Surprise post – The russian ST-I from the test server

Greetings to the WOT-community! We respectfully salute to our 10th thousand reader! For this occasion WOT Armory delivers an unusual report right from the current test server. A new 7.3 patch for Word of Tanks brings fresh blood into the russian heavy tank line. The most interesting among the new vehicles is maybe the ST-I heavy tank. This – by russian standards – unusual armored beast brings the promise to play it like an american tank.

But before we sink into the details

The information comes indirectly from russian official forums about penetration mechanics. User FrankyK on EU shared this with us:

The shell normalisation is really 8-10 degrees. Most shells have 8 degrees, only some shells 10 degrees. Storm and SerB confirmed this again in the RU forum.

  • The slope of the UFP of the IS-4 will be increased in the release version of 7.3 from 58° to 61°. In this way, the IS-4 will be as tough as the ST-I on the UFP.
  • So, the effective armour protection of the UFP of ST-I and IS-4 will be 232mm (confirms our test result for 225mm UFP immunity)

Considering, that many people are interested in not only the armor of the new tank, but the general handling, we have something for them, too. Here are several observations after comparative trials between the ST-I and the american premium Tier8 heavy tank. Why the T34? You will see.

  • The ST-I is small for a heavy tank, the turret is big, although heavily armored
  • The ST-I gun depression is excellent by russian standards. It’s 8 degree, less than on the T29/34 series, but equals to the M103 or the T110E5. This makes hiding the hull and showing only the strong turret easier
  • The tank is clumsy, it turns slowly, aims slowly, the turret rotates slowly. It’s mobility and fire control is most similar to the T34. Only it cannot pivot turn, although top speed is higher. During our test, the T34 had no problem at keeping up with the ST-I, unless the latter could accelerate over 35 km/h downhill

The soviet heavy line becomes more specialized

So do we get a russian hull down tank? A conception about the russian heavy tank tree split can be observed. The T-150 to IS-4 line contains mostly slower moving, bunker-like tanks, the KV-S to IS-7 line is the place for more mobile vehicles with less all around protection. The current IS-4 owners must be warned, that the replacement tanks look less versatile, at least for us. The IS-8 and the ST-I hold their own distinct strengths and weakness, one might choose between them wisely. But they won’t have the fear factor of the Tier9 IS-4 had. But why is that so?

On the next pages you will see, why!

Advertisements

20 responses to “Surprise post – The russian ST-I from the test server

  1. Seeing USSR heavy with that hull down abilty, is weird. I hope it wont spread in any upcoming USSR tanks. Else, USA tanks will lose their importance.

  2. “The bane of the ST-1 is the lower front plate, it has 160 effective armor, to weak to protect the tank even against same tier mediums.”

    Would it not have higher than 160mm effective IF its resistant to guns with 160mm average pen? Note the wide range on penetration +/- 25%. Its real effective armor would thus be ~180 or slightly higher.

    Great work, could you guys focus on all the high tier tanks before moving down to lower tiers? ie. IS4, IS8, E75, M103, VK4502P, Maus.

    • 90mm M3 was the highest gun it could make the 5 shot immunity with. But of course this also means, that it has a good chance to bounce guns with little higher pen. The 50 meter, no angle , 5 shot immunity is conservative by purpose, the closest thing to a guarantee.

      In fact we tend to overdo it…It’s more like seven shots, than five.

      • We know that the ST-I and IS-4 from schematics had 140mm upper glacis at 61 degrees, with normalization its ~240mm effective. Thus from your test, its “immune” to BL-9’s 225 avg pen over 5 shots. Technically if you shoot it 10 times, at least 1 or 2 may roll high and penetrate. That’s my point, its “immune” to 90mm M3 therefore its effective armor is not 160mm but much higher.

        Great work btw!

      • Well it could not do 5 shots immunity for 167 and 175 avg at all for us. On official forums I saw results for 7/10 penetrations for 160 avg against the LFP at 100 meters. Odd enough.

        BTW, right now I’m unsure about the actual UFP thickness and slope. It might be just 120mm with higher slope than 61 degree from vertical (from russian forums), or 140mm, but with increased slope compensation for 7.3.

        I know about the sites selling such information above tier8, I prefer hands on research instead. Anyway, our might be less professional, but it’s free.:)

      • I don’t think the armor is 120mm with higher slope than 61.. just not possible given the model and images. It’s got the same sloping as the IS-4 thats similar to the E-75. I understand your “immunity” test, i just meant that saying its immune to 160mm is the same as it having ~180mm or more effective armor. It’s not 160mm effective, as guns with avg 160 pen will penetrate it 50% of the time. Just a nuance.

      • Ok, then I correct it in a minute.

        I would like to see this blog as a community effort, so any feedback ,correction, remark is welcome.

        The old posts will be updated in time, as well. Just a bit much to do these days…

  3. I actually feel sorry for anyone who’s going to have to grind thru this tank. 185k exp just to make it usable. That’s worse then the T34…

  4. The information comes indirectly from russian official forums. Yes, there will be changes in penetration mechanics in 7.3. User FrankyK on EU shared this with us:

    The shell normalisation is really 8-10 degrees. Most shells have 8 degrees, only some shells 10 degrees. Storm and SerB confirmed this again in the RU forum.

    The slope of the UFP of the IS-4 will be increased in the release version of 7.3 from 58° to 61°. In this way, the IS-4 will be as tough as the ST-I on the UFP.

    So, the effective armour protection of the UFP of ST-I and IS-4 will be 232mm

  5. After reading this, ST1 is like the old tier 9 T34. Hull down fighting is going to be the way it was meant to be played. Also similar thing is likely going to happen to IS4 after 7.3. Can you do a review on IS4 after 7.3 patch?

  6. I wouldn’t call 232mm effective armor a “hull-down” tank. Thats enough to bounce pretty much every tier 8 and tier 9 medium tank without angling, with angle its immune. It’s just not going to bounce tier 10 guns (except for Germans ofc.), but doesn’t make it any worse considering every tank is vulnerable to the new high penetration tier 10 guns.

    • It is, we realized that few days ago, but from the inner statistics it can be seen, that people actually google for ST-1. Anyway, I put ST-I to the tags to be sure

  7. Has the ST-1 same FSH as IS-4? Does it have the increased 160mm or just the 140mm? I think it would be more logical for only IS-4 have 160m FSH…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s