Ho-Ri "production" and "prototype" are fictional

Mess Room
36

. . . bad pictures/drawings near identical, Ho-Ri 1 three return wheels, eight road wheels on four arms. jiro/hiro sha four return wheels, nine road wheels eight on four arms but none of that matters but one fact many later tanks were literally built from the hulls of earlier tanks, look me in the eye and tell me you cannot make a ho ri from a hiro sha or jiro sha , still the site was both wrong and confusin so you get 6.5 points of ten and i get the remaining 3.5 math out who wins

1 Like
37

Lol here we go again with more exaggerations.

You probably mean T44-100, it is just exaggeration to call it a T-55 prototype.
Ho-Ri can pen it from the turret cheeks.

Another exaggeration, it is clearly not the counterpart of M1 Abrams prototype.

1 Like
38

And HoRi clearly never existed.

Then what’s the difference again?

39

Hiro-sha is the proto prototype Jiro-sha (and are ‘real’) which would have led to the ho-ri I II but yeah they fake as hell

40

M1 Abrams will not be needed for balance.

It is just funny that the examples you listed to counter the balance argument are the one that are not needed for balance.

41

Similarly, when you need “balance”, you can’t just invent vehicles that never existed

42

. one SPG has been called Ho-Ri, Hori-Sha, Type 2 Ko-to and Ro-Go :rofl:

1 Like
43

That begs the question, what would Japan get as a BR4/5 tank? In terms of tanks, their designs were designed to kill Sherman 75s so at most a relatively weak medium tank

44

IMG_20241130_014032
What on earth is this little guy, Japan rider class premium material, little tankette :rofl:
He can take down Super Pershing like it’s nothing I bet !

45

Type 5 Ho-Ru - Tank Encyclopedia. well a light tank 13 feet is a bit much for a tankette. |## Type 5 Ho-Ru specifications||
| — | — |
|Dimensions|Length 4.38 m, Width 2.07 m|
|Armament|47 mm Type 1 gun|
|Crew|2 to 3 (Commander and driver possibly even a gunner)|
|Propulsion|120 hp Mitsubishi 6-cylinder diesel engine|
|Speed|40 km/h|
|Armor|6-12 mm|.

1 Like
46

Longer than I expected, suppose it’s just it compared to those giants that makes it look so miniscule. Would be a funny br1 event tank honestly

47

Japan never had a tank on the Tiger/Panther/IS/T-34-85/Jumbo/Pershing level.

Japan 100% must’ve been BR 1-3.

You can’t just make stuff up.

48

without something of a known scale (human) no one can tell scale WW2 German Tank Type and Size Comparison 3D

49

Japan should have never left BR3 in general.

1 Like
50

agreed end the TT at br3 with Type 4 as their best weapon

51

or remove Japan, gimp to br3 or remove hmm which is worse

52

Ho-Ri II was the chosen production version since it was using Chi-Ri II chassis which sped up the developement. Whilst none of the Ho-Ri productions were completed, we know that 5 of them were under construction.

image
image1134×839 331 KB

It has 125mm flat frontal armour. The same 105mm Main Gun.

I wouldnt mind the O-I either since it was built and even did mobility tests in 1943 until it was scrapped for metal later that year.

image
It can also shoot the same 15cm HE as Ho-Ro but at like twice the velocity. Insane amount of TNT and 55mm HE effect vs armour. Will kill any tank in the game and huge anti infatnry blast radius as well

2 Likes
53

This is more plausible than a Ho-Ri.

1 Like
54

WW2 MECH - scratchbuilding What-if - iModeler because something that was impossible is more likely than something that did not happen, so nazis had a better chance to build a ufo then japan building what germany, us, ussr, uk, france could have not calling you racist, not not calling you racist

1 Like
55

Well they couldn’t dig up any better brv worthy jap tanks in wt