Jump to content

Object 279; The FINAL Soviet Heavy Tank


Ruslan_DR
 Share

Tenk.  

619 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you want this in game?

    • Of course
      310
    • No.
      309
  2. 2. Would you want this vehicle EVEN IF it meant the Kpz-70 and MBT-70 variants would be put in to combat it?

    • Yes
      327
    • No, keep your silly designs out of my game.
      292
  3. 3. Would you want this if we had more vehicles in between them, and had at least one equal match for each nation?

    • Of course.
      351
    • No
      245
  4. 4. how about as a tournament vehicle, like the E-100?

    • Yes, it's well deserved.
      82
    • no.
      357



IMHO, the Kpz-70 will have substantially better firepower and mobility (being 15 km/h faster and having a gun similar to the Leo 2) while the Obj. 279 will have the best armor (in terms of angling)

 

you can't be serious can you

 

the Obj. 279 will be the most bounciest thing in the game and will just be hellspawn to everyone

 

Not if it costs 100,000 GE (~$460)    :Ps

 

If you ask me, I don't think I'll ever give Gaijin that kind of money.  On the other hand, there's always going to be jackpot winners, retired millionaires, and Chinese with spending sprees large enough to waste money on anything they lay eyes on (not to mention those spoiled rich kids).......

Edited by Results45
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Besides having being 14km/h faster, how do you guys think the Kpz-70's 245mm of spaced frontal turret armor at 53 degrees (and a gun similar to the one in today's Leopard 2) compare to the Object 279's ~300mm of hull armor at 70 degrees?

 

The Kpz-70 did not have the 120 mm. It had the 152 mm. The 120 mm was tried separately, the first tank to receive it was the Kieler. Either way, the MBT-70 can penetrate the Object 279 frontally, whereas the Object 279 cannot penetrate the MBT-70 frontally.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kpz-70 did not have the 120 mm. It had the 152 mm. The 120 mm was tried separately, the first tank to receive it was the Kieler. Either way, the MBT-70 can penetrate the Object 279 frontally, whereas the Object 279 cannot penetrate the MBT-70 frontally.

 

I'm sure Objekt 279 could at least pen the Kpz-70 in the lower hull (80+70mm spaced armor @ 47 degrees)

 

Other MBTs would need ammo like HEAT rounds and imoproved APDS/HESH rounds to pen the Kpz-70 though (which if kept with the 152mm gun instead of the 120mm must only be able to fire 152mm rounds, not MGM-151 missiles)

Edited by Results45
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure Objekt 279 could at least pen the Kpz-70 in the lower hull (80+70mm spaced armor @ 47 degrees)

 

It's not spaced armour. It's different compositions of steel (high hardness, medium hardness). And no, the M-65 will not other than probably point blank. 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, sure bring all this stuff in because the Russian line desperately needs more heavily armoured tanks.  :facepalm:

Like it's not bad enough that the IS3 and T54-47 got down-tiered so they can continue to club at 6.3.  Nothing was learnt from the past.  

And they say a lightly armoured Keiler is power creep. 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to see it. Though it would break the game majorly.

 

What im thinking, is it being an event, like the ST1 event, not unlockable, just there during that event, for April fools perhaps this year? But overall it shouldn't be added in the tech tree's, At least until it gets some proper enemies (M1 and such).

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see it also, but regulated to events or custom battles only, perhaps.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to see it. Though it would break the game majorly.

 

What im thinking, is it being an event, like the ST1 event, not unlockable, just there during that event, for April fools perhaps this year? But overall it shouldn't be added in the tech tree's, At least until it gets some proper enemies (M1 and such).

 

Leo 1A5, Chieftain Mk.5, and AMX-30B should do it (with HEAT & early 80s HESH/APDS rounds) -- not in terms of armor,  but the firepower & ammo.

Edited by Results45
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kpz-70 did not have the 120 mm. It had the 152 mm. The 120 mm was tried separately, the first tank to receive it was the Kieler. Either way, the MBT-70 can penetrate the Object 279 frontally, whereas the Object 279 cannot penetrate the MBT-70 frontally.

 

Where is your source? Kpz has 120mm, the MBT used a 150 with missile launcher, that was the american design. 

 

The KPZ's 120 was muchly preferred to the fault-filled launcher/gun.

 

KPZ;

http://www.panzerbaer.de/types/bw_kpz_70-a.htm

"Der MBT 70 hatte daher eine eine selbstladende 152mm Kombinationswaffe XM-150 (Kanone/Raketenwerfer) und der KPz 70 eine 120 mm Kanone von Rheinmetall."

 

"The MBT 70 was therefore a self-loading 152mm combination weapon XM - 150 ( gun / rocket launcher ) and the KPz 70 is a 120 mm cannon from Rheinmetall."

 

bw_kpz_70-002.jpg

 

MBT 70; Notice the lack of a bore extractor for fumes.

 

us_mbt70_ft_knox-001.jpg

 

P.S. I don't know why the hull is different, IIRC they mounted a turret onto a different vehicle's body for one of the testbeds.

Edited by Ruslan_DR
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

MBT 70; Notice the lack of a bore extractor for fumes.

 

us_mbt70_ft_knox-001.jpg

 

P.S. I don't know why the hull is different, IIRC they mounted a turret onto a different vehicle's body for one of the testbeds.

 

Notice the size of the bore? I've worked with the L7, the L/44, and the L/55. Neither of those cannons even come close to that bore size. That exact vehicle is the vehicle found at Fort Knox, and is still there today, AFAIK. Guess what? It's an MBT-70 armed with the 152 mm XM150E5, not the RM-120-44. Every source I've ever seen on the MBT/KpZ-70 lists the RM-120 being mounted in the KpZ-70 "Keiler".

 

This by comparison is the Keiler with the Rheinmetall 120 mm L/44:

leo2_proto120_ExperimentalEntwicklung_Ke

 

Germany got fed up with price of the joint project, took the lessons and technologies learned and shared and moved on to task Krauss-Maffei with the eventual Leopard 2, starting with the KpZ-70 Keiler (Leopard 2K). Considering the RM-120 was never actually fitted to a vehicle until late 1972, I'd have to say the MBT/KpZ-70 never had it. In a mock up or a turret stand? Perhaps. But in an actual vehicle, never seen it and again, everything comes down to the Keiler which had the first prototype ready in 1972. 

Edited by Choogleblitz
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest

Yeah, sure bring all this stuff in because the Russian line desperately needs more heavily armoured tanks.  :facepalm:

Like it's not bad enough that the IS3 and T54-47 got down-tiered so they can continue to club at 6.3.  Nothing was learnt from the past.  

And they say a lightly armoured Keiler is power creep. 

Did you bother to read?

God,every single time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice the size of the bore? I've worked with the L7, the L/44, and the L/55. Neither of those cannons even come close to that bore size. That exact vehicle is the vehicle found at Fort Knox, and is still there today, AFAIK. Guess what? It's an MBT-70 armed with the 152 mm XM150E5, not the RM-120-44. Every source I've ever seen on the MBT/KpZ-70 lists the RM-120 being mounted in the KpZ-70 "Keiler".

 

This by comparison is the Keiler with the Rheinmetall 120 mm L/44:

leo2_proto120_ExperimentalEntwicklung_Ke

 

Germany got fed up with price of the joint project, took the lessons and technologies learned and shared and moved on to task Krauss-Maffei with the eventual Leopard 2, starting with the KpZ-70 Keiler (Leopard 2K). Considering the RM-120 was never actually fitted to a vehicle until late 1972, I'd have to say the MBT/KpZ-70 never had it. In a mock up or a turret stand? Perhaps. But in an actual vehicle, never seen it and again, everything comes down to the Keiler which had the first prototype ready in 1972. 

 

No doubt, even if all other endgame MBTs did have HEAT/APDS with 500mm pen, having a Leopard 2 gun on the Kpz-70 would have the best gun in-game.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice the size of the bore? I've worked with the L7, the L/44, and the L/55. Neither of those cannons even come close to that bore size. That exact vehicle is the vehicle found at Fort Knox, and is still there today, AFAIK. Guess what? It's an MBT-70 armed with the 152 mm XM150E5, not the RM-120-44. Every source I've ever seen on the MBT/KpZ-70 lists the RM-120 being mounted in the KpZ-70 "Keiler".

 

This by comparison is the Keiler with the Rheinmetall 120 mm L/44:

leo2_proto120_ExperimentalEntwicklung_Ke

 

Germany got fed up with price of the joint project, took the lessons and technologies learned and shared and moved on to task Krauss-Maffei with the eventual Leopard 2, starting with the KpZ-70 Keiler (Leopard 2K). Considering the RM-120 was never actually fitted to a vehicle until late 1972, I'd have to say the MBT/KpZ-70 never had it. In a mock up or a turret stand? Perhaps. But in an actual vehicle, never seen it and again, everything comes down to the Keiler which had the first prototype ready in 1972. 

 

Which is weird, i admit. 

The Keiler is not part of the KPZ-70 series however, it was designed to replace that series and be more economical. Bizzarely, my articles state the gun was taken from the German KPZ-70 variant.

Man i don't even. I did some double checking and also could not find one example. Pretty strange, perhaps they just never unveiled that model. many sites state that configuration but none have photos.

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which is weird, i admit. 

The Keiler is not part of the KPZ-70 series however, it was designed to replace that series and be more economical. Bizzarely, my articles state the gun was taken from the German KPZ-70 variant.

Man i don't even. I did some double checking and also could not find one example. Pretty strange, perhaps they just never unveiled that model. many sites state that configuration but none have photos.

 

The Leopard 2K (Keiler) did somewhat use the KpZ designation:

 

 

Das Bundesministerium der Verteidigung, vertreten durch das Bundesamt für Wehrtechnik und Beschaffung beauftragte Krauss-Maffei mit der Planung und dem Bau des Kampfpanzers Leopard 2 – ein Projekt, das schon 1968 als Experimentalentwicklung Keiler (Leopard 2K) gestartet wurde. Die Kampfpanzer-70-Prototypen und deren Türme dienten in dieser Phase im ET-700-Programm als Erprobungsträger für Triebwerks- und Laufwerksteile. Die ebenfalls durch das Bundesamt für Wehrtechnik und Beschaffung in Auftrag gegebene und durch Krauss-Maffei durchgeführte Studie Eber (Leopard 2FK) wurde letztendlich verworfen. Gemäß General Heinz Günther Guderian wurde eine Lösung mit Kanone bevorzugt, das Konzept eines Kampfpanzer auf Basis des Kampfpanzer 70 mit Fahrer in der Wanne und 152-mm-Kombinationswaffe war nicht zu akzeptieren.

 

It shared enough of the Kampfpanzer that it was, at least originally, part of the -70 family to an extent as it used the ET-700 program as a basis.

Edited by Choogleblitz
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest

''as for reasons, my whole ulterior motive is that everyone complained that the Kpz-70 would be too OP. so, I gave them something to counter it with. Both vehicles have comparable statistics"

That is what i am talking about.

 

What are you on about mate? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

''as for reasons, my whole ulterior motive is that everyone complained that the Kpz-70 would be too OP. so, I gave them something to counter it with. Both vehicles have comparable statistics"

That is what i am talking about.

 

 

People complained about the KPZ-70 being OP becasue they are under the mistaken belief that the game is modelled to be technically and historically correct which it is far from.  The problem is that the devs tend to listen more to these type of suggestions as is evidenced but the abundance of tier 5 Russian armour.  This thread despite it's intentions has morphed into a suggestion for Obj279 and Obj277.  A better suggestion would be a halt to late soviet development until the other factions have adequate numbers of available vehicles to counter them.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest

People complained about the KPZ-70 being OP becasue they are under the mistaken belief that the game is modelled to be technically and historically correct which it is far from.  The problem is that the devs tend to listen more to these type of suggestions as is evidenced but the abundance of tier 5 Russian armour.  This thread despite it's intentions has morphed into a suggestion for Obj279 and Obj277.  A better suggestion would be a halt to late soviet development until the other factions have adequate numbers of available vehicles to counter them.

The suggestion is about getting this(though it is trolling mostly) to fight the KPZ-70.

NOT to get an OP club machine.

M60A1,Leo1A1,M103A1,Chieftain Mk3...

I'd say we are safe.

Remember this is to counter KPZ-70,and it doesn't even do that very well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People complained about the KPZ-70 being OP becasue they are under the mistaken belief that the game is modelled to be technically and historically correct which it is far from.  The problem is that the devs tend to listen more to these type of suggestions as is evidenced but the abundance of tier 5 Russian armour.  This thread despite it's intentions has morphed into a suggestion for Obj279 and Obj277.  A better suggestion would be a halt to late soviet development until the other factions have adequate numbers of available vehicles to counter them.

 

Most people would call the MBT-70 overpowered because that's what it is. No matter how much factual information you'd like to ignore, no matter how much you want to stick your fingers in your ear and scream I can't hear you, it's evidently overpowered. You're looking at a vehicle that would require the introduction of later vehicles like the T-64A, or even the Object 219 SP2. That's the problem with the "russia has so many tenks" approach to everything. You're so caught up in a non-factor that you'll think anything is balanced/viable.

 

Also, not sure what you're on about with the whole suggestion for the Object 279 or Object 277, but if you read the god damn thread title, I think you might realize that's basically what this thread is for. 

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people would call the MBT-70 overpowered because that's what it is. No matter how much factual information you'd like to ignore, no matter how much you want to stick your fingers in your ear and scream I can't hear you, it's evidently overpowered. You're looking at a vehicle that would require the introduction of later vehicles like the T-64A, or even the Object 219 SP2. That's the problem with the "russia has so many tenks" approach to everything. You're so caught up in a non-factor that you'll think anything is balanced/viable.

 

Also, not sure what you're on about with the whole suggestion for the Object 279 or Object 277, but if you read the god damn thread title, I think you might realize that's basically what this thread is for. 

 

If the devs really wanted to, they could put Obj. 277, IS-7, and Obj. 279 after the T-10M, but IMHO I'd say just adding MBTs and upgraded M103 & Conquerors for now is good enough*.  If the Kpz70 was ever added we'd probably need ATGMs like the Sheridan's MGM-151 as well as HEAT & AFSDS shells to be able to pen it.

 

*Leo 1A5, Chieftain Mk.5, M60A3, AMX-30B2, T-62, Type 74E, Pz. 68/88 (Mk.3), M103A2, Conqueror Mk.2H

Edited by Results45
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people would call the MBT-70 overpowered because that's what it is. No matter how much factual information you'd like to ignore, no matter how much you want to stick your fingers in your ear and scream I can't hear you, it's evidently overpowered. You're looking at a vehicle that would require the introduction of later vehicles like the T-64A, or even the Object 219 SP2. That's the problem with the "russia has so many tenks" approach to everything. You're so caught up in a non-factor that you'll think anything is balanced/viable.

 

Also, not sure what you're on about with the whole suggestion for the Object 279 or Object 277, but if you read the god damn thread title, I think you might realize that's basically what this thread is for. 

 

Sorry that was my bad, I confused myself with the Keiler.  Yeah maybe KPZ-70 on paper is OTT.  The Keiler could be introduced just fine.  REMEMBER the game does not follow real world physics, thermodynamics, crew skills/vitality etc, nor does it pay any real attention to history.

 

The "Russia has too many tanks" argument is not a non factor.  Having 3 mediums, 3 Heavies, and an SPAA that smite any medium in the game makes a big difference.  You are obviously a good player (congratulations) for the mere mortals out there that die in game, having the ability to re-spawn in a competitive tank makes a big difference.  I'm not getting into any more circular arguments, enjoy your last word.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people would call the MBT-70 overpowered because that's what it is. 

 

Actually, re-considering the information given the gun would likely only have HE. I'm not even sure if they developed HEATFS rounds for a 150mm gun, so it'd be just a very heavily armored Brummbar or SU-152 with turret, armor, and lolspeed.

 

But, if it only had the 150 on both variants, without the missiles it would be more of a derpherp gun.

 

EDIT; http://en.valka.cz/topic/view/106089/XM150E5-tankovy-kanon

 

Aaaaaaaaaa

 

Ammunition Used: 
Ammo Used: MGM-51C (guided anti-tank missiles) 
M409 (HEAT-MP-T) 
XM410 (Smoke) 
M625A1 (Brush / flechettes still buried charge) 
XM617 (shrapnel) 
M657 (HE-T) 
XM578 (XM578E1) (APFSDS-T)

 

You know, if they drop the APFSDS then we could probably have it, the M409 apparently pens 355mm already. Jesus.

 

we'd already get that ammo anyways because they plan on adding in the sheridan, which also had it.

Edited by Ruslan_DR
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EDIT; http://en.valka.cz/topic/view/106089/XM150E5-tankovy-kanon

 

Aaaaaaaaaa

 

Ammunition Used: 
Ammo Used: MGM-51C (guided anti-tank missiles) 
M409 (HEAT-MP-T) 
XM410 (Smoke) 
M625A1 (Brush / flechettes still buried charge) 
XM617 (shrapnel) 
M657 (HE-T) 
XM578 (XM578E1) (APFSDS-T)

 

You know, if they drop the APFSDS then we could probably have it, the M409 apparently pens 355mm already. Jesus.

 

Shrapnel would be real nice for killing SPAAG crew xD 

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...