I am working, very slowly on a suggestion for this ship. But the WoW’s version is an adaptation with a fantastical extra turret that never existed. Also not sure why the 3" guns are in single mounts not twins.
adapted part =/= same tank.
And sadly the british tank design died with the centurions, they were doing fine, inventing an entirely new tank class but then bunged it up on the next simple and logical step.
I’m just saying. If someone mains a single nation for reasons that aren’t time constraints they shouldn’t make constant “X nation suffers” posts/comments.
1 Like
It’s definitely a shame that the UK didn’t simply make its own hull after the Germans banned the export of theirs. It’s not like it wasn’t doable, the UK had just made a new hull for ENT and Shir (well thats technically half chieftain which is the damn problem).
The British Army was never going to be allowed adopt Vickers Mk.7/2 over Challenger 1, which I don’t think is a bad thing as Challenger 1, for its time, was phenomenal in the turret, and didn’t lag so far behind on the hull that it was a huge issue.
But Vickers MK.7/2 definitely had more growth potential and fit the idea of MBT80 better, perhaps could later have replaced CR1 rather than CR2. Ultimately CR1 and 2 was picked out of cost, more than anything. For CR1 it worked out, CR2, less so.
I think Challenger doing so well for the age of its design is more a case of it being lucky that the supply lines, quality of individual technologies etc was so good. Rather than the design itself being good.
2 Likes
Cuz thats not Mintaur. Thats Edgar, it adds 1 more turret, replaces the 3 inch with OTO (Le Orla gun) and adds limbo.
This is WOWs Minotaur
I don’t like to admit it but Chieftain upon entering service was the best tank in the world. There’s isn’t really much debate on the tanking side of things in that regime. But Chieftain lasted too long in the Chieftain form, and much too long after it got recycled into Challenger’s 1 and 2.
and I am of the opinion it means bugger in terms of getting bug reports fixed.
BOL fixes for example would be a huge buff for Britain, but the nation that would benefit probably the most is Sweden.
Wait do WoW’s add straight up fake ships?
Because the OTO 76 did not exist in the same timeframe as Minataur or even Tiger given that’s the super rapid variant?
It would help the US a lot if their planes that actually used BOL pods IRL would get them in game…
2 Likes
That took you a while to realise. It is one of the most modern ships in WOWs, dated 1975.
They have many fake ships.
3 Likes
that’s a fairly wild one, mostly because the T-64 also existed. but it’s kinda pointless to talk which one was the best since both east and west had different tank doctrines.
It would, there is a debate that some like the F-15 have a huge internal supply and dont need over 1000 extra CMs.
but even just the aircraft we have in game right now with BOL, Viggen and Gripen would hugely benefit from the buff
I think most evaluations led to that conclusion, certainly essentially every evaluation I have read not just limited to British and American ones either but a German one too in the original German. But I agree the doctrines would play a factor. Attempt to use a Chieftain under Soviet doctrine and it will show you what a fat, unreliable pig of a tank it is/was.
I don’t like the Chieftain in fact the only British MBT’s I like is CR1 and Vickers MK.7
I can say it may have been the best in a stricly defensive doctrine but offensively i see it lagging behind
Strictly speaking he said “upon entering service”. Chieftain entered service in 1965 and T-64 entered service in 1967, so the T-64 was not a competitor “upon [the Chieftain] entering service”.
1 Like
I think you’d then have to account for inbuilt NVD, FCS being very good and a very very potent cannon. But I also cannot imagine a Chieftain leading a push (engine would stop working before it climbed the ridgeline xD).
Well, they wouldnt would they?
A core part of the NATO plan was dig in and defend. So thats why many NATO tanks have very strong turrets but weaker hull armour.
Yes, WoWs tends to do a ton of straight-up fake designs and what-if refits. That said, the vast majority of ships in-game are real though.
3 Likes
Yea well that is very strict.
Still, entrance to service is also a rather loose term. Im not trying to downplay your statement by the way.
Eh, enough of that though.
Indeed so you could argue that it was the best tank in NATO and as @Flame2512 pointed out, T-64 isn’t a competitor by timeline but I’d also probably haggle a bit over T-64 anyway.
But doctrinally the chieftain would suck in soviet forces, and the modern equivalent would suck in the newly adapted NATO forces… hence why there’s a lot of debate over Challenger 2.