Comments on: Ensign’s Q&A #19

By: Ensign’s Q&A #20 Special Edition | For The Record

Ensign’s Q&A #20 Special Edition | For The Record — Sat, 18 Jan 2014 20:07:01 +0000

[...] Previous Q&A is here. [...]

By: Wregh

Wregh — Thu, 09 Jan 2014 01:49:37 +0000

It is a bad tank. It got moved to tier 10 and replaced with the ST-1 which is basically the same thing with less side armor but has the ability to hull down in many locations making it more viable in hill maps. For instance its worse then the T110e5 in ever aspect apart for turret and a tiny bit of alpha. It worse in stats AND in physical design of the tank itself. They just need to nerf the shit out of the obj 770 and put replace the is4 which is the worst tier 10 in the game. Tier 10 should be the most balanced tier, but in its current state its filled up with super OP and UP tanks and a few thanks that are well balanced. Tier 10 is just broken.

By: 911

911 — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 21:59:34 +0000

“horrible IS-4″ ??? learn to play

By: Xelos

Xelos — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 15:52:33 +0000

Obj770 looks cool and IS4 at tier9 with stock gun makes more sense. Couldn’t it just be nerfed a bunch and be a prototype?

By: Wregh

Wregh — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 13:59:19 +0000

Its a shame that WG decided that the Obj 770 is not going to be implemented. I always thought that the obj 770 should replace the horrible IS-4 and give the russians a decent heavy to play with. Especially since the russians have such a variety of different designs. The IS-4 should have never been moved to tier 10. it should just have been nerfed as a tier 9.

By: bojan

bojan — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:56:07 +0000

57mm project 413 gun actually existed, in drawings at least and was considered, but for arming KV-1S. That was not the same gun as ZiS-4, ZiS-4 used cradle of F-34 gun, while 413 used cradle of ZiS-5 gun.

By: Kirito

Kirito — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 08:40:21 +0000

Nothing on the Not-so-Great Britain tanks? D:

By: 23r0_NA

23r0_NA — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 08:35:35 +0000

He’s right actually, the 57 mm 413 was not only never mounted on the KV-1, but the gun never even EXISTED. I’m not sure if the 57 mm ZiS-4 was ever considered for mounting on a KV-1, but it’s effectively the same gun and, unlike the 413, was a real weapon that actually existed. This fact has led me to conclude that the 413′s existence in WoT rather than using the ZiS-4 was put in there simply to prolong the grind on the KV-1 (as if trying to get it elited didn’t take long enough, what with having to unlock all of those modules AND three tier 6 Heavies).

By: dr_schmerz

dr_schmerz — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 05:55:40 +0000

Its russian, there won’t be any changes in your chernobyl KV tenk

By: PeanutFly

PeanutFly — Wed, 08 Jan 2014 02:30:10 +0000

Wait, you’re telling me that my favorite gun on the KV-1 isn’t historical? Well, that’s a shame, I hope that WG doesn’t change it for “historical reasons”.
If anything, that gun is actually OP on it, as while the T-34 has weak armor and a lowish HP pool with the same gun, it can’t afford to stick around in one spot to use the DPM to its full extent, and it still manages to be a very strong tank for Tier 5.
On the other hand, the KV-1 has a good HP pool and very nice armor that can be angled at 45 degrees and become nigh-impenetrable for most same Tier tanks, allowing it to just sit there pumping away with the incredible DPM. All you need to do is rush (or rather crawl) to the nearest chokepoint and start abusing the DPM to club everything in your way.
As the cherry on top, it even has the accuracy to snipe! If anything, I’d say it’s a stronger tank for its Tier than the KV-1S with its amazing mobility and the infamous D-2-5T.