Lets Talk About The Object 279 Issue. Currently 5.8+ KDR on Average

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
486

It does not. Multiple russian sources have it at 5 rounds per minute (12 seconds) as a high end. In game the slowest it get is 11 seconds (still wrong by nearly all sources).

Not cherry picking, and in game it should reflect the higher end not the lower end, especially with the known issues of russian tanks already being buffed and over performing.

I provided the source data for the M-65 and its ammunition from russian documentation. That should be good enough. Lets see the snails documentation… if they have any or they didn’t just make more up like they tend to do with russian vehicles.

Only because the snail uses a known flawed and wrong method that doesn’t give NATO and many other nations their proper performance but favors russian ammunition giving it overperformance in game. This has been documented countless times and isn’t even a discussion.

One that has been proven wrong time and time again yet isn’t fixed because it would harm russian vehicles.

I made a statement not an accusation on your part on the armor. I could make many more statements about how wrong the 279 is but this beating a dead horse. You shouldn’t think so highly of yourself to misinterpret a comment. I said the amor “is also” meaning adding to the list of issues.

At this point it is silly to even continue to address you people. You clearly need to defend this abominations position for whatever reason. You know its performance wrong, the snail knows its performance is wrong.

I would love to see why the object 279s code shows only a 15% detonation chance when the rounds are loaded with TNT.

I don’t even know why I bother really, it clearly isn’t going to get fixed and the russian vehicles will continue to over perform, not spall, and not detonate regardless of how science fiction russian vehicles perform.

I am not going to waste anymore of my time on this fruitless effort. I have shown you the flaws in the snails design, you can do what you want with them or artificially defend them despite multiple sources on multiple threads proving the snail and you guys wrong. I think it is better if I simply block anyone who defends the nonsense.

Oooh your a russian main according to your player stats. That figures. Bye.

487

Just searching “Объект 279” in Google and the top 3 results will mention 5 to 7, those results being Wikipedia (Russian Wikipedia makes no mention, English Wikipedia says 5-7 RPM), “pakpatriot.ru”, which says 5-7 RPM, and “armedman.ru”, which says “up to 7 rounds per minute”.

So multiple sources state 5-7 or just 7 RPM. On top of that, of your multiple sources, you’ve only shown Wargaming, which is perhaps the least important source out of them all.

As stated, you very clearly used the website I mentioned for information, yet also disregard that same website when it states an RPM of 6 to 7 RPM. By definition that is cherry picking.

Sure, never said that couldn’t be the case. My whole argument is about real life characteristics, and not how it behaves in-game. Zephoid said the Object 279 does not have any autoloader or semi-autoloader, I disagreed and provided proof. And now, my whole argument is that the Object 279 in real life did have an RPM from 5 to 7 seconds.

Again, that the Object 279 should or could have a slower reload rate for balancing purposes is an argument that I have not made nor will enter. I am purely talking about real life characteristics.

And here you’ve shown to completely not understand what I said.

Different nations use different methods to determine the penetration of their rounds. For example, lets just look at the methods that the US used.

US penetration criterion

Criterion
Criterion850×1350 161 KB

Each one of these criterion will give different penetration values with the same exact projectile, in the exact same conditions, yet each and every single one had its own completely valid definition for “complete penetration”. And the Russians have their own methods and “criterion” for determining if a round goes through or not.

WarThunder pen values are roughly “Navy criterion” when it comes to performance. What I mean by this is that a projectile with 100 mm of penetration at a given distance will have a 50% chance of going through a 100 mm thick flat armor plate at said specific distance.

One cannot take values from one penetration criteria and simply copy the penetration to a system that uses a completely different penetration criteria. That is the problem with the source you’ve given, precisely that it is Russian documentation that uses Russian methodology which would not correspond to other testing methodology.

One of the easiest examples of rounds that overperform with the current calculator are US APCBC-HE rounds. They all overperform, from the 75 mm M61 to the 90 mm M82.

You also said, and I quote:

But you can keep defending this nonsense.

It just goes to show russian bias does exist and some people will go to extreme lengths to defend it before they admit their is a problem.

As if I have been defending the performance of the Object 279 in the game to begin with. That is a misinterpretation on your end, because I have not. In fact, I do think it should be 9.0. My only problem is when people misrepresent or outright spread misinformation on real life characteristics of a vehicle.

Excuse me?

My statistics
My statistics1593×1029 144 KB

My most played vehicles are American. My favorite vehicles are all American. I have more total games in US vehicles that any other nation. I have played Russian vehicles but I consider myself most definitely a US main. Hell, every single topic I’ve made in this forum and the old forum except one is about a US vehicle in one way or another.

What a sad attempt to deflect the argument. Not to mention that it is completely off-topic.

1 Like
488

Source for the 12 second reload with a fully trained crew? You’re spreading misinformation again or what? Also posting misinformation about the Obj. 279’s shell again… wtf is wrong with you?

489

I have posted more than one source for this in the past. I have also posted documentation, in russian. If you can’t manage to read it, that is your issue not mine. Interesting that you are hiding behind a freshly made account. Wonder why. Adding you to the list. You can go back and read the documentation that has been posted over and over again.

490

You’re comparing the real data at 1000m while in game at 10m…

This is what we should be comparing.

           IRL   In Game

0º / 1000m | 280mm | 321mm

30º/1000m | 240mm | 244mm

60º/1000m | 114mm | 109mm

It’s better at 0º but worse at 60º

And now the most surprising fact… you’re showing data about the wrong ammunition, which is the earlier 130mm shell that weighs 30,7kg and has a muzzle velocity of 1030m/s, while in game we have the late 130mm ammo which weighs 33,4kg and has a muzzle velocity of 1000m/s, if anything it is underperforming at 60º.

You should research more before speaking nonsense. You’re trying so hard to hate on the Obj. 279 while making yourself a clown, also how is it a freshly made account (Lvl 38)? And what it has to do with the topic? You think because i’m level 38 i’m dumb or what? What it feels to be level 100 while having negative K/D in most of your vehicles? You’re not that smart right?

1 Like
491

My experience facing this monster in GFAB, you have two kinds of 279 players:

  • YOLO kind with the insight of a turnip, which mostly ODL and die to the first chap with a sufficiently powerful round to kill it;

  • one who actually knows what he is doing, the highest i’ve seen was 13 kills;

if anything the 279 is an ultra forgiving vehicle, for a heavy tank it has the ultimate in the big three: Protection, Mobility and Firepower.
Protection: I’ve seen this thing shrug off 105 DM23 or 120 DM13 without much issue, you have to aim for rather small weakspots;
Mobility: for a Heavy tanks its god tier, comparing it to the MAUS is like comparing a Ferrari to a Tractor;
Firepower: this APCBC round rivals most APDS and starter APFSDS in penetration with a vastly superior post pen effect.

Also about rarity is see far more 279 when i play in that bracket then a MAUS.

The MAUS was removed because of balance issues, while still retaining a 15-20k SL repair cost, changed only recently with the economy changes.

The 279 has the same problem, godlike in a down tier and while in an uptier it can be killed, there is not really a single vehicle which it cant pen from the front and take out in a snap shot. that is the real power of the 279, it can and is mostly used in a very aggressive way. it can take the hit and almost always has a guaranteed kill in return.

What also doesn’t really help is before the latest changes in the economy (aka no loss of SL with premium, unless teamkill). when i was spading my ISR then 8.7-9.0 which start of with HEAT-FS, i faced 279 a lot and was destroyed without problem, even when people state load HEAT-FS to kill 279. This resulted in a huge loss in SL per battle since most vehicles back then even stock 5k Sl or higher, losses of 15 k SL per battle were common.

the 279 is not a rare occurrence in GFAB and seeing two of them wipe an entire flank and get kills in the double digits is some thing rarely seen in other vehicles, unless you count the BMP-2M or 2S38.

492

Lets not forget it is one the few vehicles that did not get moved up in BR in the last update. So it got a reduction of 0.3 in BR.

493

How is it “useless”? Just because night battles were temporarily disabled - very recently too.

494

Permanently disabled for nearly all players as it’ll be an opt-in feature in the future.

495

It isn’t useless at all. Thermals work just fine during the day, and can help you better track targets through the brush and trees. It all depends on if you know how to use it or not. Especially when it comes to Gen 3 thermals like the 2S38 has. They work just fine for hard spotting:

image

496

good luck doing the same with 1 gen xD

497

I agree that this tank needs it’s BR to be upped. It’s ridiculous how OP it is.
People say “Oh it can get penned by HEATFS, it’s pretty much useless when uptiered” and yet don’t realize that that is true for every tank. Going by that logic, Maus should be at about 6.3? - I mean Israeli M51 can pen it right? Baffling logic you have there.
As for the site you’ve given, sure the K/D can be off by much, but the players on that site are probably veteran enough to use them, meaning they’re skillful players. If you kick out the noob players playing the 279, you’d get about the same results the site has.
It needs to go up. You can’t pen it frontally most of the time. Yeah you can “shoot the barrel” but you can do that to every tank. Use ANY tank at the same BR and you’ll see the difference in effectiveness.

498

its a joke at this point, the obj was moved up in br because of that … ^^
now you face it in tanks that stand no chance without careful aiming, while he aims in your general direction xDDD

1 Like
499

Yeah, you’ve summed it up perfectly. I don’t know how can people even begin to defend this tank being at the right BR when it obviously isn’t. Either they have a severe skill issue (either thinking they’re gods and just rushing in headless), or they’re trying to dunk on players for as long as possible.
It’s also very much true that the tank is OP because we’ve all seen a very sharp increase in their usage recently.

500

The reason they say this, and why its an issue. Is because it actually shows you the entire problem with the russian tech tree. The argument “it can’t move up, because other tanks can then pen it” is absolutely the russian player mentality. They are often handed tanks that can’t be penned and you have to aim for pixel perfect weak spots, while they can just swing and blast away killing you no matter where the shot lands.

It shows you that russian players literally don’t aim, and don’t have to learn to use cover because the minute a tank can be penned they cry that it shouldn’t be at that BR.

3 Likes
501

its like the ppl saying turms t55am bmp2m 2s38 leopard 1 ( on 7.3) etc
they want the red button gameplay…

Also we saw? it when turms was added on 9.7 with 2 gen thermals i think it wasn’t even 1 day till they gave it 3bm42 because aiming is hard xDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

1 Like
502

well tbh the BMP-2M can be uptiered to 11.7 and it would be fine, simply because of the missiles and the OP thing that it can fire on the move (note that a lot of other vehicles have this IRL, yet the 2m only got it).
Leopard is basically a germany version of a british vickers mk.1, so i can see that they’re in the same BR. What i don’t understand is why is a CENTURION on 8.0 lmao.
a Centurion is on the same BR as 279, imagine that.
2s38 is op wherever it is.
i don’t struggle much with t55am, i simply see it as a good tank, but when compared to other nations at the same BR, yeah i’d say it’s a bit more effective

503

Yeah. I’ve been trying to not research any of the “big three” simply because i don’t want to, but man, when i switched from British / German (event vehicles) top-tier to Russian top-tier? can’t even compare.
You can survive a lot more shots, they have amazing mobility even being STOCK, ammunition options are amazing, they have a lot of vehicles you can choose…
Really makes you think do russian players even see anything other than russia being #1?

1 Like
504

The BMP-2M is an update that was completed in 2020. The first vehicles were delivered to the 40th Marine Brigade in January 2020.

The 2S38 was supposed to enter service this year, but has not as of yet. Likely supply issues with the ongoing war.

I have done several mobility tests on the test range in game, and found the vehicles are faster and getting higher acceleration than their documentation has for them. So that isn’t surprising.

They do, but only when they cannot one shot kill you, or when they get one shotted. One of the devs actually posted that the reason they don’t detonate on the modern russian tanks (T72, T80, T90 etc) was because of wet ammo stowage. Keep in mind, the carousel is not wet ammo stowage. But that was the reason they gave for not detonating so they know something is wrong but it benefits them so they don’t really care. Not fixing it, doesn’t hurt them so they just ignore it.

3 Likes
505

9.0-9.7 will be the death of the Object 279. It is okay at 8.7, 8.3 might be a bit better. But 9.7? Are you out of your mind folks? It is less survivable from the front than IS-7, and that is 8.3. And 279 has no modern features like Thermals+lrf!