Just make the Conqueror playable! Not even good, just playable!

Currently the tank is completly unplayable. It lacks anything that is essential for a tank to be effective.
So, what is the problem with the tank?

Well, on paper, it is a heavy tank. Heavy tanks usually have 2 associated things with this.
1, that they have a high mass;
2, that they at least have some armor, that they can rely on.

The Conqueror has only one of these, and it is not the armor!

The lower hull of the tank is just made out of wet paper, even 2 (or more) BR lower medium, and light tanks will penetrate it.
The upper plate can (mostly) resist full calibre shots, however, when it is facing off against HEAT(-FS), or subcalibre shots, it will not stop any of them.

Okay, but this is a western style tank, this means that the turret is really good! Right?
Eeeehm, NO! It can stop full calibre shells, but against a 400mm HEAT-FS penetration, basically the whole turret is just dead weight. APDS can have a problem, but if you know where to shoot, it will not be a problem.

Even then, there is the gunner’s optic, that is 50mm thick. So even SPAA with SAP rounds will just one shot the tank from far away, if they manage to hit there.

Yeah, yeah, but the french have paper heavy tanks too, so this must mean the the good old Conq is at least fast…
Or not.
Compared to an M103, another similar style heavy tank (that actually has armor), yet it is 10 tons lighter for the same engine power.
The tank is just very slow (not like a Maus, or E-100, but you know, those have armor, and waaaaay better survivability)

Now here we have arrived to the most painful part of the tank. The “gun”.
Just like the M103, and the T-10, this tank also has a large gun, with relatively long reload (15s aced), and “high” pen.
On paper, the Shell 1G looks amazing! Better penetration, than the 120mm DM33 APFSDS at close range 0° angle. Oh, wait, that is basically meaningless, the angle pen is just way more important, in which case, the DM33 doubles the Shell 1G’s 60° performance.
But okay, it is 6.3 kg instead of the DM’s 4.3 kg, the damage must be good.
Wait what? This is an oxymoron! Damage and APDS is contradictory these days!

Now, jokes aside, the damage of this round is just awful, in fact, around the same level as the 17 pdr APDS, and certainly worse, than the 83mm and the 105mm APDS.

For example, to destroy a Panther frontally, you need 2 shots with the 17 pdr and the 83mm guns, and mostly 1 shot with the 105mm.
With the Shell 1G, it is 2-3 shots. Shot goes through the driver, knocks out the gunnder, and makes the commander red, or even just orange, because we all know, when a 6 kg piece of metal rips your legs off, you can still command the tank…
And repeat this shot 1-2 times, until the Panther is done.

With a Tiger 2? Around the same thing, you just add 1-2 more shots in case the shell just shatters on the front of the unangled front of that tank.

Oh, shattering. Yeah!
Shooting tanks in the side is very dangerous with this tank.
Oh, there is a little 4mm sheet metal box? Shell shattered!
Addon track link? Shell shattered!
Running wheel? Shell shattered!
You hit the schürtzen on a german tank? Shell shattered!
Proper spaced armor? Shell shattered!
You hit the gun mantlet of a tank? Shell shattered!

I guess you get the point.

At this point, it would be nice, to remember how long the reload is. 15 seconds with aced crew.
Same as on the M103 and T-10.
Why is it a problem on this tank, and not on the others?

Well, because those tanks have actually usable ammos to choose from.
APHE/AP and HEAT, and HE. On the Conq, you get the useless APDS, and an even worse HESH.

If an M103, or a T-10 hits something, that will hurt, or out right destroy the tank with 1 shot, with the Conqueror, even shooting ammunition racks is not a guaranteed 1 hit. And with the long reload, unrelyable penetration, AND damage, combined with the slowness and no armor of this tank, it is just utterly useless.

I would like to suggest a solution.

Give it the same reload as on the T-62!
So 11.1s base, and 8.5s aced reload. As i said in the title, this would not make it a good tank, with this change, it would be a playable tank.

Another reason for this, is that it would blend better into the upcomming Chieftain and Challenger tanks, and their faster reloads (Chief 7.5, and Challenger 5s aced), while all 3 tanks using 3 piece ammunition.

To illustrate how little “damage” this round has, i present you this picture:

Yes! That round went through the frontal plate, did nothing to the crew, and at least knocked out the engine.


Your preaching to the masses, and I agree with everything you’ve stated.

But Gaijin being Gaijin, who for some odd reason hates the British lineup will cite “technical specifications” as a reason it can’t be adjusted.


At the same time i don’t see the specifications for the Object 685 having the ability to replenish the autoloader from the ammo next to the engine block while traveling at 60 km/h…

The devs dont make changes like that out of thin air.

The Conqueror already has something that it shouldnt, that gives it an advantage in the game.

It also has things that made it a viable tank sniper that doesnt translate to anything in the game aswell.

That being said, the round is definitely not doing enough damage, and I think the shell shattered nonsense is exaggerated. Its a 6.5kg shot with a 75mm diameter flying at mach 4. It should evaporate everything in its path, especially when this round allegedly has a tendancy to shatter: Gaijin are you implying that this super high velocity round is shattering at hyperspeeds inside the enemy tank?

1 Like

I would say this Heavy tanks suffer due to how Gaijin treat APDS , APCR (in term of damage output) with how overperform APHE currently are. I think Gaijin should at least increase AP , APCR , APDS damage output.

For Armor part. Most Heavy tanks suffer because of BR compression. (meaning more change you are going to face enemy with higher BR vehicles that has enough fire power to bypass your armor) especially Heavy tanks at higher BR.

Also the threat that irl Tanks has to face compare to War Thunder.
In irl there are infantrys with anti tank weapon , AT gun . Their fire power nor range might not be powerful than that on tanks but there would be a lot of them and they certainly are a threat to tanks especially light armor vehicles which would have a hard time maneuver freely around battlefield like they do in War Thunder. In the same situation Heavy tanks would fare better. But none of that are imperment in this games.

What is it?

The only thing it has, but should not have is the absolute uselessness of that “tank”.

Once it shattered on a storage box on the side of a ZSU-57-2. 4mm structural steel +15mm rha…

The issue is with the “armor” of this tank is, that the gun mantlet is just very thin. And for some reason, something like a Tiger 2 hitting it will explode the ready charges, and something like an IS-2 will just OP the crew.
It has no side armor, no lower plate (“JuSt Go HuLlDoWn” - you have to get there somehow).
And there is the 50mm thick gunner’s optic, that can be penned even by SPAA from distance.

Lastly, as i said, there are multiple 17mm cast hatches, and a flat turret roof that is 30mm, so most medium-high calibre HE will just OP the crew.

As i said with how APHE are overperform while Most UK vehicles stuck using AP or APDS thus make them suffer.

For mantlet part i might check again later. But Gaijin tent to nerf some tanks mantlet. For example M60s,M48s wait for years before they get fix.
Armor hole (in term of vehicles model) exist on others tank as well. But these problem get worse as “overpressure” mechanic got add. It basically make rapid fire 30-40mm gun able to knock out crew even against heavy armor because explode damage able to reach crew via those armor hole.
To fix this Gaijin would has to fix / remodel said vehicles .

As for shooting vehicles roof with high caliber HE. That effect every vehicles.
But i would said it work about 50% of time. Since sometime it does nothings but damage optic.
irl those 50% would go down even future because no way we would be this accurate with HE round. (unless lucky shot)

The issue is, that even 90mm HEAT will trigger the OP if it detonates near a hatch. There were at least 3 times when i got killed by an AML-90 (or something similar to that) just because it hit the turret front over the driver’s hatch.
Higher calibre HEAT is even more effective.
And the HEAT shield addon armor of the turret makes it even worse, because HEAT detonates closer to the hatch.

It is not an armor hole. It fully pens the mantlet, and the shell explodes behind it. And since the first stage ammo charges are right under the mantlet, any AOHE will just ammorack it. Or if the shell has 200+g of TNT, then it just OPs the crew.

Not really.
For APDS, any early design ones, with T.Carbide core are just out right useless, because they shatter on everything and deal next to no damage even if they pen.

On the other hand, T.Alloy APDS, like on the 105mm L7 are very good in terms of consistency, and damage.

For solidshot, the issue is that they use low calibre. While the US and French use 120, or 100mm solidshot, the brits use 83mm ones.

The 17pdr is fine up to 5.0-5.3, but after that, you have to shoot a lot of APDS, but again, it is an early one, so it sucks.

Conqueror has pretty good armor, especially turret armor, with the experimental armor package fitted it is almost immune to 90 mm HEAT, 105 mm early APDS and in some areas even immune to 400 mm HEAT.

Conqueror already has a realistic rate of fire of 4 RPM, and that shouldn’t change. The M103, despite having two loaders, has the same slow reload rate, even though its IRL minimum rate of fire was 5 RPM, so the Conqueror absolutely shouldn’t get a reload buff, rather, the equivalent tank (M103), should.
What should change is that they should buff the damage its APDS does immensely, on the Chieftain level of damage (which is pretty good).

They should also remove its BS ahistorical stabilizer, the thing had the complete opposite of a stabilizer - it couldn’t fire at all when moving more than 2 mph as the gun completely locked up. It is unfair that it gets a stabilizer, but the M103 and equivalents don’t, when they were actually capable of shooting on the move (albeit ineffectively).

The Conqueror also gets experimental armor, the M103 should in turn get the experimental APDS (same as Conqueror), and experimental HESH that it used. The IS-4 should get HEATFS. The T-10A is fine with good mobility, armor, decent reload, vertical stabilizer and decent APHE.


I always love this “historical” whining.

Yes dude, because replacing a blown off gun barrel in 15s without them getting out of the tank is realistic, bringing back to life someone in 20s that had his head blown off by a 120mm shell is so realistic.

This game is anything BUT realistic.

Making a tank playable is more important than it being “realistic”.

Why aren’t you b***hing on the forum because the Sturmtiger does not have 5 minute reload? Or that it essentially has a laser rangefinder?
Is that realistic? I don’t think so.

The experimental package even lowers the survivability. Why?
because if a HEAT shell hits directly over the driver’s hatch, the package makes it detonate closer to the driver’s hatch, making it more likely to overpressure the 17mm cast hatch door.
The package addon armor also falls of quickly, so it is not a permanent thing.
The gunner’s optic is 50mm cast, so even SPAAs will pen it from almost a km, and since most of the uses SAP, they just 1hit the entire turret crew.
The gun mantlet is also very weak.
And then there are a few more 17mm thick cast hatches on the turret, as well as a 30mm cast plate over the gun breech, making it extremely easy to overpressure with anything that has explosive filler (except APHE).
Then the hull is extremely weak okay, hulldown tank, but you cant just sit all battle in hulldown most of the time).

Not just that, but a lot more tanks just have waaay faster reload than they should have. Why aren’t you whining about them as well?

Yes, but they will not. The Chieftain APDS is completly different, it uses T.Alloy, not T.carbide.

Yeah, make the Conqueror even more unplayable!
On the other hand, the M103 is just better in every way.
It does not have a ready rack ->Can fire all it’s ammo without getting longer reload.
It does not have those shitty 17mm hatches, and the weakest part is 38mm on top ->harder to overpressure (for example, soviet 122mm HE can’t pen it, while it can pen the Conqueror)
Overall better armor
10 tons lighter with the same engine HP
Gets AP, HEAT, and HE, all of them are better than the shit APDS, and HESH on the Conqueror.
Has a .50 cal


As i said it effect every vehicles. But i get that you are confuse. Because such small explosive shouldn’t OP that which i agree.

For armor hole i was mention about “overpressure” since that was the another reason why some heavy armor tank die from SPAA with 30-40mm guns due to “overpressure” damage.
I should have quote the post before reply.

As for mantlet . there are certain weakspot on some part. But back in the day. It use to be good as it can stop 100,122 APHE . Gaijin change it. So i’d like to see any source about it’s gun mantlet.

It does somewhat effect majority of them though.But if Gaijin can buff APDS damage output on 105mm
Why can’t they do for the others ? (infact they did buff solid AP shell before when france was introduce)
Also the fact that APHE already get overperfrom damage output.

As for solid AP damage output compare to APCR . irl US did a test on shell damage between solid AP and APCR and the test result show that APCR was sightly higher.

So in my opinion any AP , APCR , APDS should get damage output buff to compensate that as well. or nerf (fix) APHE damage output.


You are exaggerating a little. Some of these things you state arent of big concern. I have only ever been killed through the optic sight I think once, and I have played hundreds of matches in it.

Gun Mantlet isnt “very weak”, it is at worst “weak”, but the Gun Mantlets issue is the level of consistency, parts of it fly into a 150mm shield just behind, where even huge AP rounds like the Maus can fail to pen.

There is an overpressure issue with it though where huge rounds that dont quite pen the tank still magically kill everyone for no reason.

EDIT: Also neglecting that the Conqueror has one of the best Anti-HEAT protection for a Heavy Tank in the game. Gaijin was definitely generous to add that spaced armor. Provides great protection from 90mm and smaller HEAT and decent protection against larger HEAT. That Mantlet “weakspot” still has a chance to eat rounds and its not even guaranteed to take out the breach.

To think that with a bit of extra armor on the mantlet this thing would be a hull down HEAT EATER.

Someone on the forums once posted a table with a standard AP shot for the conqueror.

EDIT: Conqueror Apds stats found online. - Heavy Vehicles - War Thunder - Official Forum

1 Like

This is what a T-55A looks like at 2000M

It’s a shame we can’t rotate the turret in protection analysis, to see how it would look if the T-55 player angles his hull.

Another reason why WoT > WT /jk


“Decent” protection.

As i said, HE shells hitting the turret fron will just OP the driver hatch:

This happnes too if the shell explodes near any of the 3 other hatches on the turret roof.

Yeah with it’s tendency to get OPd…

For that one shell that will tear off the addon armor…
At least you can shoot a warning shot at the enemy…

Nope. It pens the mantlet layer, explodes behind it, and triggers OP if it has enough explosive mass (~200g tnt), or just shrapnels the ready rack charges and the tank explodes. Happened to me with a bloody Panther, and it’s awful 27g tnt equivivalent…

Btw a one shot spot against a 35mm SAP at 700m…

Happened me at least 3 times agains the Oerlicon 35mm, and a dozen other times with larger calibre APHE.

Dont use tanks.gg. it only takes the base angle without any angle modifiers.
I dont think a 37mm APCR should have over 50% chance of penning the T-34 upper plate…
This is more realistic:

1 Like

Yes, you shouldn’t use it for Wathunder. It’s calculating effective thickness using rules from WoT, where the shell subtracts obliquity(-5°) from the target, so it’s effective thickness is always less than simple line of sight thickness. Its very unrealistic and makes sloped armour much less effective, but that’s what you get.