9.16 Armor changes by “TheMostComfortableTanker”


TheMostComfortableTanker” , despite not playing WoT anymore, is back with one more armor change article for you:

-He deserves a big thank you. 🙂

“Through my benevolence, I have made a 9.16 armor change thing despite no longer playing the game.  Once again, tweaked the format a little.  I’ve split the changes for each tank into nerfs, buffs, and neutral changes.  Sometimes, a tank may only have buffs and a neutral change or whatever, but I’m sure you’re all smart enough to figure out what is what.  If you’re not, then that’s on you and I don’t love you.


Frontal hull roof slope is 6mm (-2mm)

Lower sloped front plate is 19mm (+7mm)
Most of the tank’s all around armor is 14mm (+2mm)

Verdict: Now the hull roof is easily x3 overmatch by 20mm spam, but the rest of the hull is no longer x3 overmatched by 37mm and 2pdr guns. I think I’d call it a buff.

Pz I Ausf C

Spaced armor strip on hull in front of turret is 5mm (-15mm)

0 armor hole behind the mantlet to the side of the gun removed
Spare tracks cover most of the upper rear hull (+5mm)
Cupola is much shorter
Nubs connecting the hull to suspension removed

Verdict: A buff, but nothing you’ll notice.


Pz III Ausf E (Was Pz III Ausf A)

Top turret cupola is 10-30mm (-15mm and -20mm respectively)

Hull roof is 16mm (+6mm)
Hull front and side are 30mm (+16mm)
Hull rear is 20mm (+6mm)
No zero armor holes behind mantlet.

Verdict: Easily a buff since you won’t have your armor getting x3 overmatched anymore. The turret front is reliable against lower pen guns now too.



60mm spaced armor strips in front of turret are finally modeled
Cupola is much shorter
Hull roof is 25mm (+5mm)

Verdict: The turret is going to be a bit more nice for certain.

Pz B2

Turret ring is 60mm now (+15mm)
Spare tracks on hull front (+10mm)
Side of hull cannon mount is 60mm (+15mm)
No zero armor hole behind turret MG

Verdict: Really only got better. Spare tracks on the front hull and the turret ring no longer being a giant weakspot are both nice.


Hull rear is 20mm (-20mm)
Upper hull side is 30mm (-30mm)
Hull and turret roof is 10mm (-10mm)
Angled corners at turret front are 30mm (-15mm)

Spaced armor over most of hull side, turret side, and turret rear (+5mm)
Cupola is 95mm, with small 30mm sections (+45mm)
UFP is 80mm (+20mm)
Much smaller 0 armor hole behind mantlet
Hull machine gun no longer in hitbox
Very small turret ring added (80mm)

Verdict: Healthy buff. The hull side nerf at first looks like a bad deal, but I don’t think this will matter much. 60mm at tier 5 doesn’t bunch much either outside of ricochets, so the only new real weakness is 105mm HE derps. However, most of the hull side and turret is covered with spaced armor, so it ends up actually being harder to derp. Hull rear now is sadly x3 overmatched by guns bigger than a 57mm too.

80mm UFP means the armor went from being penned 100% of the time head-on by its own gun to only a little over a 50% chance to do so. Most tier 5 mediums won’t get through reliably.


Lower strip of cupola is 30mm (-65mm)

Turret spaced armor doors are now closed.
Spare tracks at the rear of the hull side (+15mm)
0 armor hole behind mantlet is much smaller

Verdict: A little better, but nothing you’ll notice. The thing is OP as heck now anyways.

VK 30.02 M

Edges of mantlet are 100mm as well (+75mm)
Turret armor behind mantlet is 100mm (+50mm)

Verdict: Turret will get a few more troll bounces.

T2 light

Small cylinder at hull rear removed
0 armor holes behind mantlet removed

Verdict: Basically nothing.


Hull MG no longer thinner than UFP
Spare tracks on front and side hull (+10mm)
Hatch roofs on front hull are 25.4 (+0.4mm)
64mm part on turret front removed
50mm part on turret front is smaller
0 armor hole behind mantlet is much smaller

Verdict: Tank will be a little bit tougher, but probably won’t be noticed much. I point out the 0.4mm buff because that stops a 76mm gun from getting a x3 overmatch while 25mm does not.


Turret slope above gun is 10mm (-5mm)
Engine deck is 6m (-1mm)

Front hull roof slope is 10mm (+3mm)

Verdict: Still no armor, but now the turret is more likely to get x3 overmatched by 37mm guns.

Matilda IV

Turret is so ugly I may want to stop playing it for good
Flat parts on turret front appear to be larger
Cupola looks a little taller

Armor behind mantlet is 75mm (+28mm)
Smaller 0 armor hole behind mantlet

Hull shape changed to match Matilda II

Verdict: I want to puke. Hull change is good or bad, depending on how you look at it. I don’t know how well it works on the Matilda II. Turret was nerfed

KV-220-2 Beta

Look at a normal KV-220-2


Some hull side is now extends over the tracks
Turret part on mantlet is 60mm (-15mm)
LFP is now a 37° and 57° plate (was 54°)

Flat area between UFP and LFP removed
Armor behind mantlet is 75mm (+15mm)
0 armor hole behind mantlet is smaller

Verdict: A mix of small buffs and nerfs. I consider the LFP changes a nerf since the 37° part is the upper half of that area now, including where that old flat area was.


0 armor zone added in gap of gun shield

Hull roof is 40mm (+10mm)
Hull UFP and middle slope are 75mm (+25mm)
Support bars on front hull under gun are 60mm (+30mm)

Verdict: Over are the days of not killing an S-51 from having your shell go between the gun shield and gun

FCM 36 PaK 40

Front hull slope is 25mm (-15mm)
UFP/LFP are 21°/19° (-8°/-15°)
Lower rear hull is 20mm (-20mm, +8mm)

Driver hatch is 40mm (+5mm)
Side skirts on suspension are spaced armor and not hull armor (+8mm, +20mm)
Added a very sloped area connecting LFP to floor
Rear of superstructure is 20mm (+10mm)
Spare tracks on superstructure side add 5mm

Verdict:  Still barely any armor, but that chunk of spaced armor not being hull armor anymore is nice for certain.

AMX 50 Foch

See AMX 50 155. Still adding a screencap though

Crusader 5.5″

Hull rear is 28mm (+14mm, in front of gun)
6mm spade at hull front (behind gun)

Verdict: What armor?


Gun and mantlet hitbox changed
Hull cannon mount removed from hitbox

Verdict: Basically nothing


130mm covers less of turret side (-30mm)
Side hull slope to hull floor is 49° (-6°)

Armor behind mantlet is 240mm (+90mm)
Flat parts are turret front are thicker (+60mm, +35mm)
Mantlet is 250mm (+10mm)
Flat bits above and below mantlet removed
Turret roof is 55mm (+30mm)
Upper section of turret rear is 100mm (+40mm)
LFP is 140mm (+60mm)
Upper hull side is 120mm (+40mm)
Hull side behind spaced armor and tracks is 100mm (+20mm)
Shape of hull behind spaced side armor matches 113 (Not IS-3 BS)
Front hull shoulder behind spaced armor is 230mm
Side hull slope to hull floor is 60mm (+10mm)
Cupola slope increased by 5°-10°

Verdict: Why can’t I hold all these buffs? WZ-111 is feeling very sad now.


Liked it? Take a second to support Rita Sobral on Patreon!
9.16 Armor changes by “TheMostComfortableTanker”

61 thoughts on “9.16 Armor changes by “TheMostComfortableTanker”

      1. zonda says:

        happens to me very time not only OIs mt-25s amx 13ts and every light tank once they see my lower plate they focus at me till i hide it.

    1. Glenn A says:

      He was referring to the fact that the Foch is just getting its HD model and no changes. Him telling to you “refer to the foch 155” is him saying its still the same weak POS its always been since they nerfed that line into the ground.\

      Reallly that line needs some buffs and reducing that fucking tumor on top so its armor is relevant again. The god damn Obj 704 more or less has similar armor profile with a higher alpha gun and it bounces shots more reliably than the foch tier 9.

    2. TheMostComfortableTanker says:

      What Glenn was trying to say is the armor model is now effectively the same as what the Foch 155 currently has.

  1. bograd says:

    While i really appreciate the effort that certain people put in to this, i have to wonder…does anybody really gives a fuck about armor changes to tier 1-5 tanks?

      1. Ragnarokbazil says:

        How about you buff the SU-76i armor so it can counter club the pz2j better xD WE says its never coming back and it has been almost three years now so why not?

      2. TheMostComfortableTanker says:

        Oh honey, if I had a say in these armor changes, I’d probably still be playing. I would also just opt to buff both tanks to further ensue the rage. We could always start counting the driver windows on the Pz II J as 70mm spaced armor over an 80mm plate, then add spare tracks to the lower plate :^)

      3. Problem with PzIIJ is that its armor is useless against majority of tier 4 guns, sides can be penned by pretty much all tier 3 non-automatic guns, and tier 3 non-auto guns can pen its front if firing gold.

        The IIJ is only really useful against autocanons. Other than that it needs to bet on the fear factor to make the ennemy panick and not aim its shots.

        SUI seems better

      4. RagnarokBazil says:

        Su-76i needs it more xD i only play my 76i now it needs the frontal weaknesses removed amd that back one i dont mind the side weakness bit, cause i like a good challenge but meh if thata buffed too kudos to you too and yes 76i i enjoy i wanna keep killing the pzb2s and Matildas xD im just tired of wot in general.. took away my fv304… and now su-76i is all i play now.. so an HD model please for it pretty please.. 80/50/50 id say on it xD maybe some tracks one the front and sides too :p and that glass armor for the view ports make it a Micro ISU-152 again its never coming back to the shopsso id say do it xD thing is freakishly rareier then the 2j. Since tge 2j is being sold 24-7 on all other servers >> by 24-7 i mean on special days they get sold… but ahh well thats a wet dream an HD SU-76i armor buff

      1. Asghaad says:

        its actually 198mm effective against AP, 209 against APCR and 218 against HEAT …
        and thats without angling, with angling it will be 215 against AP and 240 against HEAT … xD

        combine that with 270 effective upper plate and similarly tough turret and it migt actually be the most armored tank at T8 bracket …

      2. themostcomfortabletanker says:

        Whoever got you those numbers is either bad at math or didn’t know the angle of the LFP. While 140mm, it’s only at 45°. Helps that in practice, most people are shooting down at it, making it sloped more.

        It’s 198mm without normalization (HE, HEAT), 183mm against AP, and 188mm against APCR.

  2. So 112’s LFP is now pretty much impenetrable by scouts? And it can now poke it’s front around the corner and actually bounce something? And it can actually start side-scraping?

    Hm… diggin’ the changes. But yea, Matilda’s turret now officially looks like a turd. <_<

    1. This buff doesnt change anything.
      -turret ring : nobody fires there at tier 4 and it is hard enough to hit anyway.
      -gun : even a bot knows that you dont aim at a gun in order to pen something. Only few tanks can call their gun mantle a weakspot. So no change here.
      -spare tracks : the hull is impossible to pen in the first place. Only Mathildas with their tier 6 pen at tier 4 (balance™) can pen it whatever the angle is. So the spare tracks will not change anything.

      The main weakspot (the driver hatch below the turret) is not changed and anything can pen it if they take time to aim. If they cant aim at that they wouldnt bother to aim at the turret ring or gun mantlet and they would autoaim at its hull.

    1. themostcomfortabletanker says:

      The hull for certain. 20mm thicker LFP and 10mm thicker side hull below spaced armor, though the hull roof is 5mm thinner.

  3. rrff says:

    I came here solely to read about amx 50 Foch’s changes and all I see is “See AMX 50 155”. What is that even supposed to mean? Are these two tds identical in armor now?

    1. TheMostComfortableTanker says:

      Same as the Foch 155, just as they were prior to HD (disregarding sideskirts). Only difference now is the spare tracks on the Foch 155 are further back.

  4. “First everyone is complaining that the Chinese tanks are a pile of shit and bad copies of the Russian tanks. Then they don’t play the Chinese line. Years later the one premium tank considered to be the worst gets a well deserved buff.. And the children start crying. Fucking pathetic! ”

    quote of the day……… ^^

    1. Ares says:

      Buff tank, don’t make it broken. 112 armor was good, very good ufp, bad lfp.

      Look how slower tank looks in comper. Tiger 2, VK auf A, KV 4, IS 3 has worse armor. IS 3 ufp is weaker, Tiger 2 same, KV 4 has falt armor on turret, as Tiger 2.

      Tiger 2, KV 4 are slower tank, with worse armor ….great. Lowe and T34, WZ 111 look like crap now…what point of that buff ?

      113, WZ 111- 1-4 has worse hull armor then 112, tier 8!!!!!This make no sense….

  5. septfox says:

    What a coincidence, I was just sitting here thinking “man, the Matilda IV is completely overpowered these days, having managed to outrun all the power-creep that’s happened since it was released. I hope they bring it down a notch by nerfing its armor with absolutely no other changes to compensate”.

    And lo, my prayers were answered. Thank you, WG!

  6. wolvenworks says:

    i’m not sure what to think of the changes for matilda IV.

    on one hand i don’t play it
    on the other i don’t get why WG swaps the hull to a matilda II’s when the name obviously states IV BUT since the only mention of matilda IV is with the game (and the wiki page is fucked), i dunno if this is of balancing or “historical correction”

    1. TheMostComfortableTanker says:

      It’s always had a Matilda II hull. The Mk IV really just means the engine was tweaked. That isn’t anything to worry about. I was just referencing that the Matilda II in game right now will have the exact same hull armor so I don’t have to think or type as much.

      In game, instead of the hull front having a more traditional shape, it’s pointed. WG still has it wrong and forgot that the rest of the front they took off is 14mm-20mm. They also deleted the inner track guard armor because reasons.

      1. septfox says:

        As far as the frontal profile, wasn’t the hull itself actually like that, though? Pointed, I mean. I realize it’s missing spaced armor that the stowage boxes should be adding.

        Also fyi, eyeballing tanks.gg’s current collision model, the cupola looks about twice the height. Not that anyone will ever bother shooting it with the xbox-huge size the gun mount housing is now.

      2. themostcomfortabletanker says:

        The cupola is certainly a bit taller, I just don’t always trust my eyes.

        Yeah, it was pointed.

        I just wanted to complain about them not modeling the stowage bins on it too. Gaijin actually modeled them (but too thick), but they also did not model the inner side skirt on that area either for some odd reason.

    1. -it has no turret so it cant get the turret ring buff
      -it has no turret so it cant get the gun mantlet buff
      -I dont know if it got the hull buff but this buff is not noticeable because the front hull isnt where you aim to take out these tanks, they both have a weak driver spot that can be penned by anything, and it hasnt been buffed. Only autoaim noobs will be affected by the additional track part.

    2. themostcomfortabletanker says:

      Speedycraft pretty much already answered it, but the LeFH18 doesn’t get any spare tracks on the front hull either.

    1. themostcomfortabletanker says:


      I suppose the 80mm UFP, sideskirts, and stronger turret aren’t enough to satisfy your filthy wehraboo heart

  7. Christopher John Caddock says:

    I know that these are just armor changes, but I was wondering if you could pass along to the other devs if they could put the top engine from the WZ-111 1-4 in the WZ-111, since more than likely it will not get an armor buff then why not give it better mobility.

  8. SCARed says:

    what I am realy wondering: I read quite often “hole behind mantlet was made smaller”.

    if I think of tanks like the Tiger, Tiger P and VK 36.01 H, they got HUGE holes behind the mantlet when getting their HD models, making their turrets effectivly worthless, especially for the VK. now all the new tanks get smaller holes … :/

    hello WG??

  9. SCARed says:

    well, the Chieftain may be an ever returning topic for WoT. what I found way more interessing: they get an component viewer (giving you knowledge about module positioning inside the tank -> better chance to land criticals …) as well as an armor viewer ingame (similar to WoWs).

    those two features would be really nice in WoT PC, too!

    1. Anonymous says:

      well i will buy a new hat that can protect me from the rage that will come from Pc Forums soon. some of these features are things people on pc want already for a long time. and the chieftain yea…….. they thought that they would see it first but never knew that they were jsu testing it for console :p

  10. Tom says:

    Something I found out for WoT console as in the last few minutes, they will be receiving the Centurion Action Ten but also receiving the Chieftain in the same patch.

  11. arentatano says:

    112 buff….to much
    WG promoting gold spam with that buff….i mean come on, even stuff like mutz and panther will need gold.

    as for pz3/4…..will pz4 benefit from that kind of frontal buff? pz3/4 is angled…but Pz4H isn’t, and HALF of its front armor is 20mm-30mm.

Leave a Reply