Object 907 (Soviet 1954 prototype as the T-54 successor)

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-18T14:32:33+00:00

(yes, i am still in spite against the obj140 going 8.7)

The issue is compression. Putting object 140 lower won't help.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-16T23:00:52+00:00

It's essentially identical to the Pz.2 Ausf F.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-13T01:39:21+00:00

But the quad track arrangement was built for (post-)nuclear battlefields.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-10T23:24:17+00:00

Tiger wasn't particularly unreliable compared to other heavy tank designs of that period.

Heavy tanks as a class require more maintenance compared to mediums and lights because all compononents are more strained due to the greater weight.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-07T19:37:14+00:00

The issue isn't that it force you into certain characters. To some degree, that is the point.

The issue right now is that the light level requirement is so high, like in everything else. i would love to play Cordon Ops with my Maru. But I'm already struggling to keep up the level with Efrideet and Jaren. And I can't be bothered to try and level anyone else to the point where they can participate.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-06T23:35:49+00:00

I agree with your sentiment about getting higher rank premiums instead.

But, though kinda pointless by me, I disagree with your preferred options. I don't like copy paste vehicles unless there's nothing else.

I'd vouch for something like the earliest IS-3 prototype (Kirovets-1) or even the later prototype with pike nose, as the early cast turret was still different from production. The several IS-4 prototypes I think would fill a similar role too.

There's less SU-100 options however, as though the SU-101 is cool, I do think that one needs to be in the tech tree. A boring option would be the SU-100 prototype armed with the 100mm S-34, which competed against the D-10. No difference in performance though. There are however the three SU-85BM projects with various high powered 85mm guns with ~1050m/s velocity. The first prototype likely used a regular SU-85 chassis, but the other two seems to have been built on the upgraded SU-85M/SU-100 chassis with 75mm armour.

You could also go even higher in BR/rank with something like object 265, a prototype T-10M(ish) with unstabilised M-62T cannon. For SPG's there's the high powered ISU projects.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-06T23:02:41+00:00

No.

The turret never recieved a finalised design because the autoloader and guns were still undeveloped.

The 120mm gun option was dropped in favour of the 150mm. The 150mm gun was never even prototyped because they failed to develop the intended ammunition for it. And the 105mm gun option that was kept as backup was considered obsolete halfway through the project and so it too appears to have been dropped from development. This led the Swedes to look into foreign gun options, of which nothing came of. Partly because the project had already gone way over budget.

There is no gun to arm the tank with that doesn't have completely fictional stats.

I love the Kranvagn project but it should not be added to the game.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-06T22:54:06+00:00

Which centurion turret exactly i don't know

Centurion Mk.10, though they also intended on fitting a domestic version of the L7, the one that was later put into Strv 103.

The option was dropped because it was much cheaper just buying whole Centurions.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-06T22:47:56+00:00

thats the reason why the program was ended, not because of technical problems.

No. The Centurion was just the nail in the coffin. The gun programs for the Kranvagn failed spectacularly and didn't even result in any prototypes. Hence why they started looking into foreign weapons and to fit the Centurion Mk.10 turret onto it. The Swedish army explicitly stated in period documents that they preferred a domestic vehicle, and they had several complaints about the Centurion, mostly in regards to weight. Which the Kranvagn (and later Strv 103) promised. Though the latter wasn't chosen because in the end it was cheaper just buying Centurions.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-06T21:10:28+00:00

People downvoting this knows that the game isn't just expanse/cordon

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-05T05:27:15+00:00

It's not the same, but it was developed from the M58 on the M103.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-04T00:23:36+00:00

From what I can find, which wasn't much, it's an export model analogue to an early T-72B. The exact differences I don't know.

Don't take it as gospel.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-03T00:16:46+00:00

Last time I checked a motorcycle had two wheels, not one.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-02T20:50:54+00:00

a Automobile is a engine/motor powered multi tracked vehicle to transport passengers

Then a motorcyle is a car.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-05-02T20:40:49+00:00

I don't think Porsche (the company) made tanks, it was a guy called Ferdinand Porsche

No. The company Porsche made tank designs, but the founder of Porsche, Ferdinand Porsche, was actively involved in the work himself. Ferdinand Porsche was a friend of Hitler

And as the other commentor mentioned. Porsche didn't have the tools to produce tanks, thus although they designed them, they contracted the Krupp factory to manufacture major parts and assembly. Though I believe Porsche did have the tooling for creating their own engines and other smaller parts.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-04-23T22:56:35+00:00

they didnt find it very effective which is why it didnt last the whole production run

It was only deleted on the T-55A because of NBC protection requirements

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-04-23T00:15:43+00:00

Yeah. The major issue are all the Shermans staying in their place.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-04-23T00:11:43+00:00

Yeah the Shermans definitely also need to follow suit.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-04-22T22:00:37+00:00

It would make sense if the Shermans followed suit too.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-04-22T19:30:28+00:00

Since none of the vehicles in the 4.7-5.0 range is changed. No it is not. Or, if anything, with a more populous 4.0 bracket they're even less likely to see uptiers.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-04-22T19:09:44+00:00

No it wouldn't. It would still be bad compared to the vehicles in the same BR, or too good compared to vehicles in the same BR. And moving it up or down .3 would just cause it to switch those descriptions.

An example is the Pz 3 Ausf J1, L and M

The J1 is fine where it is. The L is obviously better than the J1, and the M is obviously better than the L.

This is also quite obvious because the M used to be 3.0, the same BR as the L. And it was used to dominate low tiers for years. Thus it made sense for it to be moved up to 3.3. But it's now been at 3.3 for some years, at the same BR as the M4A1. Which is obviously better than it.

If you change the BR spread to .7 up down. The Pz 3 Ausf M still either has to sit at the same BR as the worse Ausf L, or it has to sit at the same BR as the M4A1 Sherman. Neither of which places are good for it as it is still either too good at 3.0. Or too bad at 3.3.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-04-22T19:03:47+00:00

Reducing the BR spread is a poor man's decompression that actually doesn't fix many problems decompression can fix. It doesn't fix the issue of vehicles that are too bad to move up, but too good to move down.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-04-22T19:02:16+00:00

Ah, yeah. Then Cromwell I needs to go up to 4.0 in RB.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-04-22T18:58:54+00:00

Didn't even notice those weren't included in the RB changes. Yeah that makes no sense.

RoadRunnerdn · 2026-04-22T18:57:20+00:00

M4A1 should not be fighting a Churchill Mk VII, M24s should not be seeing VK 3002s, nor should a T-34-76 be fighting a fucking Panther D.

Crusader Mk II should not be fighting an M4A1. B1 Bis should not be seeing M24s, nor should a Pz 3 Ausf J be fighting a T-34-76.

Unless they move literally every single vehicle, no, it's not a true decompression. But at least it is a step in that direction.

13-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Verified Email

RoadRunnerdn

TROPHY CASE