9.15 HD Detailed armor changes

52

Hello,

I have my little thoughts at the end of each list of tank changes.

Soviets

T-46

•Vision slits no longer weakspots
•Raised area on engine deck removed

Verdict:  Still no armor, but at least it’s slightly less likely to get hit.

 

T-127

•Driver hatch is no longer a weakspot (+10mm)
•Vision slits no longer weakspots
•Hull floor buffed to 25mm (+15mm)
•UFP buffed to 58° (+1°)
•LFP nerfed to 29° (-7°)
•Rear side hull by engine deck no longer sloped (-33°)

•Turret shape is now more like a T-26 than early T-34-76 (less flat from front)
•Door weakspot on turret rear removed (+5mm)
•Tiny 0 armor hole for MG removed
•0 armor hole for gun looks slightly wider

Verdict:  Between the better turret shape and fewer UFP weakspots, I’d call it a buff

WdN0xSj.png

 

BT-7

•Hull is the same as BT-7 art now
•Side hull mostly buffed to 19mm (+4mm)
•Hull extensions for front wheels removed

Verdict: Armor is still not there, but can autobounce 57mm shots from the side now instead of only 45mm.  The hull extensions for the front wheel were of notable size as well.  Buff.

T-80

•Driver hatch is no longer thicker than UFP (-20mm)
•Spaced armor on hull side for engine removed

Verdict:  Certainly a nerf, but the T-80 never really relied on armor much in the first place

SU-85B

•Driver hatch and other 42mm UFP spot same thickness as UFP (-17mm)
•UFP angled nerfed to 59° (-1°)

Verdict:  Same deal as T-80

T-34-85

•Tracks add armor to UFP (+10mm)
•UFP and LFP fixed to 60° (was 58°-61°)

Verdict:  It’ll feel the same, but kind of a buff I guess

T-43

•Vision slits no longer weakspots
•Front hull beak is rounded instead of flat
•Beak buffed to 100mm (+25mm)
•UFP/LFP angles buffed to 55°/48° (+3°/ +2°)
•Hull rear reworked.  Overall will feel the same

•Stock turret rear is buffed to 80mm (+20mm)
•Stock turret roof buffed to 30mm (+10mm)
•Stock turret cupola is now 60mm on sloped parts (-20mm)
•0 armor hole behind mantlet is a bit bigger
•Stock turret mantlet nerfed to 80mm (-10mm)

•Top turret mantlet slightly reshaped (buff)
•0 armor hole behind mantlet is much larger
•Top turret turret ring is smaller target

Verdict:  Turret nerf, hull buff.  Probably slight nerf overall, but mostly from mantlet 0 armor holes.

SU-122-54

•Beak removed
•LFP and shoulders nerfed to 80mm (-20mm)
•UFP/LFP changed to 51°/55° (+3°/-11°)
•Rangefinder tumor is more compact
•Rangefinder tumor front nerfed to 100mm (-20mm)
•Hull side behind tracks nerfed to 60mm (-20mm)
•Hull floor side slopes nerfed to 20mm (-10mm)
•Rear of superstructure nerfed to 30mm (-15mm)
•Mantlet area reworked
•Mantlet is a bit smaller, but tougher
•0 armor hole behind mantlet noticeably larger
•Housing roof top buffed to 30mm (+10mm)
•Housing top is much larger

Verdict: The mantlet does look a little tougher, but that’s likely offset by it being smaller, larger 0 armor hole, and other stuff being weaker to varying degrees.  Nerf

1sKcDyE.png
Object 430

•UFP/LFP angles buffed to 60°/55° (+1°/+1°)
•”Edges” of UFP are larger, adding two relatively flat 120mm spots to front
•No overmatch spot on LFP now
•Hull floor side slopes angle nerfed to 29° (was 38°)
•Upper hull side slopes buffed to 48°-51° (was 37°-48°)
•Hull roof is 16mm now, instead of just the engine deck (-24mm)

•Turret rear is mostly 63mm
•Turret is harder to overmatch from the front (both on cupolas and roof)
•Tank manages to be even smaller

Verdict: Buff.  Hull roof is now vulnerable to stuff smaller than 122mm overmatching it, but the new size, smaller overmatch spots on turret, and improved side slope result in a buff.

TF2sa6H.png

 

 

Germany

Pz 38 (t)

•Look at the LT vz. 38, then put spare tracks on it that add 5mm.

Verdict: Buff.  Protects a lot better against autocannons and has a 50mm thick elite turret instead of 25mm or less.

 

VK 30.01 (P)

•Hatches and vision slits removed as weakspots
•Driver’s port no longer creates 115mm armor zone (-30mm)

•Stock turret roof nerfed to 25mm (-15mm)
•Change to stock turret front is a nerf
•Stock turret cupola shape changed with 95mm middle area (+15mm)

•Top turret cupola style changed
•Top turret cupola is 95mm and slightly larger (+13mm)
•Top turret roof nerfed from 28mm to 25mm (-3mm)
•Top turret mantlet 0 armor hole is larger
•Top turret mantlet armor layout is same as stock Tiger P
•Top turret armor behind mantlet is now 100mm (+35mm)
•Top turret roof has bump added through the middle

Verdict: Stock turret is worse for sure.  Top turret is probably worse, but that style of turret is such a clusterfuck of different thicknesses it’s hard to tell.  Missing the driver’s port strongspot sucks, but the tons of other weakspots won’t be missed.  It’s a mixed bag, possibly leaning towards nerf I think.

 

 

America

 

T1 Cunningham

•9.5mm sideskirts added
•Everything but the mantlet, turret front, and hull front is now 6.3mm.

Verdict:  Have fun no longer being able to autobounce 20mm rounds.

T67

•UFP nerfed to 12.7mm (-9.1mm)
•LFP and upper side hull nerfed to 12.7mm (-6.3mm)
•Stock turret is not 19mm all around (was 21mm fron, 13mm elsewhere)

Verdict: weaker to Pz I C and HE

M60

•35.8mm hull roof in front of turret removed
•UFP/LFP angle buffed to 66°/55° (+1°/+3°)
•Front hull roof is now horizontal
•Engine deck reshaped some
•Hull side is much better sloped, up to 55°

•Turret ring is a bit larger
•No more flat 76.2mm spot under mantlet
•35.8mm bump on hull side for turret ring removed
•Turret model is basically the same as the M48A1, but with a paper turret ring and even bigger tumor
•WG is still bad at modeling and has the mantlet as being weaker than it should be

Verdict: Better, but likely not enough to notice.  Still a fatton.

oDBE4Xy.png

 

 

The small countries

Chi-He

•Nothing much

Verdict: Nothing special

Chi-Nu Kai

•Some changes in the shape of stuff

Verdict: Basically the same

Bishop

•”Turret” front nerfed to 30mm (-20.8mm)
•”Turret” sides and rear buffed to 30mm (+4.6mm)
•”Turret” roof nerfed to 10mm (-2.7mm)
•Small parts of front hull buffed to 60mm (+10mm)

Verdict: Can’t bully tier 3 tanks or resist HE as well anymore.  Nerf.

 

Type 62

•Turret armor layout tweaked
•Commander’s cupola is somewhat smaller
•Turret side near the rear nerfed to 30mm (-5mm)
•UFP/LFP buffed to 59°/53° (+1°/+5°)

Verdict: Still shit armor

WZ-131

•Top turret and stock turret have same armor layout as Type 62

Verdict: While not the exact same, it’s still got basically the same changes as the Type 62

Centurion Mk. I

•Beak removed from front hull
•spare tracks add 12.7mm to UFP
•UFP/LFP buffed to 57°/44° (+3°/+5°)
•Added 76.2mm spaced armor continuing off edges of LFP similar to other centurions

•Stock turret mantlet is all 127mm (was 152mm-76mm)
•More of stock turret roof is 25.4mm (-25.4mm)
•Side turret hatches and secondary gun mount no longer thinner than surrounding armor
•Stock turret cupola is smaller and more rounded
•Stock turret 0 armor hole behind mantlet is much less tall
•Minor changes to stock turret elsewhere

•Top turret mantlet gets wrecked
•Stock caernarvon turret is very similar to the new version

Verdict:  About as bad you expected

AMX 13 90

•Hull is same as AMX 13 57, but with +5mm armor on UFP from spare tracks
•Turret changes so it’s similar to AMX 13 57 armor layout (nerf)

Verdict: Nerf since UFP or turret won’t really troll bounce much anymore, but that’s about it”

 

That’s all folks!

Liked it? Take a second to support Rita Sobral on Patreon!

52 comments on “9.15 HD Detailed armor changes

  1. Pierasso says:

    430 getting some love? My panties are wet!




    0



    0
  2. peter vis says:

    why the hell did they nerf the centurion 1? It was never good. The turret was the only thing it had going for it next too the decent gun pen. And wauw! they buffed the hull, it will certainly bounce nothing now just like before!

    Wargaming is doing great again. Ruining the whole british tank line. Tier 10 heavy will probs become a little bit buffed conq. The centurion X is the same as the Centurion 7/1. 1 good death-star and 1 shit barn. A ebola carrier of an arty at tier 10.

    I regret going for the British tank line first.




    0



    0
    • DoctorBest says:

      The 7/1 at least still has its turret armor. Both the Comet and now the Centurion 1 lost so much turret armor, especially the tier 8 is now almost worthless. It’s strongsuit was always being able to bounce the other tier 8 mediums, which have more dpm but less penetration. Now they will be able to easily pen the Cent, while its shitty DPM will make it annoying as fuck to play.




      0



      0
      • HaliBURD says:

        The turret armor is the exact same as the Cent 7/1 after this patch… The Cent Mk.1 had superior turret armor from way back when the Centurion 7/1 got it`s classic WG HD-Sh** all over the turret. If you go look at something like tanks.gg and look at the Cent 7/1s current turret armor and compare it to the current Mk1 you`ll see how much big of a dump this is on the british tanks. Goes from a 200mm mantlet to a 152mm with the cheeks becoming more pronounced along with the machine gun being an autopen for most tanks.

        WG just doesn`t give a sh** about the British. It took them THREE DAMN years to replace the FV4202… And we got a lacklustre tier 10 med as a replacement. Every “HD” rework has taken a big **** all over the british tanks because wargaming simply doesn`t care. The black prince got it`s turret nerfed to redundancy, the Comet got nerfed, The FV304 (The arguably only OP british tank) got crapped on, the GC got nerfed, the 7/1 got nerfed TWICE (Thrice if you count the accuracy overhaul) and is powercreeped beyond comprehension. There`s probably more that got HD-Turd treatment but I can`t remember all the times wg has crapped on the U.K tech tree. Every other change to a british tank, bar 1, did nothing to enhance or change them. The ONLY time I`ve seen a British tank get a legitimate buff is the Caernarvon with the AX turret. We won`t get the chieftain since the British tech tree can`t have any good tanks and the other “Good” tanks are likely to be CW or IP awards.

        TL:DR WG hates the UK tech tree and instead just sit on their hands and buff Russian tanks that really don`t even need a damn buff.
        Rant over




        0



        0
      • Jack Kenyon says:

        Nope the 7/1 lost its turret armour when it was made HD. For a time the Centurion 1 had better turret armour while it was unhistorical and SD while the Centurion 7/1 had its arnour nerfed twice in a row with model redesigns, ruining first the turret and now the upper glacis angle. Now the Centurion 1 is being made HD it’s getting the same “historical accuracy” nerf bat that seems to miss the IS7’s miraculous spaced side armour every time.




        0



        0
      • Teknokraatti says:

        Honestly, even though the British tech tree is largely unimpressive, there are some serious gems there. Cromwell and Bromwell are naturally the crown jewels of the lower tier British vehicles, but Matilda is nothing short of an amazing T4 tank and the Cruisers are good, if fragile, low-tier tanks too. And even though the way up is VERY rocky (Black Prince? Oh God almighty, the pain! And Caernarvon? Not gonna touch that one until I have free-XP-d turret and the first 20-pdr), the Conqueror and FV215B aren’t the worst of their peers.




        0



        0
    • themostcomfortabletanker says:

      The turret was actually overarmored SD, but HD brings it more inline to how it was IRL. This includes both the hull buff and turret nerf. The new top turret is a copy/paste armor-wise of the stock Cent 7 turret.




      0



      0
      • HaliBURD says:

        Since when has WG cared about realism?

        I digress… They return it to historical armor capabilities, fine. But they give the tank NOTHING in compensation. An additional spot that receives 12mm more of armor and slight angling changes does not even come close to even an iota of “compensation”. And there lies the problem. They make the tank look good, Wooohooo, it doesn`t matter if it looks good if you make the tank a POS. They have done this to almost every UK tank and SPG/TD that they have “HD” reworked and they never once compensated or went “Whoops, that was a mistake!”. If they are gonna nerf turret armor of a tank that is SUPPOSEDLY supposed to RELY on it`s turret armor to fulfill it`s role, then they better DAMN make sure that they give it something worth the loss it`s taking.

        I`m fine with “Historical accuracy”, but Wargaming using it whenever the see fit is aggravating. To make certain tanks follow the “Historical” restrictions and have others just forgo that entirely is stupid. Okay, they nerfed the armor to historical values. That`s completely and utterly fine. Just give the damn tank something that counteracts the blatent nerf. But sadly wargamings balancing department is full of turds who can`t use simple logic. And couple that with them being generally disinterested and ignorant of anything but the most played lines makes it worse




        0



        0
    • Michael Hughes says:

      IS-3 is now inside of a maus for historical accrusay




      0



      0
  3. Ares says:

    430 was buffed VK was nerfed, who is surprised, same story.

    Centurion get hammered by HD, nothing new, he is not russians, commrade.

    Su 122 -54 never has armor, so np.




    0



    0
  4. r says:

    so…. the brits get half the armor added for tracks than the russians? they really cant see the bias… or maybe they just dont care.




    0



    0
    • themostcomfortabletanker says:

      Armor from tracks is more based on tier and tank type than nation. Low tier and paper-thin tanks usually get a 5-10mm boost. TDs and meds seem to mostly get 10-15mm, and heavies with 20mm. There are exceptions to this “rule”, but it for the most part stays true.

      And yes, I did just dig through half of the mid to high tier HD tanks to double-check my statements. The lowly Churchill VII gets as much armor from tracks as the IS-6, IS-3, and IS-4. The vaunted T-22 gets 10mm from its tracks and the new object 430 model gets 15mm on the rear hull, leaving the Centurion Mk. I in the middle with 12.7mm.

      Do note that I still think WG is retarded for putting +20mm tracks on the front of the IS-3.




      0



      0
  5. nano852 says:

    NOOOO Not the bishops front armour 🙁




    0



    0
    • Bonesaw1o1 says:

      I too am saddened by the nerf to the holy bishop. How else am I to spread the word of god to heathen light tanks?




      0



      0
  6. Sam says:

    Does the angle on Rudy’s UFP and LFP will be changed aswell?




    0



    0
  7. sirdiealot53 says:

    Ok maybe I had a stroke but didn’t this get posted last week????




    0



    0
    • Rita Sobral says:

      You got WG’s version then my hidden changes version and this one brings a deeper insight.




      0



      0
      • Anonymous says:

        Rita in the next Q&A could you ask for the community why everytime Wargaming dies something to nerf a British tank they give nothing to compensate it? Listen out because the list is long.
        Original pen nerfs last year, every tank with a pen nerf was granted buffs to rate of fire, aim time and accuracy. Plus gold rounds were barely touched. Centurion 7 was planned to get the biggest nerf, 268 to 240 pen, yet it wasn’t promised any buffs. Not one. It also has no gold rounds to compensate for lack of pen. Not just Centurion but all British tanks in the length nerfs weren’t going to get compensation. It was literally blanket discrimination against the tech tree. Tortoise, Conqueror, all the Centurions, nerfed with no compensation.
        In HD centurion 7 got nerfed. We know this, but is anybody going to hold WG accountable for the 9.13 or 9.14 (I forgot) nerfs that they didn’t even announce? The patch notes said nothing about it and it wasn’t mentioned anywhere but they nerfed the only remaining good armour by reducing the angle of the upper plate. No buffs.
        Please Rita because the lack of compensation for repeated nerfs to British lines is getting farcical.




        0



        0
      • Anonymous says:

        mmmm deeper insight




        0



        0
      • Rita Sobral says:

        you jackasses…hehe




        0



        0
  8. Cr says:

    Will Rudy’s UFP angle be changed aswell?




    0



    0
  9. Hedgehog1963 says:

    That T-127 has been a constant companion. The crew training it has provided for me has been great. Best of all it was the first free tank I ever received. There was a magazine promotion late in 2011.




    0



    0
  10. Deano says:

    the t43 is gonna have a hard hit because that tank relied on its turret and the hull was already strong enough but the turrets trollness was what made me love it and if that got hit then i guess that tank is now useless because the side armour was useless as far as some rare tier 8 games but the turret would work in most if not all tier 8 games so thats really crappy news.

    also the centurion 1 nerf was unnecessary i wouldve said up to this patch its better than the caernarvon but that was mainly because of the little bit of extra speed and the turret but with the loss of the turret strength this tank will suffer greatly and with the buffs of other tier 8 mediums this tank and the panther 2 have been seriously out classed their both massive slow in comparison to the other and their guns may be decent but their disadvantages far out weigh their advantages so when ever the panther 2 finally gets an hd model that thing needs some serious serious love.




    0



    0
  11. Uuuhhh says:

    My 430 is getting moist just thinking about 9.15




    0



    0
  12. qwertypresser says:

    I look at all those changes, and I really want to believe that there is plan behind them all. But I fear this is just yet another set of random changes, all without any sort of plan to them. Just like all the other random changes that WG has made, that has gotten WoT to where it is today. One foot in the grave.




    0



    0
    • themostcomfortabletanker says:

      A lot of these changes are actually fixing old errors of various sizes. The T-127 floor buff, VK 30.01P stock turret roof nerf, and Bishop nerf are the ones that I believe could be WG being silly.




      0



      0
    • Shade01982 says:

      Considering the number of players, that one foot is still nowhere near the grave…




      0



      0
  13. x says:

    Nice to see a totally worthless vk or the shitty centurion getting nerfed even more…. Meanwhile the IS6 got an armor buff….




    0



    0
  14. Super_Noodle says:

    >T-127 gets buffed

    it’s already OP, it will now be more OP, and WG won’t nerf it because they don’t want to upset the special snowflakes

    I’m just going to sit back and wait for the E-25 process to be carried out on it.




    0



    0
    • themostcomfortabletanker says:

      A lot of it was expected and I find the new turret to be better looking.

      However, if they kept the weaknesses on the lower part of the UFP, I see no reason why it would hurt to keep the driver hatch at 30mm. 25mm hull floor doesn’t make sense at all to me. Going off of the roof, as well as the armor of the T-50, the old 10mm makes a lot more sense. 25mm hull floor means you’ll need a 76mm to autopen it.

      I guess at least the LFP is a bit less sloped.




      0



      0
  15. wolvenworks says:

    you get a nerf. you get a nerf. you get a nerf.

    EVERYONE GETS A NERF




    0



    0
  16. PUNISHER989 says:

    That SU-122-54 nerf doesn’t make sense, that things needs armour layout buff.




    0



    0
  17. Anonymous says:

    Už se mi nechce ani nadávat, bude to chtít jinou hru. Je to ruská hra, ruské stroje musí být něj ,i když všude na bojišti dostávaly na řiť .




    0



    0
  18. Anonymous says:

    i would like to know why the M60 hasnt been buffed to match the M48…and its a clan wars tank so its rarer, so why even own one when the 48 is a better tank overall?




    0



    0
  19. Big_Chief says:

    i would love to know why the M60 hasnt been buffed to match the M48, its a CW tank thats been neglected…yet again not Russian so who cares right




    0



    0
  20. Oberst_Stein says:

    I gues i can sell my Centurion 1 now…




    0



    0
  21. “fuck you” to my favourite Centurion.. well, fuck you to WG… Because that tank was kinda tricky to play with forced mobility and speed limit 40km/h.. now his only adventage, turret getting nerfed? thats not how you do it WG, nope..




    0



    0
  22. Toiletpaperuser says:

    Now losing so much armour, will be faster than tank? Centurion?




    0



    0
  23. Anonymous says:

    They needed to nerf the worst tier 8 medium (Centurion) to actually make the premium look good and worth buying. The best tank design of the post-war era has now been turned to a steaming pile of shit, because its British and not Russian.




    0



    0
  24. Anonymous says:

    Nerf the centurion?? really?? Russian Bais once again…




    0



    0
  25. Anonymous says:

    Wargaming are short sighted Jingoistic idiots. I’m not longer surprised by the constant stream of biased changes. British vehicles only get nerfed beneath mediocrity. Russian tanks consistently get buffed to ridiculous levels of effectiveness. Perhaps they’re trying to make up for the mediocre performance of their tanks IRL. That’s their idea of good game design. Idiots.




    0



    0
  26. Qill says:

    Please tell me what exactly happend to Chi-He…. :). iT IS MY LOVE- THX 🙂




    0



    0

Leave a Reply