Straight Outta Supertest: LTTB Characteristics

Posted on by

Source: FTR VK community

wTzAPEJAPus

New tier 7 Soviet light tank.

Stats for 100 percent crew

Weight: 22,680 tons
Hitpoints: 950
Viewrange: 390
Radio range: 761,3

Hull armor: 90/45/?
Turret armor: 90/75/?
Engine: 700 hp
Power-to-weight: 30,86 hp/t
Maximum speed: 68/20
Hull traverse: 48 deg/s
Ground resistance: 0,863/0,959/1,534

Gun: 85mm
Penetration: 170
Damage: 180
DPM: 2208,4
Reload: 4,89s
ROF: 12,269
Accuracy: 0,345
Aimtime: 2,01s
Depression: -3/+15
Turret traverse: 50,1 deg/s

58 thoughts on “Straight Outta Supertest: LTTB Characteristics”

        • Mt25 (9.1) vs old T-50-2
          Mt25 : Better accel in hard and medium surface
          Mt-25 : better ROF
          Mt-25 : better maneuver (alot)
          Mt-25 : higher hitpoint (not much)
          Mt-25 : heavier make it become battery ram when need and dont lost much speed when run throught obstacle
          MT-25 : slightly better armour than T-50-2
          The only problem with Mt25 its huge size, too big when compare with “race body” of T-50-2

          *awful Eng skill, sorry

          • MT-25 definitely does not have better manoeuverability than the T-50-2, even if the stats say otherwise.

            • I have to agree even with the recent BUFS the MT-35 is worse that the T-50-2 as with the T-50-2 you used to pull of things that in the MT-25 is impossible as its slower to reach the top speed and loses much more speed at the maneuvers than T-50-2 and i had tried the MT-25 when it replaced the T-50-2 and it wa just bad and the size is almost 2x as T-50-2 but shorter than it.

            • The advantage of the T-50-2 over the MT-25 was that it had almost no turn bleed – if you went round a corner in the T-50-2 you’d keep pretty much all of the speed you had already, whereas most other light tanks lose a fair amount when not driving straight.

    • if you have offroad driving.. it will be less alot less ground resistance.. as offroad driving takes off 0.500 at 100% thats that secert too how to make the a-20 work

        • but the lttb has omg 31hp per ton lol offroad driving and a speed govener?! thats a t-50-2 i ever seen one lol

          also gotta remember with offroad driving.. on the lttb its more like 0.300, 0.300 and 1.000 Sooo your drifting every damn were with that hp and that 31 speed per ton lol

      • Well the nested comments look terrible at 4th and 5th level of nesting. There is so much border space that in portrait mode I get 1 letter per line with the rest of the screen empty. Since a number of the spacings seem to be fixed percentages there is no way to fix it on my phone. Even in landscape its hard to read (for instance this comment edit space takes up less than half the width of the screen)

        SS, I’ll email a few screenshots so maybe it can be fixed. I spend more than half my FTR time in the comments and most of it on my phone. I’d love to keep it like that)

  5. Ufff is the combat version of T-50-2 but is a curious mix of T-34/85 turret in a T-80 on steroids hull… a great armor, super gun but maybe as pasive scout… looks like same problematic MT-25 doing pasive spoting… no hull down to made a pasive position a combat position.

    Any info about crew??? 4 or 5??? i think is 4 because hull looks the simple soviet version with no radioman but… maybe it has 2 driver positions like many wheeled scout vehicles in WWII hehehe.

  6. is it possible we can get a credit & XP cost for these new lites? I’m sitting on 2.6 mil (not so) “FREE” XP and need to know how much I need to convert

  8. I think the same but we need wait test… maybe when is alive do a special with screen shoots from Tech tree… the 700hp engine in LTTB breaks me and the gun… maybe the new KV-85 100mm gun???

    I think in LTTB with a lot of luck like in LT-54 i only need research tracks and turret because guns-engines-radios could be present in top tier meds or in lower tanks…. only RU251 and american line kill me because i need for sure top gun in RU251 (i think engine could be from Leos and same with radios) and the T49 and M41 guns…. apart the Chaffe change.

  10. MY first though on seeing this was the use of a comma instead of a decimal. Here in North America commas are used to separate thousands.

    22,680 tons… are we sure we’re not talking about HMS Dreadnaught from World of Warships?

  11. a 5 second reload with a 100mm on a light tank? wow thats genuinely impressive it got a faster rof than the t-44 a medium of a tier higher with the same pen.

  12. Just wondering, how is the mobility going to be on it with 30hp/t and that ground resistance?

    Already have 38k exp on MT-25 to get this thing right away

  15. If I recall correctly, only the hull was designed, while the turret is completely made up, isn’t it?

    • It certainly LOOKS like a Soviet-ized stock Chaffee turret… but then again there are only so many ways to make turrets…

      Anime-hair-like (especially spikes) turrets do not work in real life, btw, otherwise there would be infinite permutations.

      • It’s not a matter of design, but it’s again WG pulling out of their hat another tank that nobody feels the need to have. There are still tons of tanks that can be implemented (basically EU ones), and that can be almost perfectly historical, instead WG keeps inventing stuff. It makes no sense.

        I can understand their double-standards (we care about historicity as far as we have to nerf something or invent some tier-filler), and the fact they base their offer on the needs of russian market ignoring everybody else, but this behaviour still pisses me off.

        • It took Wargaming this long to even put together a semi-historical Russian light tank tree.

          I don’t see that much of an issue with it. The tank was basically a light-weight family member of the T-44, so giving it a turret that was similar to the T-34-85/T-43/T-44 isn’t very far-fetched.

          I seriously doubt they could’ve built this tank with a 90mm glacis and a 200mm turret face and still kept it anywhere near 22.5 tons…

    • Yup. And I’m disappointed. The specs for this thing said the turret armour should be 200mm, AFAIK. 90 != 200, last I checked.

  16. With all these Soviet tanks getting their historical -3* gun depression, it makes me wonder if they’re going to go back and do the same thing with the T-34, T-34-85 and IS.

    The Chinese variants all seem to have fairly close to their historical gun depression. Type 58′s right, Type T-34 has -5* when it should be -3*. Examples like that.

      • According to Zaloga, the T-34-76 could only get -5* with the U-11. With the F-34 or any of the other guns it was -3*/+30*.

        -5* is right for the T-34-85. The Type 58 has -5* ingame but the T-34-85 gets -7*.

  18. SS!!!! TELL TO THE DEVELOPERS TO KEEP THE RADIO OPERATOR IN THE Light T 54, (IT WOULD BE NICE) IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENTIAL OF THIS LIGHT TANK LINE.
    ACTUALLY, MY MT-25 RADIO OPERATOR HAS Situational Awareness AND Call for Vengeance (100%) AND IT REALLY HELPS A LOT!
    SRY FOR MY ENGLISH AND SRY FOR THE CAPS(i really want you read this :)

  19. so is terrain resistance like accuracy where the bigger the number the worse?????

    • Yes.

      0.5 resistance is better than 1.0 resistance, for example.

      Bigger number = resists more = bad.

      • okay thank you oh and there were a bunch of comments saying the terrain res. is horrible but is that just compared to other light tanks or just overall bad

        • Compare it to the ground resist on the M41 Walker Bulldog leak. The M41 is considerably more mobile despite lower P/W ratio.

  21. Pingback: Info ze supertestu: Charakteristiky LTTB

  22. Pingback: Supertest LTTB | Clan Pack wot