That’s fair yeah. Again, I would definitely prefer a UI change to select Ukrainian tanks instead of Russian ones (maybe we make a suggestion thread for it?). But if that’s not possible, then a subtree would be my preferred option.
I mean, you cannot really make such a change exclusively to UA within USSR. And changes as such were already proposed(?), and given devs are not hinting towards any TT-level changes, I doubt they will accept a suggestion this specific.
1 Like
Firstly I lemme say that these placements are based on what I see as being right compared to existing vehicles in the tree, I have probably missed some things and thus not everything is concrete (as I said in the original post).
If you actually read the post, Bulat I did as 12.0-12.3, T-84U Oplot (DU9) I did as 12.0-12.3, and BM Oplot I did as 12.3-12.7.
Specifically mentioning that higher placements are based on the real values of Nizh being implemented and Duplet being fixed. Along with the addition of modernized APFSDS to replace BTA-4 on BM Oplot.
The T-84U at 12.0 to 12.3 makes perfect sense considering that it would have increased armour and mobility compared to T-80UE-1 (12.0) while having a worse round.
BM Oplot is already at 12.3, and the 12.3-12.7 range is if the armour is improved.
Fair enough on the engine, but calling it a “side grade” when it fixed the biggest weakness of a T-72 (-4kmph speed) is a choice for sure.
That’s fair, It should probably be 10.7.
My friend, they’re not gonna put 478A at 9.7 when the T-64BV is 10.3. I gave it that BR because there isn’t much of a difference between it and T-64BV, removal of Kontakt-1 in exchange for better turret basically.
Almost as if I wrote 11.7-12.0
Good thing there are several export configs I mentioned in what could be added.
This is not true, even with the current values of the 3BM42 projectile in game, the armour is under performing.
You seriously think fire on the move ATGMs will not move it’s BR?
1 Like
I only have a few things,
BWP-1 was license produced BMP-1 and is eastern design and just I don’t think it should be in a western only version
BVP M-80A I am going to argue had a more eastern design philosophy and fighting philosophy, but you could argue it’s addition because it had western parts. Though that’s just more of a Yugoslavia issue
T-72M1 same issue as BWP-1, though if you include it change designation to T-72EA. The tanks were modernized slightly before donation and given kontakt-1 and thermals (would be like T-72AV Turms-t)
T-72M4CZ would have been better for western tree but that deal fell through ironically because the TURMS-T system on that tank was faulty
Change M-84 designation to M-84A4. M-84 was pre-production tank from Yugoslav times. The tanks donated were modernized in the 90s by Croatia/Slovenia.
Osa-AKM-P1 gotta go too
Dana also might have to go. I don’t know if it’s the original Wz.77 from communist times or one of the more modern version today. I think Slovakia donated their version of Dana called zuzanna which would be perfect as it is a westernized version of the original Wz.77 variant (152mm->155mm)
Another option if we want to keep T-72M1 is the T-72M1R from Poland which is slightly more of a westernized version than the T-72EA
This would absolutely be the coolest tech tree. Abrams and Leopards covered in ERA, dozens of different vehicles, etc, would love to see it added. I see some complaints about the fact that there’d be no naval tree, but no one plays that and half the gaijin nations lack one anyways.
1 Like
If you would have read my message at all you would see that even 12.0 for BM Bulat is beyond delusional.
Not only I explained that it’s useless to wait for that but also it wouldnt buff it to anywhere high enough level that would suddenly make T-64BM’s in any world better than T-80UD/BE at 11.0
Let’s look at our options
checks notes - yep none
And yet in other fields it would be just downgrade to T-72B3M in the game. Stabiliser would be worse, it’s gonna be heavier while also having worse engine will lead to it having worse accel. rate; you also need to keep in mind that side coverage is gonna be just much worse overall. Also complete lack of any upgraded rounds (at best you can hope for 3BM46) and lack of lock on T-72B3 has. Although if you add variant with Shtora mounted I could agree on it being “slightly” better, game wise.
If T-64BV wasnt 10.3 I would have put it there. It’s gonna have worse armor, worse mobility than T-80UD. It’s nearly as heavy as T-80UD with worse standalone armor which ERA just doesnt put it up to it’s standart (especially if they fix T-80UD armor as it should be equivalent to T-80U’s armor).
You dont seem to understand how shit the version of Object 478A that you picked is. Time wise composite for the hull was basically three layer without applique armor, which in game is equivalent to T-64A armor for the hull. While yes the turret is better, even for T-64A turret is already good enough. Fire control system wise it’s basically T-64B/80B but without thermal the T-80B gets. So you basically have faster T-64A with better turret armour that doesnt really matter much. That’s way below the level of T-80B/T-64B.
Devs might, but im of position that a lot of lights at these battle ratings are overtiered and outmatched. Why take and play big bars with no gun depression and poor autocannon damage (and APDS shatter) when you can take fast and toxic undertiered beasts like XM803, MBT/KPz70 or XM1’s? And I am not even talking about XM800T or 35’s that make any ru 30mm seem like peashooter.
Too bad you have no granted that developers would ever add them, or not make them into separate vehicles to sell as events or premiums.
You just completely ignored my words.
Honestly, it’s not a bad idea, though there’s definitely room to expand. It would be nice to see some of the weird Kharkiv prototypes, like the BMPV-64 and BMPT-64.
1 Like
Do you have any other complaints besides placements? I am not gonna spend my time arguing over something I have already said is not concrete and probably contains mistakes.
Yes, although those one off prototypes would probably be added as premiums or event vehicles unfortunately.
Tho I could totally see the T-64 based BMPs fitting in before the BMPT in game.
You would be better off just not including BR placements in your suggestion at all if you dont really care.
It’s really not that deep.
Just ignore it if it bothers you.
1 Like
Sadly lol, that said, are you trying to keep your tech tree proposal outside current events? If not, then I mean there are a few other neat modern options like the various MT-LB conversions and the foreign equipment Ukraine is the only operator of.
1 Like
Yeah tbh, while I would like to see stuff being used currently (to an extent, i don’t like the idea of leopards in the Soviet tree for example), I think their association with current stuff would lead gaijin to not add them.
Altho tbf they have added the variant of T-90M developed after 2022 so maybe there is a possibility.
Yeah, that’s honestly one of my main gameplay concerns about adding Ukraine as a Soviet Sub TT. It provides the perfect justification for adding many top-tier NATO systems to the Soviet TT. As much as I see the argument that they could just not add them or add a pre-1990s Ukraine as a sub TT, from what we’ve seen so far, all eras of a country are fair game (see Hungary and Romania). So adding Ukraine provides Gaijin the perfect casus belli to copy and paste the top-tier NATO stuff. That said, there are definitely some neat Western-modified, Ukraine-only systems that would be nice to see added.
Aye, and wasn’t there a leak at one point that suggested they had a BVM Obr 2023 model? So they definitely seem open to adding current-events stuff.
2 Likes
Forum is quite literally a place to discuss.
UPA tanks
who said ukraine doesent have early tanks?
4 Likes
I doubt they would add it given the operator. Also, Su-76i would be Soviet anyway
6 Likes
would probably just be under ukrainina flag
It won’t happen due to political reasons. I doubt Ukrainian players would want to see their nation under Russian tech tree now.
this wont happen. UKR flags together with russian ones. never