Comments on: It’s a Fake – Part 2: Wargaming fakes

By: mondog

mondog — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 17:24:59 +0000

The problem with the FV4202 is it was a test bed not a prototype, it was never designed to actually be used in combat. Its an example of a tank that shouldn’t be in the game with its real life stats or not. The 215B well….just get rid of it. The Chieftain can be balanced to fit in WoT easily.

By: Keldy

Keldy — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 10:02:28 +0000

one tiger was armed with 88 mm L71 , only for testing , same situation like with KV-85 with 122 mm gun …….
and only gun as far i know which was planned for Panther 2 was 88 mm L71 ……

By: Iron_Tsunami

Iron_Tsunami — Tue, 07 Jan 2014 22:49:43 +0000

Crazy. I didn’t even know about the E-75.

By: Captian Nemo

Captian Nemo — Tue, 07 Jan 2014 22:17:37 +0000

I doubt it they have been most likely scrapped by now… But on the other hand a Panther tank did manage to sit in a French scrapyard until something like the 70′s/80′s.

By: LoserDestiny

LoserDestiny — Tue, 07 Jan 2014 21:50:04 +0000

Let´s not argue much about my thinking or knowledge. ;)
I pointed out your mistakes, you reply with that…
Sure, how would you disprove SU-122A or SU-85i are fake etc…

P.S. I got the PaK length wrong too at 65 instead of 66, my bad.

By: twcopal

twcopal — Tue, 07 Jan 2014 21:46:05 +0000

You say that the Conqueror Gun Carriage may be fake, and when looking at it, I say with 9% certainty that it is. I say this based on the following reasons:
1. The named Conqueror Gun Carriage does not make sense. If it were real it would most likely be named FV####. Even if this were its real name, it does not make sense because they name skip the FV name in the Conqueror yet they do not call the FV207 or the FV3805 Centurion Gun Carriage . Furthermore, if it did not receive a FV designation it would more than likely be named something like the Conqueror 9.2″ SP following the British naming system (to my knowledge not once did the British call an SPG a gun carriage). The name looks like WG attempt to name it based of the Churchill Gun Carrier.
2. The hull is all wrong and does not match the name or description of the vehicle. The first thing I noticed about the vehicle is that unlike all the previous British SPGs the hull is not backwards. Note that The in game description says a proposal to mount a 234mm gun on the chassis of the conqueror. SPGs based of the chassis of other tanks did this because the engine had to be mounted in the front not to interfere with the gun. Otherwise the chassis(hull) would require extensive modification. When I took a look at it I compared it to the FV215b (183), and sure enough, the hulls matched. Therefore the in game has the hull/chassis of the FV215b not the Conqueror. Yes the FV215b used Conqueror components, but the chassis is so heavily modified they are not the same. Theoretically they could have modified the chassis to put the engine in the front, but that would be inefficient and illogical. And even if they did, why call it the conqueror gun carriage when it uses the carriage of the mock-up FV215b? Simple answer, its fake.

By: Silentstalker

Silentstalker — Tue, 07 Jan 2014 21:26:55 +0000

Yes, it was, just check the trunnion position. And be so kind and be polite, I am lately allergic to smartass trolls, especially those that post crap.

By: LoserDestiny

LoserDestiny — Tue, 07 Jan 2014 21:24:45 +0000

Yes, top T-150 has KV-220 turret. I mean the REAL KV-220, not the KV-220-2 which is called KV-220 ingame.
The actual KV-220 is ingame the stock KV-3.

Go read books.

By: LoserDestiny

LoserDestiny — Tue, 07 Jan 2014 21:08:54 +0000

Hm, yeah, BL-9 fits in every tiny turret (after the trial it wasn´t even considered for the ISU with much larger superstructure than IS-3´s turret, but what the heck), but 128mm IMPOSSIBURU to fit into the Ferdi with larde superstructure. Sure.

By: Jupeli

Jupeli — Tue, 07 Jan 2014 21:06:30 +0000

Exactly. Now if only they would label those made up tanks as such, it would be fine.