That's a really interesting article. Thank you, Rita!
I still don't see why Wargaming couldn't introduce an early prototype of the M1 into WoT. The XM1 with the 105mm gun maybe. I feel like it would roughly play like a combination between the current FV4202 and maybe the T-62A? Speed and agility of T-62A, HP/ton and punchy gun of the FV4202, but its armor wouldn't really be anything special. The Americans would finally have a tier X medium capable of having a fighting chance going up against other mediums.
The XM1 is outside the scope of world of tanks. It was produced post-1960. The General Motors and Chrysler XM1 proposals were also the same way. It would be an incredibly mobile tank with a hard-hitting gun (equivalent to the in-game M68) and epic on-the-move accuracy with relatively thick armor. Even vehicles such as the XM803 and MBT-70 project were all too advanced for the purposes of WoT. (With smoothbores, advanced stabilization, 1200+ hp engines, and the like). Even if they were historically in-timeframe, they'd just be too far above their contemporary rivals.
Type 61, STB-1, and at least one other tank were produced post-1970. Wargaming has said before, its not the date of development that determines whether a tank is added into the game, it is almost entirely decided by the main armament. Cut off is not tied to date, but to introduction of features like smoothbore guns and guided anti tank missiles. The XM1 prototype had the American version of the L7 105mm gun, which is already in the game and on several tanks. As for armor, that's why I said put in an early version, before Chobham armor was added. The armor would be decent, for a medium, but certainly no better than say the T-62A or the FV4202 as they stand now. Maybe even slightly less, to balance out the super high mobility. Its my opinion that the XM1 would be roughly on par with the current Russian tier X mediums. Maybe slightly less armor for a better gun, but roughly equal. Also, it seems the XM1 would make a better tier X for the American medium tank tree than the current M48. Everyone would agree that the M48 is sub par compared to nearly every other tier X medium out there.
I'm curious to see what your opinion on this is, Rita. You probably know a lot more about Wargaming and their reasons and foibles than I.
A MBT-70 and even the XM803 are WAY too advanced. Even early Abrams are too advanced... They have like a foot thick of armor, very good gun stabilization, laser sights, etc.
@That Dashing Rogue: Whoops, my bad. I've made a fool of myself now. But even so, I feel that the XM1 would be too over powered to be produced in game. I've looked over Hunnicutt and haven't been able to find anything that says that the XM1 was ever equipped with anything other than composite armors. Perhaps the validation prototypes had RHA? Beyond that, we have the issues with the AGT-1500 or AVCR-1360 engines, which both produce over 1500 horsepower and would make the tank easily one of the fastest in the game.
The M48 could be re-balanced easily. Just slap in an AVDS or LVDS VCR/VHO engine. 1000+ horsepower.
@Ryan Sun: Thanks for the reply. You make some good points, and I conceed that the XM1 may be too powerful for the WoT. Granted, Wargaming could always come up with one of their "blueprints" of a prototype with less armor and less HP...
Ultimately I think the best route to take for Wargaming would be to make the M60 the tier 10 tank. Better than the current Phatton, but not as overpowered as an XM1 would potentially be. I personally like the M60A3 for its turret, but I'll take an M60 too I suppose.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteJunk linking for more hits on his video.
DeleteThat's a really interesting article. Thank you, Rita!
ReplyDeleteI still don't see why Wargaming couldn't introduce an early prototype of the M1 into WoT. The XM1 with the 105mm gun maybe. I feel like it would roughly play like a combination between the current FV4202 and maybe the T-62A? Speed and agility of T-62A, HP/ton and punchy gun of the FV4202, but its armor wouldn't really be anything special. The Americans would finally have a tier X medium capable of having a fighting chance going up against other mediums.
Or maybe it would play more like the Leopard 1? Hmm...
DeleteThe XM1 is outside the scope of world of tanks. It was produced post-1960. The General Motors and Chrysler XM1 proposals were also the same way. It would be an incredibly mobile tank with a hard-hitting gun (equivalent to the in-game M68) and epic on-the-move accuracy with relatively thick armor. Even vehicles such as the XM803 and MBT-70 project were all too advanced for the purposes of WoT. (With smoothbores, advanced stabilization, 1200+ hp engines, and the like). Even if they were historically in-timeframe, they'd just be too far above their contemporary rivals.
DeleteType 61 and STB-1 are laughing at your stupid ass right now.
DeleteType 61, STB-1, and at least one other tank were produced post-1970. Wargaming has said before, its not the date of development that determines whether a tank is added into the game, it is almost entirely decided by the main armament. Cut off is not tied to date, but to introduction of features like smoothbore guns and guided anti tank missiles. The XM1 prototype had the American version of the L7 105mm gun, which is already in the game and on several tanks. As for armor, that's why I said put in an early version, before Chobham armor was added. The armor would be decent, for a medium, but certainly no better than say the T-62A or the FV4202 as they stand now. Maybe even slightly less, to balance out the super high mobility. Its my opinion that the XM1 would be roughly on par with the current Russian tier X mediums. Maybe slightly less armor for a better gun, but roughly equal. Also, it seems the XM1 would make a better tier X for the American medium tank tree than the current M48. Everyone would agree that the M48 is sub par compared to nearly every other tier X medium out there.
DeleteI'm curious to see what your opinion on this is, Rita. You probably know a lot more about Wargaming and their reasons and foibles than I.
A MBT-70 and even the XM803 are WAY too advanced. Even early Abrams are too advanced... They have like a foot thick of armor, very good gun stabilization, laser sights, etc.
Delete@That Dashing Rogue: Whoops, my bad. I've made a fool of myself now. But even so, I feel that the XM1 would be too over powered to be produced in game. I've looked over Hunnicutt and haven't been able to find anything that says that the XM1 was ever equipped with anything other than composite armors. Perhaps the validation prototypes had RHA? Beyond that, we have the issues with the AGT-1500 or AVCR-1360 engines, which both produce over 1500 horsepower and would make the tank easily one of the fastest in the game.
DeleteThe M48 could be re-balanced easily. Just slap in an AVDS or LVDS VCR/VHO engine. 1000+ horsepower.
@1mymm - I'm going to go cry in a corner. Bye.
@Ryan Sun: Thanks for the reply. You make some good points, and I conceed that the XM1 may be too powerful for the WoT. Granted, Wargaming could always come up with one of their "blueprints" of a prototype with less armor and less HP...
DeleteUltimately I think the best route to take for Wargaming would be to make the M60 the tier 10 tank. Better than the current Phatton, but not as overpowered as an XM1 would potentially be. I personally like the M60A3 for its turret, but I'll take an M60 too I suppose.
That was my baby IRL... SWEET
ReplyDelete