British Q&A


I’m continuing the Nation’s Q&A, this time we gonna be focusing on the British armoured vehicles.

Feel free to put any historical and in-game related questions in the comment section bellow.

Dave Lister (no, not the Red Dwarf guy) and Volketten (perhaps some of the other guys will join too) will be picking and answering them for you.


Thank you. 🙂

Liked it? Take a second to support Rita Sobral on Patreon!
British Q&A

216 thoughts on “British Q&A

  1. Da_Zohan says:

    Considering that the Shot Kal (Israeli modified Centurion’s with 105mm M68/L7 Main Cannon with HESH as main ammo) devastated T54/5/62’s in real combat, why is the Centurion weaker in game than the T54/62A/140/430?

    1. Culloden Muir says:

      Where did you hear Israeli Centurions used HESH as their main ammo? They mostly used HEAT and APFSDS rounds, not HESH.

      1. Da_Zohan says:

        From my father, who was a gunner in a Shot Kal in the 7th Armored Brigade, under The Legendary Lt. Colonel Avigdor Kahalani.

    2. Culloden Muir says:

      I still doubt it was HESH. Outside of the UK, HESH was not in widespread use, nor was the US equivalent, HEP used much. HEAT and APFSDS rounds were in widespread Israeli use at the time. And while I don’t doubt that Israel used some HESH/HEP rounds, and would have fired some at T-54/55/62 tanks during the Yom Kippur War, that would not have been the primary ammunition type used. I’m discounting anybody’s service here, just pointing out that this information is second or third hand and memories and eye-witness accounts are not that reliable.

  2. Oh, another question: Does the A7 Medium Tank still have a chance of making an appearance in the game? I like the idea of a mini-TOG at tier 2 with the 2pdr. Maybe a gift tank, IDK.

  3. Phontomen says:

    Now that the Sandbox is bringing new established roles into the game, have any of you passed off on or know about any new British Breakthrough Vehicle candidates being considered?

  4. Phontomen says:

    Now that the Sandbox is in full swing, proposing new roles for Tanks. Are there any new British Breakthrough Vehicles candidates being passed around or being considered? Now that we have all these new spaces to fill.

  5. 1. Any pics or stats for Conqueror AT with autoloader?
    2. TOG IV – real project or fake? And when we can see a book about TOGs?
    3. Pasholok mentioned a real world alternative for FV215b, what is it?
    4. More info about A31 project.
    5. Churchill with sloped armor – what it looks like and maybe some modules/stats? 32-pdr maybe?

  6. 1. Any pics or stats for Conqueror AT with autoloader?
    2. TOG IV – real project or fake? And when we can see a book about TOGs?
    3. Pasholok mentioned a real world alternative for FV215b, what is it?
    4. More info about A31 project.
    5. Churchill with sloped armor – what it looks like and maybe some modules/stats? 32-pdr maybe?

  7. Michael Hughes says:

    Will the Churchill ever get its famous off road ability
    Scotland flag please
    Will we ever get the tetrach in its rightfull home, maybe with the little jhon adaptor
    Scotland flag please
    Can you change the name of Stuart I-IV to honey or honey stuart
    Scotland flag please
    Will we ever get a Stuart V (M3A3) as an elite tank, or a Stuart kangaroo (You think the MT-25 is balance with +3mm who needs turrets anyway)
    Scotland flag please
    We will ever see a UK light line
    Scotland flag please
    Can I get a discunt to make up for England’s stupidity
    Scotland flag please
    Why not Scotland flag

      1. ApolloF117 says:

        was looksing for scotland flag once when i painted the 215b haven’t found it, tought im the shite , but looks like not

  8. Deano says:

    what ever happened with the english 120mm armed tank destroyer design blueprint that was found (a few years back now) that was i think being mentioned as a potential fv4005 replacement you know because that thing is just totally out of place in that line.

  9. Deano says:

    from a balance perspective do you think that giving the challenger a 20 pounder gun in game would be such a big deal? i mean if i remember those guns have the same mounting or something like that so why are wargaming so insistent on making people play a bad tier 7 with a terrible gun for the tier. i mean its a 230 damage gun yeah itd have the best pen joined with the at7 at tier 7 just nerf the rof and aim time for it on the challenger make that line not just a free xp magnet.

  10. whitebaron777 says:

    When talking about British tank development, the Comet is usually considered to be a considerable step up in build quality compared to the Cromwell, but no specifics are mentioned. What made the Comet so much better?

  11. Silvio says:

    1. Have you found any reports of the British testing post war US tanks? Did they recommend purchasing and/or modifying vehicles?
    2. Did the British receive any M8 HMCs? Did they modify them? Could they be added to the game in the British Tech tree?
    3. Were there any SPG/TD designs planned based on any Cruiser tanks? Could they be added?
    4. Did the British receive M4 Sherman tanks with HVSS?
    5. Did any plans exist to upgun/modify/ or convert the M3 Lee/Grant (SPG/TD/AA). Could they be added to the game?
    6. Would the Staghound fit into the game as possible a tier 3/4 LT?

    1. 3. I’ve studied the British tanks a fair bit. So far as I know there weren’t arties or TDs made based on the early Cruiser chassis. The Crusader 5.5″ of course is based on the Crusader, which was a cruiser tank.
      5. Not so far as I know. The Grant/Lee was a stopgap vehicle to get something with a 75mm into battle. It was then replaced with the Sherman of course…

    2. Anonymous says:

      The Staghound is a wheeled armoured car (and a bloody big one). There are, and probably won’t be for the foreseeable future, and wheeled vehicles in WoT.

      1. Anonymous says:

        That was meant to say “There are no, and probably won’t be for the foreseeable future, any wheeled vehicles in WoT.”

  12. Anonymous says:

    Can we expect to see the Uk Fv4401 Continious (Name possibly spelt wrong) and prehaps the french Lorr CDA As a future tank destroyers.

  13. Was the Crusader ever used in USSR service through lend-lease? If so, did they do anything notable to improve its performance?
    Why does the FV304 in-game use an unhistorical 4.5 in howitzer? Weren’t there any better choices?
    Was the Matilda I (A11) ever planned to be fitted with anything other than a machine gun?
    Why is the Vickers Medium Mk III in the British line a Tier 3? Wasn’t there any better choices for that spot in the tree?
    Are there any more blueprints/schematics/pictures for the FV300 series (FV301, FV303, FV305) and A46 Light Tank Prototype that aren’t already viewable online?

  14. Is there any chance of some emblems based off of British division and regimental insignia? There are some really cool symbols there. *I* would pay money for them…

  15. Swatdennis says:

    Why the Matilda 2 even has the Little John? 122 pen at tier 4 is OP as freaks… Even some tier 6 tanks are cake to pen and do not get started why it has prem-rounds(?)… The tank has good armour too, the only trade-off might be that it is slow…

  16. Also, why doesn’t the Churchill I have the 3.7-in howitzer as an option? It would certainly make a fun alternative for the 75mm HV and would also make it more deadly against potential flankers.

  17. When are you going to stop pumping out Chieftain-esque prems (Chieftain/T95, T95/Chieftain) and release the actual tank that everyone wants? Can you stop trying to milk everyone for all their money, or get them to try to play shitty clan wars that only top clans can actually succeed at, and instead just do something the community wants for once? That’d be great

  18. Maho says:

    Any chance for the 32pdr penetration data? It’s something I really want to see myself, only got a vague paragraph about the gun annihilating a Panther.

  19. jorg2 says:

    Would there be candidates for an (new) light tank line? And would other fv304 like vehicles (high rof, high speed) be possible?

  20. Anonymous says:

    Is the horrible gun depression on the Charioteer, Conway and FV4005 a historical necessity or just an game balance issue, Conway has trouble working even small mounts and the fact that the gun is mounted so high makes things even worse

    1. Anonymous says:

      Often (such as with the Achilles) gun depression was deliberately limited to stop the recoil unseating the turret when on slopes. The biggest issue with gun depression is the highly compressed range of battles in Wot – in reality these guns would be firing from a kilometer or more away where a few degrees of depression wasn’t an issue – and with fall of shot over range you might have to use a few degrees of elevation! With the short ranges in game, historical accuracy is not always a great idea.

  21. Thomas Chen says:

    1) Any plans for a British light tank line up to tier 8?
    2) Will we see the Valiant any time soon?
    3) Tetrarch?
    4) How will the Chieftain be introduced to the game? Will it be in a mini-branch from the Caernarvon/Conqueror as an alternative to the FV215b (kinda like the French MTs or Russian MT situation)?

  22. OrigamiChik3n says:

    Are there any plans to improve RoF of the L7 on Centurion Mk.7? While in reality L7 could achieve up to 10 RPM, in game it has probably the worst DPM of all T9 MTs.

    1. jenik2398 says:

      Yes, but it has got penetration, You know, you can’t have same DPM as M46 patton when he needs to shoot premium ammo to have same pen as you with standart ammo. and Leopard PTa has poor DPM too.

      1. Baldrickk says:

        And type 61.

        Basically, it has 20% worse DPM than any other tier 9 med. And half of them use the same gun.

  23. jenik2398 says:

    Can these tanks be in game?

    1. Will we see the light tanks and the 2nd heavy line for Chieftain with Super conqueror (Turret founded by Listy and spaced armor) in the 1. one?

    2. Will we see 3rd TD line?
    From photo: T53E1 is american tank. Comres 75 is maybe too modern and project Prodigal will have poor gun handeling and few ammo (120 gun L11A7 and autoloader for 36 shells)

    3. what about Tog I, Tog II (not Tog II* (star) ), Tog II R and Chruchill AVRE 165 (gun is L9 )

    4. What about Centurion AVRE? (165mm gun L9A1)

    5. Can we see tanks like: FV429, FV4201, A37 Super Excelsior, A38 Valliant, A20E2, Independent A1E1, AT 1, AT 13, AT 14, Crusader AT, Ram AT, FV303, FV205, Jagdchieftain and Prodigal 3 or FV217 in the game?

  24. jenik2398 says:

    1. Can we see more heavy tanks? IV – A20E2, V – Valliant, VI – Super Excelsior, III – A1E1 Independent, IV – Tog I, V – Tog II (not Tog II bovington or Tog II star) VI – Tog II R, VII – Churchill AVRE 165 (165mm L9 gun), VIII – FV429 (cleft turret with 20 pdr, american 105 or L7 gun), IX – FV4201 (chieftain prototype) and X – Chieftain?

    2. can we see TDs like Crusader AT, Ram AT, FV303, FV205, Jagdchieftain, Prodigal 3 or FV217

    3. Light tanks like III – Harry Hopkins, IV – Tetrarch CS (76mm howitzer or 2pdr gun with little john adapter)
    V – AVR (FV101 Scorpion),VI – FV301 (A46), VII – FV4401 Prodigal (17pdr gun with 4-5 shot autoloader, VII – Scorpion with 90mm gun, VIII – Vickers 24t (22 hp/t, 20pdr gun, wide tracks so good terrain resistance)

    4. Top tier medium tanks from vickers? (IX – Vickers Mk. 1 Vijanyanta, X – Vickers MBT)

  25. Bonesaw1o1 says:

    1. design wise what are the main distinctions between the Centurion action X and the FV 4202, additionally is there any information in regards to 120mm guns that were tested on the FV 4202

    2. How historical is the 4.7′ howitzer option on the Bishop SPG

    3.In an old WG article on British TDs I saw mention of the AT 1 assault tank, in particular reference that It had a turret, but no details were provided beyond that. Is there any other information available on this vehicle

    4. What is the purpose of the ridge/fin on top of the FV4004 Conway’s turret

      1. Bonesaw1o1 says:

        considering I like to drive my AT-2 with the 3.7 to troll the enemy this tank makes me very happy in a dark place of my soul

  26. Okay, some actual questions:

    – Will we see the historical 3.7-inch howitzer added to the Cruiser Mk. I?

    – Could we see the Crusader being split into multiple vehicles? A Crusader I or II at tier IV, with or without side-skirts. The Crusader III at tier V, current, perhaps with added side-skirts (its armour got nerfed when it went into HD) which could be a nice compromise. Perhaps an early Crusader I or II with the auxiliary turret and side-skirts as a premium tier IV, it would require a crew of 5 making it a good potential crew trainer.

    – One more question on the Crusader, could we see the OQF 75mm added to its gun selection? The 75mm could be used in 6-Pdr mountings, and the Staghound mounted a Crusader turret armed with the 75mm showing that it’s practically possible.

    – Another, final, question on the Crusader (I love that tank). Could we see it moved to an actual tier V scout, or a tier VI light (with standard MM), mounting the meteor engine? Some sources say it was able to move at speeds over 64 km/h.

    – Speaking of splitting up vehicles, could we see the same for the Valentine? Perhaps a Valentine I at tier III, whilst the armour might be thick it’s riddled with weakspots (we also have the Valentine AT at tier III), with 2-Pdr and 3.1-inch howitzer gun selections. With the Valentine VIII-X at tier IV, with 6-pdr and 3.1-inch howitzer gun selections. With the Valentine XI and a Valentine III as potential premiums, the former with a 75mm gun and 210hp engine, the latter with a 2-Pdr and a crew of 4 (making it a better crew trainer).

    – Could we see more vehicles mounting the 2-Pdr X-B? The Crusader, Churchill, Tetrarch (if added), come to mind. In the case of the Churchill it would make the stock grind easier, and possibly allow players the choice of keeping the stock turret (as it’s better armoured).

    – Will we see other Commonwealth vehicles added in the future? AC III “Thunderbolt”, AC IV (the actual AC IV not the experimental), the Ram I, Ram II Late (the US tech tree premium is the early version), and the Grizzly.

    – Will we be seeing variants of the Cromwell such as the Cavalier, Centaur, Vauxhall Cromwell, and the A28 “Heavy Cromwell”?

      1. zombietropa says:

        It was actually the designation of the Shermans made in Canada. What you may be thinking of is the Ram’s that had their turret removed and made into Kangroo’s.

      2. The Sexton II in the British Tech Tree is based on the Grizzly hull, just as the Sexton I is based on the Ram, both were Canadian built alternatives to the Sherman, the Grizzly being almost a direct copy of the M4 but differing in details. In WoT it would be identical in stats, although a new 3d model would be possible (differences in tracks & suspension).

    1. The Crusader should be able to mount the Russian speed governor (whatever it’s called, the one that lets the tank accelerate faster but damages the engine), because that’s exactly what happened – the crew disabled the rev limiter, got a load more power from the engine, but frequently broke it… This let to the Crusader having a bad rep for reliability, actually undeserved.

    2. I’m a big fan of the Crusader too, but I really don’t want to see it turned somewhat artificially into a scout tank. However good or bad it actually performed, it wasn’t built for scouting. Making it a scout would put it in higher tier battles and it would not be able to do as much damage.

    3. bonesaw1o1 says:

      in regards to the Australian tanks you mentioned, AC IV isn’t really viable considering that it never left the drawing board and is more or less identical to the AC IV experimental in game (which is wrong anyway, but necessarily so in some parts) aside from some minor details ie frontal glacis plate.
      If they really wanted to they could make an ACIV based on the things that the Army wanted by mid 1943 ie Ford GAA engine, Torsion bar suspension, gyrostabilisation and Mechanical assisted loading on the 17 pounder ect but such a tank would be pretty much entirely WG created as these things never got to the drawing board

      AC III could be viable at tier V possibly, it has better armour than the AC 1 (same thickness but better slope) a more powerful engine (395hp vs 330 on AC 1), the problem is the Gun. AC III was fitted with a 25 pounder as its main armament (not the short 25 pounder as some sources claim, that came after the tank) however they also increased the barrel length by 12 inches which raised the muzzle velocity by about 150 fps. The problem is that I haven’t seen or heard of any remaining records of the penetration characteristics of the AC III’s gun beyond some rough estimates of about 90mm of penetration with the AP shot from a standard length gun (although there is plenty of other stuff about its accuracy and handling, all of which is good) so WG would need to do a bit of balance giggery-pokery to figure out the penetration stats for the AP shot.

      In short AC III done well would have ok armour, decent mobility, reasonably accurate and consistent gun but with mediocre penetration

      1. Anonymous says:

        An ACIV with the proper HP engine would be good enough. As it is, it’s impossible – the 330 HP engine was too big to allow the bigger turret to allow the 17 pdr. So the tank as presented is another WG fantasy!

      2. Bonesaw1o1 says:

        I’m not sure if that’s correct, but if you’ve got sources for it I’d love to see them

        AC IV was initially planned to have the same engine as the AC III (the 395hp Perrier Cadillac), however there were also some tentative designs for a 510hp 16 cylinder engine and a 600hp Michell type crankless engine as well as the later army demand for the Ford GAA. As far as I know the cloverleaf cadillac (330hp) didn’t interfere with the size of the turret ring, but the test vehicle that they used was the AC I E1 prototype (the first prototype made) with the mocked up turret and 17 pounder gun mounting fitted to its 54 inch turret ring (production AC IVs were going to have a 72 inch turret ring). The AC IV experimental in game is based off of this tank but with some minor changes (the E1 had its front hatch removed for the tests, WG replaced it with an M3 grant hatch, also the turret in game is an AC III turret which is wrong, the experimental turret was purpose made and different) so the 330hp engine in game IS technically correct because that is what the AC I E1 had

        hopefully the links work, but this is the 600hp engine and 510 hp engine

  27. baileyhun says:

    Will there be a arve variants off the British vehicles because I would love to see them in world of tanks going around in a Churchill with the spigot 240mm mortar for tier 10 tank due to the calibre of gun

    1. The AVRE would basically be a bigger Birch Gun. A massive HE bomb thrower with a tiny short range. It would have Churchill armour and a turret, but the reload time would be well over a minute (probably 2 or 3, with the turret having to rotate to put the gun above the R/O hatch, from where it was reloaded), and range only about 100m! DPM would be miserably low thanks to the reload, armour would be Tier 5 or 6 at most, speed would be SLOW. It would barely make a Tier 6 version of the Birch Gun.

      The AVRE is not a WoT tank…

  28. zombietropa says:

    A couple of questions;

    1) What caused the 17pdr’s terrible accuracy when using the Sabot rounds, have heard that it was the muzzle brake that was at fault, but clarification would be nice.
    2) Did the 6pdr gun really have sabot ammunition towards the end of the war?
    3) How reliable was the Cromwell, compared both to those British Cruisers that preceded it, and the American Sherman?
    4) What was the reasoning behind the 183mm gun and the FV4005 prototype?

    1. Much of the 17 pdr reputation for inaccuracy was due to tests made in the US where US troops who had never seen a 17 pdr before tested a used, worn 17 pdr vs a rand new factory issued 76mm and the factory test gunnery team. The US factories, naturally, wanted US money spent on US products…

      1. zombietropa says:

        I’m not talking about general accuracy, but accuracy when firing sabot rounds. Even talking with the folks at Bovington say that the 17pdr APDS rounds were inaccurate. And from what I’ve read about the American view on the 17pdr, especially with the Firefly, is that it made the fighting compartment far too cramped for their liking. They did reject a earlier variant of a 76mil Sherman (sans T23 turret) for the same reason.

      2. Its not that simple.

        There were several stages of development with the 17 pounders APDS and not only that but manufacturing issues with getting the tolerances exact on every shell is an nightmare. If your off by a few hundredths it all goes to crap when you fire the gun because the sabot does not release correctly or breaks up etc. It also depended on WHO was making the sabot rounds. The UK or Canada or being hand made in an machine shop as test projectiles.

  29. GU-7 says:

    In the game the Conqueror has the MKII chassis, yet it has the wrong armor specifications, will this be corrected, and if so… How?

    Evidence to back it up: The Caernarvon has the MKI chassis, which is proven by the amount of viewports that is on the drivers hatch, as the MKII has one driver view port, and is equipped with more armor in the frontal regions.

  30. Cruisin' it says:

    Possible commonwealth line? Possibly starting with Schofield (New Zealand, tier II or III), then going to the AC II (at tier IV), AC III (V), AC IV (non experimental, VI), then a Canadian sub-branch: Ram I (IV), Ram II (late version, V), and then the grizzly (VI) then having some place holder at VII (Possibly Irish comet, but as far as I’m aware that’s just a copy-paste), then Centurion mk V (used by Australia in Vietnam, Semel (IX), Then the Indian version of the vivkers MBT at Tier X.

    1. Anonymous says:

      Any reason why you think the Grizzly would be Tier VI? I thought it was just a Canadian production M4 (Tier V) with different tracks.

      1. Culloden Muir says:

        There was a Grizzly Firefly, but it’s not different enough from the regular Firefly to be included. As for a Commonwealth line, the problem is tiers 8 through 10. Wargaming won’t do partial branches at all, and while there are enough experimental Sentinel/AC upgrades and plans to make a more or less historical tier 7 (think AC IV with Christie suspension, better armor, and a much better engine), there are no high tiers. The Irish Comets weren’t modified to my knowledge, the Australian Centurions aren’t any real different to the current Centurions, and the South African engine upgrades like the Skokiaan/Semel (first was a 500hp Detroit Diesel engine, next was the M48 Patton’s 810hp AV-1790 gasoline engine) don’t equal an entirely new tank either. And keep in mind that the Skokiaan, Semel, and even the Olifant Mk. 1, all kept the 20-pdr.

  31. Gernett_scourge says:

    When will FV4005 get buffed? It has really poor concealment poor gun depression worse turret angle and paper thin armor! You just buffed Fv215b(183)’s armor! And it has not only better than 4005 but also better armor than the Fv215b it self!

  32. zombietropa says:

    A more modern question; what do you think of the plans to upgrade the Chanllenger 2 as to lengthen its service life to 2035?

  33. 1. FV3805 HD when? Since there’s the restoration going on [and I know there was some kerfuffle surrounding that even]
    2. seriously, what happened to the chieftain?
    3. any plans to increase the mobility/agility of the crusader? it’s what it was known for but it’s currently the slowest LT at tier 5.

  34. Franco Clarke says:

    1. What would the possibilities of interwar British rivet boxes in the game (like the independent)
    2. Will more historical camouflages be added (plain bronze green, mickey mouse scheme, twin colour BEF)

  35. tjgus1668 says:

    Can we see the British scout tanks in the future?
    If we can see the British scout tanks, Can we see the FV101?

  36. How many interesting FV3xx projects you have found?
    Were there any projects about which you are really excited?
    Are you searching any replacement for Conq. Gun Carriage due to it is fake?
    For which tiers you have found LT?

Leave a Reply