22 comments on “World of Tanks Europe: Object 279

  1. FUWGpigs says:

    I love how RU tanks have external fuel tanks that aren’t modeled into the game….If these were then unbiased and non-OP Russian trash, er tanks yeah tanks…. would catch fire as often as they really should and have a proper and balancing weakness like German Engine modules.

    Yeah let’s be honest that ain’t gonna happen b/c #russian

    • wouldnt the external fuel tanks just blow up when shot and not do any actual damage to the tank except the equivalent of a non-penetration from an fv304?

    • xxtechmanxx says:

      To be honest those Tanks would then burn outside and not cause any internal fires because they are not connected to the fuel system those are just reserve tanks.

    • Nocomment says:

      External Fuel tanks just mean the fuel pours off the tank onto the ground rahter than an internal fire. The S tank used fuel tanks as extra side armour for that exact reason.

      • Nocomment says:

        tough that obj 279 looks a little underpowered to be added to the Russian tech tree in wot 😉

    • Anonymous says:

      The Maus also was supoosedto have a massive rear feul tank on the back but they didn’t model that either. I’m sure there’s others like that as well. But I do understand why u left that info out, it’s easier to make a point by leaving opposing facts out of ur argument.

    • D8W2P4 says:

      Those are jettisonable fuel tanks and wouldn’t be a problem for the tank IRL, the Maus has a spot for a really big one on the back but doesn’t have it in use in game, the AT-8 has a flamethrower and massive Napalm tank on one side, the T-29’s “ears” aren’t part of the hitbox, etc.

      While yes the Russian bias BS is a thing in WoT*, the answer isn’t stupid gamey weakspots that render a heavily armored machine worthless, logically makes no sense, realistically where fortified to perform the same as the rest of the armor, or mattered so little to the tank as to not be armored.

      *The problem isn’t that they have armor a good gun or speed, it’s the blatantly OP combination of those 3 (obj268v4 is the best recent example of this) while having a suspicious frequency of bouncing shots off of armor that has no business bouncing while being able to drive their shots through armor their gun shouldn’t have a chance of penning .

    • WhiteBaron777 says:

      Because external fuel tanks aren’t a hazard to the tank. A hit to them only causes an external fire, which does pretty much nothing to the tank. Or you know, you could just claim Russian bias and have a majority of the community support you despite being wrong. Your call.

    • Zonda1996 says:

      i hate to break it to you but those external fuel tanks aren’t connected to the main fuel tank so when you hit them the tank wont suffer any kind of damage, the only effect that may occur is losing a couple of gallons of fuel.

    • Robopon says:

      I like how people can make a completely wrong and even stupid statement without using even 2 functioning brain cells and get some likes on the internet b/c #dumbass

      • Robopon has no brain says:

        Robopon, you described yourself excellent.
        “Without using even 2 functioning brain cells.”
        Shut up, imbecile. Even though he is exaggerating, burning fuel on a tank is still a big problem, you fucking idiot. Do you even know that the engine compartment is not hermetically closed? Toss a Molotov there and you will see how the tank will love it.
        Do you little cunt know, that Molotov Cocktails were successfully used against heavy armor.
        You know nothing, bot.

  2. leppy74 says:

    The new teir 8 replacment for the defender , whatever the price “SOLD”

  3. Jurrunio says:

    Arent these old videos from WG NA, with a new thumbnail?

  4. WG better not be getting any stupid ideas… That tank is NOT WoT material!!

  5. Anonymous says:

    Why are you posting this? This video has been around for ages

  6. Anonymous says:

    Dollars to donuts the 279 is the tier ten for the T-10

  7. D0R14N says:

    What not thinking about a SINGLE ONE light tank for British tech tree? Instead of next Russian OP moonwalker…

  8. D0R14N says:

    Why not thinking about a SINGLE ONE light tank for British tech tree? Instead of next Russian OP moonwalker…

  9. Anonymous says:

    object 279 vs t58 heavy

  10. Anonymous says:

    Sure, there are not already tons of OP Russian fantasy tanks in the game. So let us witness another monstrosity. What will come next? Levitating tanks? Tesla tanks?

Leave a Reply