QA: Stream with the Chieftain

Posted on by

Hello everyone,

the stream with the Nicholas “Chieftain” Moran (US developer/history expert) ended literally a minute ago and I have to say, I am really sorry for not linking it on FTR, because it was funny as hell. The stream will probably be available as a video in Wargaming archives later on, I’ll link to that. Either way, Chieftain was talking about many interesting things, some of them were American-specific, some of them were universal. I was taking notes (NOT an easy thing to do, considering how fast he spoke at some points). Here’s what he said (in short notes, of course). Some of it is of more personal nature, so just dig over it :)

- next Chieftain’s Hatch will come on Wednesday
- Cheiftain wants to visit Munster Panzer Museum and Latrun and to return to Ottawa museum
- the AMX 13/75 might be the subject of some future Hatch issue apparently
- 17pdr Grizzly: many pictures around, it was a 17pdr in M4 turret on some standard hull, that got moved around
- cockpit view in WoWp very unlikely
- Chieftain doesn’t have a favourite museum: “They are all awesome”
- the Hatch on Renault FT – possible, as lots of museums are restoring them for 2014 WW1 100th anniversary
- FV4202 rebalance might come eventually eventually, they have to figure out the solutions first
- Chieftain prefers medium tanks, he likes flexibility
- US TD premium: one has been selected (but it will be low tier), one has been modelled already (“when it’s done it’s done”), it won’t be a hightier vehicle, unfortunately Chieftain is not allowed to say which one
- Japanese medium line: Chieftain hasn’t played them yet (he thinks they’re ugly), there were however interesting designs, internal mechanisms are pretty good, they always lagged behind the allies however,the engineering was reasonable, but the tanks were always outclassed
- Regarding scouts: more LT’s are coming, MTLS is not coming apparently, scouts should play bigger role in battle according to Chieftain

- historical mode is being worked on
- tanks and planes in the same battle? “I don’t think so” – War Thunder responses to the concept are “mixed”, it’s not fun to play a tank when you can get oneshotted by a warplane
- Chief is working on his book on US tank destroyers, he already has 160 pages – it’s based on the less known stuff, for example wheeled motor carriages – it’s all new stuff, not done previously by Hunnicutt and Zaloga, possibly two volumes (halftrack/wheel and full track vehicles), it will contain new photographs, missed by Hunnicutt
- Chieftain (tank) prototype: WG had a look at it, there is no exact plan to introduce it
- there will be more premiums for France, same for the British (model of Firefly exists)
- Walker Bulldog: will come
- more Chinese tanks: models don’t exist yet, there however is material on more Chinese vehicles, such as an undisclosed ISU-resembling vehicle
- T92 LT – it got measured, it has very poor armor, Chieftain is not sure how it would fit – it’s not yet decided to implement it, might never come
- Swedish vehicles will be a part of EU tree
- T95E2 is not going to be the next tier 10
- British medium tank rebalance (SS: a lot of British stuff is unhistorical): “still in flux”
- Chinese arty and TD advantage: not sure
- T28 won’t be made a premium TD, there might be an option to replace it with something more historical, but not much info is available
- best candidate US T8 LT? Still thinking, there are candidates, maybe M551 (without Shillelagh ATGM), not anytime soon
- info on new French HT: only that “It’s heavy” :D, lots of models are created already though
- multiturret tanks? “when it’s done it’s done” (low priority, doesn’t concern many tanks)
- T88 GMC (Hellcat with a 105mm howitzer): there are plans for it
- FV215b 183 is okay the way it is (SS: Chieftain explained how people who consider it OP only see the part where they got oneshotted, they don’t see the part where it takes ages to aim for example)
- Char 2C will eventually show up
- 2nd US medium line: might be a little bit more agile than the original one
- T29 armor: actual mantlet thickness is 8 inches, it is thicker on some places. T30 has an internal mantlet however, so the layout has to be drawn and passed to WG RU. It’s not yet sure it will change, but T30 and T34 have the same mantlet and that’s a problem. It’s not decided.
- M103 turret armor might change based on discovered ballistic tests, passed to WG RU
- Chieftain plays the Superpershing not relying on armor, he plays so he doesn’t get hit, so he wasn’t worried about the nerf
- Soviet premium SPG? “Entirely possible”
- T110 is far more comfortable to play than IS-7
- it’s possible TD’s as a class will lose the arbitrary camo bonus, but not sure (Chieftain has no knowledge)
- Type 59 is NOT going back on sale, according to Chieftain it’s not even as good as its reputation says
- M60A1 Patton will not come
- British lines in general will be revised (in the sense of possibly removing fictional vehicles, such as the FV215b 120 HT, WG is looking into that)
- historical battles – when it’s done it’s done
- QF 95 howitzer to replace the unhistorical 3.7in: there is apparently not enough info on it
- M50 Ontos: not currently planned
- US Christie tanks still planned, Wargaming is still looking into them, but a lot of info doesn’t exist anymore, some “higher” tier Christie tank info has been found (“noot soon” though)
- most unhistorical tank in the game (as in furthest from its real life counterpart): possibly the T2 LT (in real life it was probably slower)
- T58 Heavy Tank (SS: T57 with a 155mm autoloaded gun)? Wargaming looked into it, answer is “no” (too OP, it has no drawbacks, WT E-100 has very thin armor, while T58 has good armor and an autoloader)
- Chaffee on German halftrack chassis: theoretically, but no plans (SS: there was one prototype of this solution, didn’t work well in real life)
- Firefly will be in the British LL branch
- wiping tanks from player record (SS: as in, removing tanks you have bad stats on): “I doubt it”
- T37 turret (top turret) is going to be removed from Chaffee
- Karl Gerät – “not happening”
- 40 vs 40 mode needs bigger maps, might come eventually
- Hungarian tanks weren’t bad according to Chieftain: “servicable designs”
- Finnish tanks – Chieftain can’t remember many “native” ones, he noted the fact they have swastikas was a problem for the EU office, who whined about it and photoshopped them away
- brazil tanks: XA1 (upgraded Stuart with a 90mm) – probably not
- Israeli tree: there have been rumors, but Chieftain has no seen any WG materials on it
- Tiger I is perfectly good as it is
- Churchill AVRE: WG has not figured out how to implement it, so it’s sort of shelved
- Japanese heavy tanks: lack of info for proper modelling is the reason for delay
- Archer and Achilles British tank destroyers will come
- fully destructable environment won’t come, some obstacles are indestructable for gameplay reasons
- minefields: Chieftain states if you put mines on a map, you have to have clearing options (such as the mineclearing tanks), there was some talk about putting them in Clanwars somehow
- next nation after Japan: Chieftain theoretizes there are enough vehicles for some sort of Italian tree
- South African branch is unlikely, all their viable vehicles were wheeled (apart from the Olifant)
- killrings on barrels: “yes and no” – it’s possible real soldiers didn’t even do the killrings except for propaganda purposes, because it would attract enemy attention, it’s possible they might appear as rewards for achievements, stuff like this might appear in WoWp first though and after that it might be implemented to WoT
- smoke rounds will not come soon (FPS issues)
- weather has the same problem problem, plus it affects game balance (tanks that rely on long range have a problem on short visibility ranges)
- choosing a map for randoms: right now no
- 5 player platoons won’t happen in 15vs15
- Canadian branch? Not specifically (Canadian vehicles appear in British and US trees)
- most accurate tank movie? Girls und Panzer (tanks are very accurately done)
- hardcore mode (oneshots etc) – Wargaming tried, decided not to do it (wasn’t fun)
- Vickers MBT – WG is looking into it, it’s hard to get data on it, they however know the data exist
- Chief would like to see the British Berlin camo pattern
- SEA WoWp server: not yet, no ETA
- Yugoslav Sherman 122 A-19: WG knows about it (nothing else)
- COMRES 75 is too modern for WOT
- T-55 specifically won’t probably come
- T95 medium will come eventually
- Sherman Firefly is NOT a tank destroyer, the British considered a tank
- NbFz model does indeed exist

103 thoughts on “QA: Stream with the Chieftain”

  1. - 17pdr Grizzly: many pictures around, it was a 17pdr in M4 turret on some standard hull, that got moved around

    A note on this. What he said was slightly different, and referring to 17pdr Shermans that were not Fireflies in general, not just the Grizzly version.

  2. GuP being the most tank-accurate “movie”. I was waiting for this. To all the anime haters, the tanks are definetly made realistic, including the gunner sights, inside layout of the crew, tank heights….
    However you look at it, when the Japanese make stuff, they make them good :) :) :)

    • haha I loved this..

      They should make PzIVs do drifts now in WoT.. it’s historical after all :D

    • I only watched GuP for the Panzer parts.

      God that sounds like I only read the playboy for the articles -.-

      No but really the Panzer parts are really cool the rest falls for me under “Anime shit I dont want or need to understand”

    • I’m not against Anime or the GUP itself, But when Panzer IV Power sliding 360° against Tiger 1?

        • It’s the bit with the maus being supported by the hetzer (sorry, jgpz 38t) that I applaud as being the most historically accurate …

          • yeah that was complete bullshit. A 17 ton vehicle not only supporting but managing to lift a 192 ton vehicle, yeah right lol. Also that power slide was also bullshit, even if the track broke they didn’t have the speed or horsepower and tank treads have too much grip, they can’t slide as much as rubber can. But as far as how the tanks looked the were very accurate, credit where credit is due.

  4. - Finnish tanks – Chieftain can’t remember many “native” ones

    Duh, every tank the FDF has ever had was either an import or a capture. (We make some pretty neat wheeled AFV though.)

  5. I’d asked about the Berlin pattern and he loved it as much as I did. I was very pleased. It looks particularly good on a Chieftan.

  6. “Type 59 is NOT going back on sale, according to Chieftain it’s not even as good as its reputation says”

    When everyone was placing their hopes and dreams on the Type 59 being sold during Cyber Monday, I had to laugh at all the bads with below average stats in mediums getting all excited over it. It’s not a purple stat farmer unless you’re already a purple. The real blue or purple stat farmer at the moment is the WTF E-100.

  7. Dang I missed it, was actually wanting to catch this, Chieftain involved streams are usually good, though I miss when he was doing the occasional stream of him playing random matches and just hanging out.

    • Well, 40 years. So the two years you will have to wait from now on for the Walker Bulldog to be implemented isn’t much. XD

  10. wooo Latrun musem :D been there and its kewl coz u can climb on and inside thingz if u find an open hatch or escape thing under the tank

  11. >Finnish swastika

    Different from the Nazi one, and completely unrelated. So y u mad WGEU?

  12. “scouts should play bigger role in battle according to Chieftain”

    I see. Better nerf their camo and and give them +6 matchmaking spread.

    • +1. It’s time they just go and give scouts full lines up to tier 10. Arty now has tier 10s, let the scouts. Might help solve the TD issue as well.

  13. “- Soviet premium SPG? “Entirely possible” ”

    It would be time to put an another premium SPG into the game (the Sexton I is a FAIL)

    “- Churchill AVRE: WG has not figured out how to implement it, so it’s sort of shelved”

    It had a 290 mm Mortar, so i see 0.00000001% chanche to appear in WoT

    • but not a mortar in the sense that you are thinking. It had very short range. Like not more than 100m probably less.

      The post war AVRE with the 165mm demolition gun w/ HESH round would be better fit imo. Actually had a better charge than the 295mm Petard mortar.

    • “It had a 290 mm Mortar, so i see 0.00000001% chanche to appear in WoT”

      You know, the Sturmtiger had a 380mm rocket propelled shell as it’s primary armament and they’re going to add it to the game. Can’t see why the AVRE couldn’t be added.

      IMO any short range howitzer/mortar gun and all the assault guns with the actual guns (like the ISU derp ML-20) should have a firing option like the arty. Just go in arty mode and shoot your short range shell over obstacles and such. That’s what I’m using the Bishop for. Go in as a 2nd/3rd line fighter and lob shells over obstacles. Works like a miracle, and would like to see an arty mode for assault guns, howitzers and mortars just for that reason. Ofc after that, people would cry things like this: “OMG hax, that SU-152 oneshotted my Hellcat by firing an HE shell over this rubble pile into my rear armor while I was trying to run away”

      • I drive e Bishop and FV304. I see players screaming about being hacked because their arty safe position is not safe from these two low-damage high-arc spg’s. If high-powered guns are given mortar capabilities, I can hear the haters and whiners screaming on all the forums.

  14. - it’s possible TD’s as a class will lose the arbitrary camo bonus, but not sure (Chieftain has no knowledge)
    ____________
    Then remove the speed from mediums, armor from HTs, and put low calibre guns on arties…….I really can’t see any reason for removing the camo bonus from TDs except to hush the whiners….i really haven’t seen that much of a difference on TDs and other tanks in camo….if you don’t have camo skill, camo net etc. you’ll be spotted in TD as easily as in any other tank. Skill and equipment can make any tank invisible, but you can’t plant a brain in retards head who will come at first chance on forum and crying how invisible TD killed him. WG should stop bending over to morons and stop trying to please noobs at the expense of old/experienced players. Just because you will nerf some specific class that doesn’t mean that brainless monkeys will become better players…..good players will still find a way to bash noobs and that will never change….

    • “Just because you will nerf some specific class that doesn’t mean that brainless monkeys will become better players…..good players will still find a way to bash noobs and that will never change….”

      The exact thing happened after the arty nerf

    • The problem is:
      WG said “they did not want invisible TDs”…
      unfortunately they underestimated the effect with camo paint, net and crew, TDs (especially SU chassis tanks) are nearly unspottable except from the 50m rule

      That resulted in a severe nerf for scout tanks, because they had to drive REALLY close to them in order to lit them up, which often results in a dead scout :)

      if they could manage the camo as it were before the “changing”, I would be satisfied.
      (It’s not a nerf really, it’s more a “back to working standards”)

      • How exactly it isn’t a nerf when in that patch where they added bonus to TDs they nerfed bushes and camo from them. Now remove the TD camo bonus and you will significantly reduce the average life of a TD in battle. Invisible TD is the best TD and if they remove that from them then why the fuck not play something with turret and not torture myself with TDs who already suffer from way lower HP than other classes and from lack of turret where you need to turn around your whole tank to actually shoot something where tanks can peeka booh around corners with turrets….for those who use XVM….what usual bad players you get in your team drives? HT, am i right? Those are the same kind of idiots that whines on forums that invisible TDs got them. They expect from a HT to be invincible in every aspect. Only TDs i myself consider a bit OP are T10s. Other than them TDs are perfectly balanced and i would say mid tier TDs are even UP with almost 50% less HP pools than other tank classes.

  15. - tanks and planes in the same battle? “I don’t think so” – War Thunder responses to the concept are “mixed”, it’s not fun to play a tank when you can get oneshotted by a warplane

    all depends on spotting mechanics. would probably not work in WGings stuff

    • I don’t forsee it working in War Thunder very well either; historically, the balance was “Planes lord over tanks, tanks get fucked.”

    • I call BS on that. Air superiority won the war simply because planes are good in destroying supply columns, fuel trucks, trains and command and communication equipment. Every single “can opener” warplane of the war was overestimated. The figures were always pumped up, if not for propaganda reasons, then because the pilots couldn’t be sure if that tank they just bombed had a broken track or was actually out of the fight. Google the Ardennes Offensive to find something out about the overestimations of ground fighter efficiency against tanks.

      Dumb munitions of WWII were hard to aim at a moving tank from an warplane flying at 200 kph+. Even if they did hit square on, very few had the power to actually damage any critical component on the tank.

        • “Tries” is the key word here. Also, there are a lot of sick little bastards in WT that can’t wait to get their grubby little paws on a Flakpanzer.

      • So you would allow someone to call you Yugoslav asshole back in Yugoslavia? I wouldn’t!!! I was a Yugoslavian asshole in Yugoslavian times, and now I’m just an Asshole with a capital A :) :) :)

        It’s nice to know that there’s a Dezelian asshole here to keep company to Zemunian asshole :) :) :)

        p.s. When I think again, it was ok if somebody called me Yugoslav asshole, because of this asshole called Yugoslav Pantelic, he’s a top class asshole, meaning that his asshole (anus) is an asshole of an asshole, and all in all it’s just some holey ass like Shakira’s :) :) :)

        p.p.s. SS I’m watching you!!!

  17. - COMRES 75 is too modern for WOT

    This breaks my heart utterly. Always hoped those snippits of data claiming the tank was too modern for the game were false. A ww2 hull with a late 40′s gun surely wouldn’t be too modern for the game!

  18. - tanks and planes in the same battle? “I don’t think so” – War Thunder responses to the concept are “mixed”, it’s not fun to play a tank when you can get oneshotted by a warplane
    Haha, I love this! I guess it was great fun getting oneshotted by arties (ofc before the nerf this was 100% true, if you wasn’t 1shotted the other arty killed you, but the results are the same)

    • I would argue that point. Girls und Panzer is effectively ABOUT tank-on-tank action. Beast of War is about tank vs. insurgency and tank crew vs. itself.

      Mostly tank crew vs. itself, though. It was a much more psychological movie that was merely tangentially tied to the tank. It would’ve worked just as easily with helicopter or APC in place of the tank.

  20. The live stream was amazing I hope they do more. On another note I hope they introduce a researchable grizzly tank and I was stocked that the comres is to modern for the game

  21. - Regarding scouts: more LT’s are coming, MTLS is not coming apparently, scouts should play bigger role in battle according to Chieftain

    I’m not the only one ^-^

  22. - tanks and planes in the same battle? “I don’t think so” – War Thunder responses to the concept are “mixed”, it’s not fun to play a tank when you can get oneshotted by a warplane

    Replace warplane with arty and you got WoT!

    Good thing WG realized its not fun to get bombed by an airplane too bad they weren’t smart enough to figure the same thing out with arty before they added it.

  23. I was hoping a T-55A could be the top of the “Polish” part of EU tree. Yea, it would be yet another piece of Soviet technology, but T-55 tanks were built in such big amounts, that ithey could have a place in the game.

    • It has a smoothbore gun which is the main
      limiting factor for WoT, so nay.
      Although I would certainly like a mini-
      Patton :)

  25. - best candidate US T8 LT? Still thinking, there are candidates, maybe M551 (without Shillelagh ATGM), not anytime soon

    OMG YES, scout with 155mm derp=WIN

  26. - T28 won’t be made a premium TD, there might be an option to replace it with something more historical, but not much info is available

    Is he talking about the Proto or the normal T28?

  27. Self Propelled 17pdr, Valentine, Mk I, Archer

    Bring on the Archer… he he he.

    It could work at tier 4-5 depending upon how WG does it. Think FCM 36 PaK 40 but bigger and with a bigger gun. Well and better camo value. It will be a lot of fun. =)

    • I see the Archer as a T4 TD with the Achilles behind it as the T5. Just because the AT 8 has it on T6 while the Germans have the long 88 on the Nashorn on the same tier. Even the Flakbus has better pen than the 17-pdr and that’s T5. A second British TD line would be more or less an equivalent of the German Waffenträger-line, paper-armor tanks with good guns. The Tier 10 on that line could be the FV4005 Convay Stage 2 if WG can’t find anything else and/or won’t make shit up like the T28 Prototype.

      • Oh snap, meant to say “Just because the AT 8 has the 17-pdr on T6″

        Curse the absence of an edit button!

      • With the FCM 36 PaK 40 at tier 3 it would make sense for the Archer to be Tier 4.

        The 17pdr does have 171/239/38 mm penn (Compared to Sfl. IVc’s 194 penn) so it might actually work better to put it at Tier 5 along side the Pz Sfl. IVc. The only reason I would NOT put it at Tier 5 is because of the top speed of the Valentine Chassis is garbage because of how stressed it was with the 17pdr gun AND because the armor is just as thin as the Pz Sfl. IVc but the Pz Sfl. IVc has speed as a counter to it’s BIG gun. (Historical top speed ofc.)

        Now… If they wanted to put it in at Tier 5 I would give the Archer excellent camo values, and the 17pdr that is on the TOG II. That is to say 12.00 r/m 0.34 m 2.3s which would give you the same AIM time as the Pz Sfl. IVc but a better ROF to make up for the lack of penn compared to the Pz Sfl. IVc.

        NEMO.

  28. - Regarding scouts: more LT’s are coming, MTLS is not coming apparently, scouts should play bigger role in battle according to Chieftain
    - Walker Bulldog: will come

    No news about progress on RU251? WG, don’t u dare release Walker faster than RU251!

    - brazil tanks: XA1 (upgraded Stuart with a 90mm) – probably not

    Never heard about this, but I want it. Looks perfect as tier 7 :P

    - FV4202 rebalance might come eventually eventually, they have to figure out the solutions first

    Oh yeah, it’s the most shitty medium, huh….

    - 5 player platoons won’t happen in 15vs15

    It’s not nice to see 5-unicum plat as enemy, and u stuck with top-tier idiot 5-failtoon REDS.

  29. Japanese medium line: Chieftain hasn’t played them yet (he thinks they’re ugly), there were however interesting designs, internal mechanisms are pretty good, they always lagged behind the allies however,the engineering was reasonable, but the tanks were always outclassed

    “He think they’re ugly” I wonder what is Daigensui’s reaction about Cheiftain’s Livestream?

  32. It has a smoothbore gun which is the main limiting factor for WoT, so nay.

    Although I would certainly like a mini-Patton :)

    • Why is FTR on Opera mini so fucked up? The above was supposed to be a reply, not a separate comment.

  33. - next nation after Japan: Chieftain theoretizes there are enough vehicles for some sort of Italian tree

    finally some great news !!!!! ;)

  34. “(too OP, it has no drawbacks, WT E-100 has very thin armor, while T58 has good armor and an autoloader) ”

    Shouldn’t that” T58″ be a” T57″

  35. “- tanks and planes in the same battle? “I don’t think so” – War Thunder responses to the concept are “mixed”, it’s not fun to play a tank when you can get oneshotted by a warplane”

    Yeah, and getting one-shotted by an arti is SO MUCH PHUUUUUUN

  36. - British lines in general will be revised (in the sense of possibly removing fictional vehicles, such as the FV215b 120 HT, WG is looking into that)

    Yippie-Kay-Yay! Bring Chieftain plz.. Chieftain – Chieftain!! :)))

  37. - brazil tanks: XA1 (upgraded Stuart with a 90mm) – probably not

    damn. if it were implemented i would instantly drop a wad of cash on WG’s lap.

  38. “T92 LT – it got measured, it has very poor armor, Chieftain is not sure how it would fit – it’s not yet decided to implement it, might never come”

    I hope they add it, could potentially be a tier 8 LT after the T71. I don’t understand why the armor matters anyway, it’s a LT, pretty much everything can pen it anyway. Last time I checked LTs weren’t known for their armor. I would love to get my hands on it.

    British lines in general will be revised (in the sense of possibly removing fictional vehicles, such as the FV215b 120 HT, WG is looking into that)

    I wonder what they would replace it with? Working on the Conqueror now, can’t say I’m especially excited for the FV215b so it doesn’t break my heart to find out that it will potentially be removed but I am very curious to see what they would replace it with.

  39. Pingback: The Archer | For The Record