9.18 vs 9.19 VK 72.01 (K) Model Differences

Rita Sobral

Hello,

the aberration of nature, VK 72.01 (K) has received some model changes:

More screenshots of the 9.19 version:

Because Wargaming has started giving extra armour thickness to spare tracks it caught my attention given the fair amount of them applied so I went to check the armour model:

Nothing, there was no additional armour added which is a disappointment given that there’s a reason this tank is also nicknamed the “FailLöwe” as it underperforms quite considerably even after the 9.17.1 changes (buff) also, I’m not a fan on how Wargaming arbitrarily decides which tanks with spare tracks are worthy of getting extra armour, it just unnecessarily overcomplicates things.

Liked it? Take a second to support Rita Sobral on Patreon!
9.18 vs 9.19 VK 72.01 (K) Model Differences

32 thoughts on “9.18 vs 9.19 VK 72.01 (K) Model Differences”

  1. “I’m not a fan on how Wargaming arbitrarily decides which tanks with spare tracks are worthy of getting extra armour”

    think of it like historical values in general… WG just don’t care

    Reply
    1. worldsdawn28 says:

      Tiger I and the new Tiger 131 don’t have additional armor from the huge spare tracks covering the front.
      IS-4 / T-10 / IS-3 have a very small spare track on the rear where nobody will even shoot it. AND IT GIVES ADDITIONAL ARMOR!

      WG please……

      Reply
  2. Hokum15 says:

    I think they should offer better armour, HOWEVER, they should be physical on the damage model meaning that though thicker, they will have some bad angles allowing penetrations from some glancing shots as the shell penetrates the track at a flatter angle. But that may just complicate matters even more…

    Reply
      1. Gent says:

        I enjoy mine. 2.7 average which is still low because i had a bad crew when i started playing it but now i do at least 3k

      4. yer, with the armor of a Tiger II that weighed 72 ton and a 105mm gun… Not E100/Maus levels of armor weighing 120t with 128/150mm guns…

        It’s fake

      5. I’d call it an adaptation then, not really ‘fake’. If you’d go by those standards all tanks in the entire game could be called ‘fake’, since i’m pretty sure there are very few of them who still have their original historical values.

      6. Hmm maybe wargaming will replace the vk with a tier 8 premium like the Fv 4202 but probably in the next year or two. You know wargaming, they’re either too slow to make a change or too stubborn to admit a mistake when they’re using their arcade theme as a shield. Can’t think of any other way to remove a tier 10 without losing some of the fans for the tank as well.

      8. In saying that, if the PzKpfw VII was given historical stats it could make a solid tier 7 premium with a 105mm gun.

        This way they can finally make the VK45.02 A and B historical as well as have the PzKpfw VII historical not to mention a new premium they can sell to fund their moonbase

      10. Snow_Viper_NA says:

        If you actually play the Pz7, you would find out the amount of weakpoints on the tank is kinda counterproductive for the tank, sidescrape and risk getting penned on the lower back, drive straight and deal with lower plate pens, or brawl and get smack through the gun with anything over 240mm of pen. Really I’d say it has worse armor then both tier 10 German heavies, but still works out.

      11. PzKpfw VII is number 3 of all tier 10s for % of shots hitting without damaging it losing only to the Maus and the Type 5.

        The E100 comes in at 10th

        Better then E100 and only worse then the Maus cause of unhistorical armor buffs. E100 also has unhistorical armor as well

  5. Anonymous says:

    “as it underperforms quite considerably even after the 9.17.1 changes (buff)”

    You might want to check your sources on this one, just saying………………..

    Reply
    1. leggasiini says:

      This. I dont think VK is rly underperforming anymore…

      It is considered better than Pz 7 and that thing, while not as good as Maus and perhaps E100, is still fairly okay tank.

      Reply
  8. wielorybwacek says:

    – Hey, comrade, the people are pissed off because their unique tank is not unique any more!
    – Da, we need to change that. Make it look more western, so they will like it again.
    – How more western? Like Statue of Liberty? Modern Talking? Queen Elizabeth?
    – No, make it look like Bob Marley!
    – Great idea comrade, i will tell our engineers to do so!

    Reply
  10. VladCelTroll says:

    The Panzer VII underperforming????
    What ya guys high on? It’s got one of the best guns at its tier. The armor on it isn’t by any means the worst.
    It’s just a decent tank. Not something like the Type 5 but nor something like the IS7.

    Reply
  11. captin the classic says:

    I agree with some others here., VK is not a bad tank anymore with armor buff and ROF increased to 3.0. I would say it is rather decent.

    Reply

  12. So I hear a lot of people saying the Vk is decent and the gun is alright if at all anything. Perhaps the Vk just needed some cosmetic changes to up its popularity. I would be surprised to find out the Vk were not among the 5 least played tier 10’s.

    If it is an actual armor change, I mean, okay, once again, probably one of the least played tier 10 tanks so a little love is not the end of the world. Actually, a little meme popularity should be healthy 🙂

    Reply
  13. zeroyuki92 says:

    Underperforming?

    http://www.vbaddict.net/statistics.php?tier=10&tanktype=0&nation=0&premium=0&modeid=0&team=0&battles=1000&groupby=0&fieldname=won_lost_ratio&server=

    So yeah, best winrate of all tier X, such underperforming.

    Yes, there’s a bias considering that it’s a CW reward tank and generally only decent to great players own it. But it also fares better than 907, 260, 121B, and T95E6, so it’s at least as good or even better than other reward tanks.

    Reply

Leave a Reply