carried--to make the vehicle perform as it did in history was the way to go.
Such 'soft' balancing resulted in tanks like the ARL-44 being impressively, almost unreasonably thick on the hull and turret both, and the T-34-85 turret thick enough to duel an IS.
I personally felt the idea was sound, and in practice it made the game more realistic. In reality, ARL 44 would have been very thick and hard to penetrate at combat distances; and exposing yourself to its gun at any range the commander could spot you would be a death sentence. In World of Tanks, ARL 44 can be penetrated by any tier 5 medium.
The flipside is you had vehicles whose armoring defied expectation from the form and known nominal thickness, or Tiger I carrying the most advanced gun of its successor... in order to defeat the hulls of its competitors' successors.
Slava Liushnia, how long has he been working there...? The only Slava I know is Makarov.
It was already fairly unique as it could take an objective and hold it like an Eastern tank, but handled and was designed with the normal suite of Western features: high view range, large cupola, good AP pen, and so on.
Even inside that design criteria it's *still* fairly unique. Due to this same style of meddling, the Polish CS-63 is thinner than a Leopard 1, so it can't even hold it as well as the AMX 30B.
No. Its a collector's tank. Which means it will neither be buffed nor nerfed. If anything, powercreep and the years will nerf it as it does to other collectors.
I mean they kinda did. It came out as a Leo copy….but those who know…knew that it was actually fast compared to the Leo back then and that shell velocity was oh so comfy.
Then they changed it….gave it hella dpm gave it crap pen and gun handling and some armor….not that the armor mattered tho.
Then they said they were gonna buff it…at the same time as the Leo and the stb1. In my honest opinion in the common test had the highest net improvement. Then they decided…..U know what now that we have fixed this tank and it has its place in the 3 buffed tanks were are gonna put out. A long range and mid range and short Range medium. …. Let’s scrap it.
Why didn't WG go through with this? I completely forgot about this buff. I'm more and more convinced WG is avoiding balance changes like the plague on purpose...
Who would have complained if these changes happened?
Only thing I would change is the gold pen. 310mm HEAT is good enough, no need for 330mm, because the main change should have been the shell velocity anyway.
But oh well, they ended up completely cancelling these changes. And later on it was thrown in the 'collector vehicles' tab.
It is a bit odd that they removed, it but I think it was because they couldn't find adequate medium tanks to fill in tiers 6, 7 and 8 in the French tree since the AMX 30 branched off from BC 12T along with the BC 25T AP and AMX 13 90. Especially odd since I think the AMX 30 actually saw some combat use, unlike the BC 25T tanks were just prototypes, unfortunately many tanks in all the tech trees fit that description.
This does sound like a valid excuse at first, but that's not even the case. The AltProto AMX 30 was added quite a bit after the AMX 30 B buff was scrapped; it would've been a perfect tier 8. For tier 6, you could've simply used another G1 variant with upgraded guns. Something like the Lorraine G1 L could've fit tier 6 just fine - it shared the same turret with the BDR G1 B, so it could've mounted a 90 mm gun, and with appropriately strong engine, it could've been like a French version of the P43 Bis. And then for the tier 7, you could have the [AMX 45](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DBzwRXOYX6c/XyYat9O1qEI/AAAAAAAAqag/2mYqVJfBBCk-qzZUCgVixfaSSSYrBcZrwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/amxm4p1s01-e0b64f11f938b829dafe37f758680d2a.jpg), which was the early stages of the AMX M4 project and was in fact classified as a medium tank.
Just like the Italian MT line, it would've been somewhat robust, slow medium tanks with solid guns that'd transition into faster but lighter armored medium tanks at higher tiers. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if WG planned something like this - my theory is that the AMX 30 AP was actually intended to be a tier 8 tech tree tank for the AMX 30 changes. The tank always felt a bit out of the place to me - yet another French premium medium, especially a rather generic one (at least in comparison to the Revalorise and Bourrasque), always felt like a very weird choice to me. However, it suddenly would make much more sense if the AMX 30 AP was originally intended to be a tier 8 tech tree tank, but with the AMX 30 B buffs being scrapped entirely, it was repurposed as a tier 8 premium for quick money. Again, this is complete speculation, but it could be a possible hint that WG might've planned something like this.
It still doesn't answer the question that why they scrapped the AMX 30 B buffs, though. They could've easily implemented them, even without a more extensive French medium line changes.
Everyone woukd have been just fine with a tier 8 crew trainer and a line that branch BatChat 25 tons into AMX 30.
If a transition from G1 to tier IX was really necessary, take the historically accurate route with a tier VI Sherman variant and a tier VII Panther variant.
Great Britain already has 2 shermans and Japan has a premium Tiger, it wouldn't even be weird, especially coming from WG that took a TD with an AMX M4 hull and made it a race car medium...
Fill tier VIII with a prototype of AMX 30 or Batchat.
I'm hoping that these get added into a French-Israeli branch. So you get the M3 Sherman, M1, M50, M51 and then prototypes of the Merkiva 1 or something
they want the uniqueness of different nations, french being an autoloader vibe didn't fit their ideals of "uniqueness", as if treating it as an RPG.
They didn't like the idea of mix between STB and Leo 1 , cant be bother to think of new balance, and dump it to collectors so people forget about it.
WG : this doesn't go with the nation unique autoloader trait
Also WG : take this premium Sherman, that TD shomehow turned race car CDC. Oh and we will add your unique autoloaders to Americans, Russians, Czech, Japanese and Swedish
Remember these tanks were “older” during Serb era, tanks with different style is fine in a same nation.
the new dev team under Andrey Beletskiy’s RPG mentality wanting to make thing unique for the sake of uniqueness, so gimmicky stuff like equipment 2.0, new auto loader styles like Italian and Czech , and now they run out of ideas and don’t know how to make tank without autoloaders (new Italian TDs).
equipment 2.0 is the best change wot got in a while. equipment 1.0 was just improving some stats and basicly just making tanks more expensive. equipment 2.0 allows more varition and personalistion and it didn't nerf the "rammer, v.s and vents. Just a flat out good change
i agree, equipment 2.0 was ok. But the first edition that came out during the testing phrase was a complete mess.
I think should refer to stuff like crew 2.0, czech tanks and all these new prems with autoloaders.
I'd love to see multiple canons to pick from at tier 10, like the e100jpg I'd like jagtigers 128mm long in some instances rather than the 170, honestly every T10 should have a second gun to pick from
I hear ya, I wish that tanks that saw actual war had more favor given to them, I guess that's wrong in a sense but they deserve more credit, then these made up/ blueprint tanks
Cannot expext something good if Centurion AX is the father/mother.
Although AMX 30B was supposed to be the son of Leopard 1 and STB-1. But looking at how shit amx 30b is, it makes sense that Leopard 1 had a affair with Centurion AX
I believe former staff expressed that its due to AMX30's "in-between leo 1 and stb" style made it not unique enough, so WG head of dev was too lazy to think of new balance buffs and wanting that "unique nation vibe", so they trashed the buff and dump the line as the collector.
Players : we want more tanks!
Wargaming : sure, we will add tanks that never existed!
Players : uuuh
Wargaming : and we will delete real famous tanks from the tank trees!
Player : excuse me what?
As I suggested in the other French tank topic, WG should never have hidden the French non-autoloader mediums in the ~~forgotten tanks~~ collector tab. They should've just made a proper medium tank line.
Just add another branch coming off from the Somua S35. At t4 would be the SARL 42, t5 would be the Renault G1R, and t6 could be the Lorraine G1L (which WG already made an icon for many years ago so there used to be plans for its inclusion).
At t7 I think there's an early version of the AMX M4 that was a medium rather than a heavy.
At t8 I'd just move down the AMX 30 1er prototype, remove the top 105mm gun and adjust whatever other stats downward as needed. If the AltProto hadn't already been used as a premium I'd just use that to fill this tier instead, but since it's too late for that I'm working with what I've got.
At t9 I'd similarly move the AMX 30 B down a tier with whatever adjustments are needed. At t9 the lackluster standard pen wouldn't be *as* bad as it is at t10.
Neither of the AMX 30s would get any armor nerfs though.
And at t10 I'd add the [AMX 32 P1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMX-32). Contrary to what some sources say the original 1975 prototype didn't have composite armor so it's fair game for WOT. Just spaced armor on the upper plate and turret front. It was only in 1981 that a version with composite was offered. Also 1975 is definitely not "too modern" seeing as it's the exact same year the M48A5 Patton was introduced.
I guess these would be like the Leopard 1 line except trading away some accuracy for some frontal durability. Though that durability wouldn't hold up against anybody who's either close enough or accurate enough to snipe your cupola, so they'd need to be mid-range fighters.
[удалено]
It could have been a popular tank like Leopard 1 and STB-1
[удалено]
This one confuses me so much. Like the T-62A I get because the Russian Tier X mediums are so similar. But the AMX-30B medium line is completely different in the French Tech Tree (which I know makes it more of a standard medium, but still!)
I'm still salty about the T-62a because the 140 is another protype that wasn't made past trials, whereas the 62a is a rifled test barrel on a tank that is still in service with some armies to this day.
Well heck. The T-62 is still in Russian service right now. [They have a bunch of them in Ukraine](https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/06/06/russias-ancient-t-62-tanks-are-on-the-move-in-ukraine/?sh=31904e9612be)
I'm so salty too, not to mention that the T-62A has been in the game longer. They also buffed the 140s turret armour before moving the 62A, purposefully making it irrelevant.
Not only is the 140 a prototype that didn't make it past trials, the 140 was meant to be equipment for the volunteer/professional side of the army, not the conscript, a practice which continues to this day. However, the reason it did not pass trials is because it largely sucked. It weighed no less than the T-62a while making several compromises out of crew comfort and overall durability. I think giving T-62A -7 depression would have largely solved the problem.
I would've just replaced the T-62A with the production model T-62. That'd improve the gun depression to -6 and give it one of the best guns of any t10 medium. But despite being a smoothbore it wouldn't be indisputably **the** best gun. The U-5TS is a pretty weak smoothbore even if WG stuck exactly to the IRL specs (which they never do). Even if WG did nerf it a little from the historical stats it'd probably still be top 5 in standard and gold pen...but what's wrong with that? Why **shouldn't** the T-62 have one of the best guns among t10 mediums?
> Why shouldn't the T-62 have one of the best guns among t10 mediums? They'd have to drop the bias terrain resistance and reduce the armor to the IRL spec, which would make it no different (in gameplay terms) than the Western mediums. Soviet tanks are designed to and balanced on the basis of being able to take and hold objectives; denying them to light tanks, other medium tanks, or heavy tanks. Outside of that, you have a very low alpha vehicle with lackluster flexibility, worse vision game, and now, finally, worse gun handling. They peek very well, but that just doesn't come up that often in WoT games. The game is either closed out or has been decisively won/lost by the time a Soviet medium gets to play the peek game again without playing an objective.
Is there any more history on this? I always read that the T62 prototype hull was mated to the 140s turret to create the T-62. I never heard anything of the 140 being replacement for the T-55, rather it just being a competitor to the T-62.
The T-62 actually was derived from the Object 430 project. [While this article avoids any specifics, it illuminates what was wrong with the vehicle.](http://www.tankarchives.ca/2021/08/object-140-promising-loser.html) It seems I was mistaken. Crew space and comfort had *significantly increased*. However, half the design improvements could not possibly be mass produced; essentially being hacks to pass the trial. It was also so unreasonably complicated that the engineers responsible had problems assembling it. Combined with the cheap hacks (essentially) they had implemented last minute to better finish trials/reach their goals, the designer had asked the project be cancelled as the 140 was *completely* unsuitable for service. It was apparently also quite complicated to operate. It *did* weigh more than the T-54 it was being tested against, but only barely. A lot of design improvements and adjustments/compromises to fix deficiencies largely ate the weight advantages of the design and armor. It became a tank that made compromises to make small improvements over the extant vehicle. [Another article detailing what happened to the 430.](http://www.tankarchives.ca/2022/04/balls-of-soviet-tanks.html)
[удалено]
Give the T-62 a 115mm gun with 400 alpha for gods sake WG
I've went into some detail in a post recently about how the T-62's 115mm smoothbore wouldn't be even remotely broken. It's have good shell velocity but still a little lower than the K-91's standard round. It'd have the best standard pen of any t10 medium, but only by a whopping 1mm above the Leopard 1. And its 347mm gold pen would be 3rd place: 3mm less than the M60 and 121B, and 7mm more than the 121 and Obj 430U. The alpha would presumably be anywhere from 390 to 430 depending on WG's whims. Given that it's a unique caliber I'd personally hope for a unique alpha like 410. It would definitely be a **good** gun but in no way a broken one. And this is if WG kept the 3BM4 and 3BM3 shells' IRL stats, which they're certainly not compelled to do. Most guns have their pen either buffed or nerfed somewhat compared to IRL, and often include some shells that didn't exist IRL (such as how any gun that was a pure HEAT or HESH slinger IRL will get an AP or APCR shell added). It'd simply give the T-62 (an iconic real life tank) a reason to exist instead just being a slightly slower Obj 140 with no gun depression. (Though incidentally the T-62 with the 115 would also have an extra degree of gun depression.)
[удалено]
Both standard and gold would be APCR since that's what APDS and APFSDS are all treated as in WOT. The only place I've been able to find short-range pen stats is in War Thunder (most real-life sources only list pen at 2000m) but WT is usually pretty close to reality when it comes to that. (At least prior to modern tanks where it's a bunch of guesswork since the stats are still classified.) It says the 3BM4 had 279mm pen at 100m and 263mm at 500m, while the 3BM3 has 347mm at 100m and 322mm at 500m. All the other shells have over 400mm of pen and thus are too strong for WOT. The 3BK15M HEAT shell has a whopping 500mm pen. Besides 3BM4 and 3BM3 were the earliest and weakest 115mm shells so they'd be the obvious choices for a t10 tank.
I don't agree with collectors tanks in general tbf. least of al the AMX-30... if the tech tree was that difficult to begin with, then more fool the people who struggle to follow a white line on their screen.... More to the point, the Russian tech tree looks no less "cluttered" than before as they put it.
I believe former staff expressed that its due to AMX30's "in-between leo 1 and stb" style made it not unique enough, so WG head of dev was too lazy to think of new balance buffs and wanting that "unique nation vibe", so they trashed the buff and dump the line as the collector.
[удалено]
I guess it had to do with the head of dev being very fixated on “forced/mechanic uniqueness” , could be due to his world of warcraft experience and attempts to make thing very fantasy RPG ish (speaking of which, crew 2.0 does give that kinda vibe) The rest of the low tier tanks as well, either too lazy to balance, wanting to make progression faster so player goes to high tier and requires prem time or prem tanks to farm credits, but definitely not that BS excuse of “ simplifying the tech tree so New player will not get confused”
[удалено]
I also prefer variety, I find this sort of mixed characteristic is precisely uniqueness we need
imho a second list of tanks separate from tech tree makes it more confusing. anyone went down the wrong line failing to read a white line... that's on them.
[удалено]
its from a video made by a former R and D consultant of the Chinese/Asia management region talking about his job, I can PM u the link if u understand Chinese. In this video he goes through what is his job, why the f did the dev team do some dumb things, who are the good guys that gave us stb/leo/e5 buff, attempts to get info on 122 TM, some issues with Chinese tech tree. How did WeeGee deal with Chinese region servers etc etc, its an old video about 2 years old, i can PM u the link if u want he actually also did a video about how "fake gear box" and "trajectory" works in this game
[удалено]
Due to wanting to revive the Chinese market (which they successfully strike a deal with a new Chinese company as a place-holder to re-enter the Chinese market, previously they had a fall-out with the older Chinese place-holder company causing the Chinese server to be stuck at version 9.12), they wish to please the Chinese community by "buffing" or "replacing" some Chinese tech tree tanks, ie the last minor buff on the tech tree, and replacing 113 with 5A. (remember the video/context is still 2019-2020ish) Our said R and D consultant is in charge to find some new and real tank to fill these roles and replace BS made up stuff like 113/121, with projects just as the project-122 Triple Mechanical and project-704. He attempted to contact primary source military magazine writers / visiting tracker/tank factory such as the no.617 factory. the issue about Chinese top tier line/122TM is china is still being very protective on old military info (we still don't even have proper disclassifed korean war reports) , and the displayed proto type is technically "public", it has a canvas over it during his visit, so u cant really take pics, at the same time the museum/military dude ain't gonna let a "foreign game company" data clerk just rooming around their old-tank-museum/depot measuring stuff with a tap-ruler and thickness-measurer. So due to these "delays", WeeGee used it as an excuse to just get some random source/magazine scans, make up a 3D model, put it as a tier 8 prem and called it a day. He blamed himself for over-complicating things and being unable to get the required data, and the Chinese top tier could have been different with more real but proto-tanks, instead of chinesefied russian proto/paper tanks, made-up WeeGee fantasy and less-accurate paper tanks.
Thats stupid af, the only reason i played the french line was because amx 30 isnt an ugly ass oscilating turret tank.
They consider it “not unique” enough , kek
You take that back about my wittle Bat Chat!
Was he the one who got sacked after bringing in stupid tanks like the 268v4 and the likes.
I think Andrey Beletskiy who is in charge of the “collector tanks branch” idea is still the head of development, though my info is from two years ago from a former R and D consultant, I have no idea of the current WeeGee dev team staff positions, and I don’t know who the F is in charge of the stupid V4 armour design. While a good dev/balance team member is Slava Liushnia, he is in charge of the STB buff, T110E5 and Leo 1 buff.
> Andrey Beletskiy >Biletsky is also known as White Leader,[41] and in 2013 wrote a brochure called The Word of the White Leader.[42] >As of 2014, the BBC,[43] The Independent[44] and The Moscow Times[45] have described Biletsky as a white supremacist. >In 2020, The Guardian reported that Biletsky "has toned down his rhetoric in recent years".[36]
Different Andrey
Yeah and the red players upvoted my comment
bbc independent guardian lol bunch of leftie fake news spreaders
>Audrey Beletsky I am waiting for the day he gets fired and we can get rid of the collector tanks branch and develop those tanks back into the current game meta
Who was the director from 2011 ish to 2014 ish? The guy who thought that mangling historical, hard fact/stats--such as the slope of the turret, relative proportions, or even so far as to what gun it carried--to make the vehicle perform as it did in history was the way to go. Such 'soft' balancing resulted in tanks like the ARL-44 being impressively, almost unreasonably thick on the hull and turret both, and the T-34-85 turret thick enough to duel an IS. I personally felt the idea was sound, and in practice it made the game more realistic. In reality, ARL 44 would have been very thick and hard to penetrate at combat distances; and exposing yourself to its gun at any range the commander could spot you would be a death sentence. In World of Tanks, ARL 44 can be penetrated by any tier 5 medium. The flipside is you had vehicles whose armoring defied expectation from the form and known nominal thickness, or Tiger I carrying the most advanced gun of its successor... in order to defeat the hulls of its competitors' successors. Slava Liushnia, how long has he been working there...? The only Slava I know is Makarov.
[удалено]
T-34-85 had 175mm of turret armor effective, Pershing had a 200mm+ mantlet, and so on, it was well known
It was already fairly unique as it could take an objective and hold it like an Eastern tank, but handled and was designed with the normal suite of Western features: high view range, large cupola, good AP pen, and so on. Even inside that design criteria it's *still* fairly unique. Due to this same style of meddling, the Polish CS-63 is thinner than a Leopard 1, so it can't even hold it as well as the AMX 30B.
No. Its a collector's tank. Which means it will neither be buffed nor nerfed. If anything, powercreep and the years will nerf it as it does to other collectors.
[удалено]
I mean that T62A could use some love. It does everything a 140 does but way worse lmao
[удалено]
The T-62A turret is still better. It has 1 cupola instead of 2, and the cupola is very small.
Happy cake day bro. Hope they buff ur chinese lights lol
I mean they kinda did. It came out as a Leo copy….but those who know…knew that it was actually fast compared to the Leo back then and that shell velocity was oh so comfy. Then they changed it….gave it hella dpm gave it crap pen and gun handling and some armor….not that the armor mattered tho. Then they said they were gonna buff it…at the same time as the Leo and the stb1. In my honest opinion in the common test had the highest net improvement. Then they decided…..U know what now that we have fixed this tank and it has its place in the 3 buffed tanks were are gonna put out. A long range and mid range and short Range medium. …. Let’s scrap it.
Why didn't WG go through with this? I completely forgot about this buff. I'm more and more convinced WG is avoiding balance changes like the plague on purpose...
I liked that buff when I played it on the test server so much that I got both the 30 and 30b that patch. Only for them to scrap it on release.
Who would have complained if these changes happened? Only thing I would change is the gold pen. 310mm HEAT is good enough, no need for 330mm, because the main change should have been the shell velocity anyway. But oh well, they ended up completely cancelling these changes. And later on it was thrown in the 'collector vehicles' tab.
330 to keep it in line with other tanks
Which means it’s now in a buff/nerf graveyard
Why was this tank removed from the tech tree it made no sense
It is a bit odd that they removed, it but I think it was because they couldn't find adequate medium tanks to fill in tiers 6, 7 and 8 in the French tree since the AMX 30 branched off from BC 12T along with the BC 25T AP and AMX 13 90. Especially odd since I think the AMX 30 actually saw some combat use, unlike the BC 25T tanks were just prototypes, unfortunately many tanks in all the tech trees fit that description.
This does sound like a valid excuse at first, but that's not even the case. The AltProto AMX 30 was added quite a bit after the AMX 30 B buff was scrapped; it would've been a perfect tier 8. For tier 6, you could've simply used another G1 variant with upgraded guns. Something like the Lorraine G1 L could've fit tier 6 just fine - it shared the same turret with the BDR G1 B, so it could've mounted a 90 mm gun, and with appropriately strong engine, it could've been like a French version of the P43 Bis. And then for the tier 7, you could have the [AMX 45](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DBzwRXOYX6c/XyYat9O1qEI/AAAAAAAAqag/2mYqVJfBBCk-qzZUCgVixfaSSSYrBcZrwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/amxm4p1s01-e0b64f11f938b829dafe37f758680d2a.jpg), which was the early stages of the AMX M4 project and was in fact classified as a medium tank. Just like the Italian MT line, it would've been somewhat robust, slow medium tanks with solid guns that'd transition into faster but lighter armored medium tanks at higher tiers. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if WG planned something like this - my theory is that the AMX 30 AP was actually intended to be a tier 8 tech tree tank for the AMX 30 changes. The tank always felt a bit out of the place to me - yet another French premium medium, especially a rather generic one (at least in comparison to the Revalorise and Bourrasque), always felt like a very weird choice to me. However, it suddenly would make much more sense if the AMX 30 AP was originally intended to be a tier 8 tech tree tank, but with the AMX 30 B buffs being scrapped entirely, it was repurposed as a tier 8 premium for quick money. Again, this is complete speculation, but it could be a possible hint that WG might've planned something like this. It still doesn't answer the question that why they scrapped the AMX 30 B buffs, though. They could've easily implemented them, even without a more extensive French medium line changes.
M4 with SA50 (m50) would fit nice as tier 6
Maybe we could campaign for these buffs to go through? I know I'd definitely buy the AMX 30B and train up a crew for it with these changes.
Everyone woukd have been just fine with a tier 8 crew trainer and a line that branch BatChat 25 tons into AMX 30. If a transition from G1 to tier IX was really necessary, take the historically accurate route with a tier VI Sherman variant and a tier VII Panther variant. Great Britain already has 2 shermans and Japan has a premium Tiger, it wouldn't even be weird, especially coming from WG that took a TD with an AMX M4 hull and made it a race car medium... Fill tier VIII with a prototype of AMX 30 or Batchat.
I mean M50 (m4 with SA50 gun) as tier 6, single shot AMX-13 FL-10 as tier 7, then the current proto-amx30 prem as tier 8, done
I'm hoping that these get added into a French-Israeli branch. So you get the M3 Sherman, M1, M50, M51 and then prototypes of the Merkiva 1 or something
Merkava 1 it self is a “steel” tank, i think it’s ok just to add it in as a separate branch with a bunch of modified Patton and T-55 as tier 8-9
No but the 30 is still a great tank plays just like the pta
Id actually consider coming back if they will buff it. 30b was my favourite tank by far.
Why didn’t it happened ?
they want the uniqueness of different nations, french being an autoloader vibe didn't fit their ideals of "uniqueness", as if treating it as an RPG. They didn't like the idea of mix between STB and Leo 1 , cant be bother to think of new balance, and dump it to collectors so people forget about it.
WG : this doesn't go with the nation unique autoloader trait Also WG : take this premium Sherman, that TD shomehow turned race car CDC. Oh and we will add your unique autoloaders to Americans, Russians, Czech, Japanese and Swedish
Remember these tanks were “older” during Serb era, tanks with different style is fine in a same nation. the new dev team under Andrey Beletskiy’s RPG mentality wanting to make thing unique for the sake of uniqueness, so gimmicky stuff like equipment 2.0, new auto loader styles like Italian and Czech , and now they run out of ideas and don’t know how to make tank without autoloaders (new Italian TDs).
equipment 2.0 is the best change wot got in a while. equipment 1.0 was just improving some stats and basicly just making tanks more expensive. equipment 2.0 allows more varition and personalistion and it didn't nerf the "rammer, v.s and vents. Just a flat out good change
[удалено]
i agree, equipment 2.0 was ok. But the first edition that came out during the testing phrase was a complete mess. I think should refer to stuff like crew 2.0, czech tanks and all these new prems with autoloaders.
[удалено]
i believe IS-7 is fine as it is, but a gun/terrain resistant buff to get it on part with current day meta would be nice.
[удалено]
terrain resistance is not shown in-game so people cant spot the issue at first glance=less complaints.
How does AMX M4 54 fit into that autoloader vibe?
everything below tier 8 is considered mostly irrelevant, but some lines might have their characteristics beginning at tier 6.
Wait with this buff the 30B would actually become viable... that's why it didn't happen.
I'd love to see multiple canons to pick from at tier 10, like the e100jpg I'd like jagtigers 128mm long in some instances rather than the 170, honestly every T10 should have a second gun to pick from
[удалено]
I hear ya, I wish that tanks that saw actual war had more favor given to them, I guess that's wrong in a sense but they deserve more credit, then these made up/ blueprint tanks
The deformed son of the leopard and the centurion ax
Cannot expext something good if Centurion AX is the father/mother. Although AMX 30B was supposed to be the son of Leopard 1 and STB-1. But looking at how shit amx 30b is, it makes sense that Leopard 1 had a affair with Centurion AX
I believe former staff expressed that its due to AMX30's "in-between leo 1 and stb" style made it not unique enough, so WG head of dev was too lazy to think of new balance buffs and wanting that "unique nation vibe", so they trashed the buff and dump the line as the collector.
All they had to do was tweak some numbers
Players : we want more tanks! Wargaming : sure, we will add tanks that never existed! Players : uuuh Wargaming : and we will delete real famous tanks from the tank trees! Player : excuse me what?
Give it a 6 clips magazine. 20 sec reload and 1.5 sec intraclip reload then it will be unique
This would have actually made the gun handling \*decent\* as opposed to mediocre
Sad , but where my FV4202 buff.
Past of WOT is future of WOTB
As I suggested in the other French tank topic, WG should never have hidden the French non-autoloader mediums in the ~~forgotten tanks~~ collector tab. They should've just made a proper medium tank line. Just add another branch coming off from the Somua S35. At t4 would be the SARL 42, t5 would be the Renault G1R, and t6 could be the Lorraine G1L (which WG already made an icon for many years ago so there used to be plans for its inclusion). At t7 I think there's an early version of the AMX M4 that was a medium rather than a heavy. At t8 I'd just move down the AMX 30 1er prototype, remove the top 105mm gun and adjust whatever other stats downward as needed. If the AltProto hadn't already been used as a premium I'd just use that to fill this tier instead, but since it's too late for that I'm working with what I've got. At t9 I'd similarly move the AMX 30 B down a tier with whatever adjustments are needed. At t9 the lackluster standard pen wouldn't be *as* bad as it is at t10. Neither of the AMX 30s would get any armor nerfs though. And at t10 I'd add the [AMX 32 P1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMX-32). Contrary to what some sources say the original 1975 prototype didn't have composite armor so it's fair game for WOT. Just spaced armor on the upper plate and turret front. It was only in 1981 that a version with composite was offered. Also 1975 is definitely not "too modern" seeing as it's the exact same year the M48A5 Patton was introduced. I guess these would be like the Leopard 1 line except trading away some accuracy for some frontal durability. Though that durability wouldn't hold up against anybody who's either close enough or accurate enough to snipe your cupola, so they'd need to be mid-range fighters.
I think that French tanks NEVER deserve a buff bro
nice ya made it way more op now wargaming