Submarine6

T-84 oplot for T-80's continue???

Hi!

As you know, Ukraine was part of USSR. And T-84 developt from T-80UD (If I'm wrong post in comments) And as we know T-90 probably will be added as T-72's continue. How about T-84 for T-80's continue????(NOT AS PREMIUM)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Necrons31467 said:

T-84 is Ukranian, I don't think people would be happy having Ukranian tanks in the Russian tech tree.

In that regard you can remove T-34, T-54, T-64. Tech tree tanks are from the Soviet Union and 1990s+ tanks should be all from sucessor states of the Soviet Union, T-90 with the Russian flag next to the name and T-84 witht the Ukrainian flag next to the name for example.

Edited by RoflSeal
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 3
  • Upvote 2
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering current Russian Ukrainian relations, I don't think that'll happen.

Seeing as they mixed PRC and ROC who knows.

Edited by WulfPack
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Necrons31467 said:

T-84 is Ukranian, I don't think people would be happy having Ukranian tanks in the Russian tech tree.

it's a soviet tree, Ukraine included

 

heck, many aircraft and tanks already in the game were made in Ukraine

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, WulfPack said:

Considering current Russian Ukrainian relations, I don't think that'll happen.

Seeing as they mixed PRC and ROC who knows.

Good thing we don't have a Russian tech tree ingame then isn't it?

  • Confused 2
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RoflSeal said:

In that regard you can remove T-34, T-54, T-64. Tech tree tanks are from the Soviet Union

1 hour ago, i_ivanof said:

it's a soviet tree, Ukraine included

 

There's a difference between Soviet era Ukraine and current day Ukraine.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's already not historically correct for the Soviet tree to have anything newer than 1991 anyway. I think there will be no problems if a Ukrainian tank goes into the Soviet tech tree for the same reason that post-USSR Russian tanks can also go into the Soviet tech tree.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've proposed this several times. Many people confuse SOVIET tt with "russian", and forget that USSR was a UNION of SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS, where Russia was one republic among many others, like the Ukranian. From the political point of view, having Ukranian and Russian vehicles together in the same TT is much less controversial than having Chinese and Taiwanese together.

 

In fact there are already "ukranian" tanks in the soviet TT, such as the T-34 and T-64, both designed and produced for the first time in Kharkov.

 

From the gameplay perspective, the T-84 series would bring a very different and complementary playstyle than T-90/A/M having better mobility but worse firepower.

 

 

In terms of balance i consider that

 

T-90A = T-84

T-90M = T-84M aka "BM Oplot"

 

Edited by Alan_Tovarishch
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2019 at 10:52, RoflSeal said:

In that regard you can remove T-34, T-54, T-64. Tech tree tanks are from the Soviet Union and 1990s+ tanks should be all from sucessor states of the Soviet Union, T-90 with the Russian flag next to the name and T-84 witht the Ukrainian flag next to the name for example.

Soviet Union as an entity was ruled mostly by Russia, in fact you can very well say that Russian vehicles should be in the Soviet Union tree more than other sub faction of the Soviet Union. Seeing as Ukraine is against Russia today and the fact that the Oplot was literally made in Ukraine when the Soviet union ceased to exist, it makes more sense to associate it with Nato.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, WolfFang2003 said:

Soviet Union as an entity was ruled mostly by Russia

No. It was ruled by a party which did not identify itself with any soviet socialist republic in particular but only with the Union itself. 

 

33 minutes ago, WolfFang2003 said:

Seeing as Ukraine is against Russia today and the fact that the Oplot was literally made in Ukraine when the Soviet union ceased to exist, it makes more sense to associate it with Nato.

That is a situation which only begun in 2014-2015. Since the dissolution of USSR, most of Ukraine governments aligned themselves mostly with Russia to the point that many of them were seen as puppets of Moscow. But even if this wasn't the case, we have East and West German vehicles in the same TT, or even more, Taiwanese and PLA tanks together. 

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, WolfFang2003 said:

Soviet Union as an entity was ruled mostly by Russia, in fact you can very well say that Russian vehicles should be in the Soviet Union tree more than other sub faction of the Soviet Union.

:facepalm: Someone was skipping school when they were teaching history it seems.

 

Soviet Union was ruled by the Communist Party with members from all soviet republics. Just to give you an idea: Stalin was Georgian, Brezhnev was from today's Ukraine, not to mention lesser important members, ministers, etc.

 

13 hours ago, WolfFang2003 said:

Seeing as Ukraine is against Russia today and the fact that the Oplot was literally made in Ukraine when the Soviet union ceased to exist, it makes more sense to associate it with Nato.

 

Ukraine is not in NATO, no matter what certain circles in it want, so it has no business being in NATO tree. And let us hope it will never be in NATO IRL because I can't imagine a more catastrophic and dangerous situation than American tanks and soldiers being a stone throw's away from Russian border, plus all the ICBMs and BMD shield (that can be transformed into offensive use with nuclear tipped missiles easily) being able to annihilate entire Russia while keeping US safe from retaliation. The last time Russia was in a situation like that it lost 28 million people (44 million now, according to newest research).

 

Anyone with even a shred of realism about western politics and military will know they wouldn't be able to withstand the seductive idea for long. As numerous analysts have stated: the only reason why US didn't attack Russia in 90s to destroy it when Russia was at it's weakest in history was because of Russian's nuclear arsenal. Now imagine that arsenal was made ineffective and you've got your troops sitting on Russia's borders... How long will you be able to resist the temptation to attack a country that you've been taught for the last 75 year was your biggest enemy?

 

Ukraine has just as much right to be put in Soviet tree as post-USSR Russia, no matter what nationalists from either side say or want.

Edited by jackTIGR
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

No. It was ruled by a party which did not identify itself with any soviet socialist republic in particular but only with the Union itself. 

 

That is a situation which only begun in 2014-2015. Since the dissolution of USSR, most of Ukraine governments aligned themselves mostly with Russia to the point that many of them were seen as puppets of Moscow. But even if this wasn't the case, we have East and West German vehicles in the same TT, or even more, Taiwanese and PLA tanks together. 

Actually disputes over Crimea and Sevastopol started in the 1990s when the nuclear weapons still in Ukraine was still being discussed by the West and Russia. They had a gas dispute in 2009 and anti- Ukrainian and anti-Russian sentiment are still in both countries. The Ukrainians sold weapons to the Georgians during the Russo-Georgian war, well accusations by the Russians on the Ukrainians mostly. THIS SITUATION EXISTED EVER SINCE THE DISSOLUTION OF THE SOVIET UNION, pro-Russian sentiment in Ukraine is mostly in the East and is just fading away.

Now no one is even sure what to do about these political relations, the denial of the current standing, and whether to include them anyways. It is just a losing situation for Gaijn unless they can try to make it look like Ukraine is more separate from the Russian tree going into the dissolution of the USSR.

8 hours ago, jackTIGR said:

:facepalm: Someone was skipping school when they were teaching history it seems.

 

Soviet Union was ruled by the Communist Party with members from all soviet republics. Just to give you an idea: Stalin was Georgian, Brezhnev was from today's Ukraine, not to mention lesser important members, ministers, etc.

 

 

Ukraine is not in NATO, no matter what certain circles in it want, so it has no business being in NATO tree. And let us hope it will never be in NATO IRL because I can't imagine a more catastrophic and dangerous situation than American tanks and soldiers being a stone throw's away from Russian border, plus all the ICBMs and BMD shield (that can be transformed into offensive use with nuclear tipped missiles easily) being able to annihilate entire Russia while keeping US safe from retaliation. The last time Russia was in a situation like that it lost 28 million people (44 million now, according to newest research).

 

Anyone with even a shred of realism about western politics and military will know they wouldn't be able to withstand the seductive idea for long. As numerous analysts have stated: the only reason why US didn't attack Russia in 90s to destroy it when Russia was at it's weakest in history was because of Russian's nuclear arsenal. Now imagine that arsenal was made ineffective and you've got your troops sitting on Russia's borders... How long will you be able to resist the temptation to attack a country that you've been taught for the last 75 year was your biggest enemy?

 

Ukraine has just as much right to be put in Soviet tree as post-USSR Russia, no matter what nationalists from either side say or want.

Yeah the Soviet Union was ruled by the Communist party which has a fluctuation of ethnic composition from each leader to the next. For example, Joseph Stalin had a lot of Georgians in higher positions. Everyone knows that Russia comprised the majority of the land, most of the population, and the center of control. We could go over the entirety of Ukraine-Russian relations from the start of the 20th century to today, but what is the point in that? Today, Ukraine is Russia's adversary and is leaning towards the west whether Gaijn would assert something even more controversial than Taiwan being in the Communist tree, them being a Russian company, is just a hopeless situation for them.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it astonishing that we have Israeli tanks in the US and British trees, East German vehicles in the German tree, Taiwanese and Japanese tanks in the Chinese tree (!!!)...

 

But Ukrainian tanks in the Soviet tree is considered controversial? No, not the Russian tree which doesn't exist, but the Soviet tree. WTF?

  • Upvote 3
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/12/2019 at 03:41, Flavettes said:

I find it astonishing that we have Israeli tanks in the US and British trees, East German vehicles in the German tree, Taiwanese and Japanese tanks in the Chinese tree (!!!)...

 

Don't forget Israelis in French tree as well. They're spreading around so much that Gaijin should really create an Israel tree and simply move all those premiums from other countries into it.

 

On 16/12/2019 at 03:41, Flavettes said:

But Ukrainian tanks in the Soviet tree is considered controversial? No, not the Russian tree which doesn't exist, but the Soviet tree. WTF?

 

Pretty much, yeah. It's facepalm-inducing logic.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, jackTIGR said:

 

Don't forget Israelis in French tree as well. They're spreading around so much that Gaijin should really create an Israel tree and simply move all those premiums from other countries into it.

 

IKR. Until we get to that point, i would welcome things like the TIran series (any of them should do nicely but my favorite is the Ti-67Sh) as a Soviet 8.7 premium .

Edited by Alan_Tovarishch
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/12/2019 at 04:30, Alan_Tovarishch said:

IKR. Until we get to that point, i would welcome things like the TIran series (any of them should do nicely but my favorite is the Ti-67Sh) as a Soviet 8.7 premium .

 

Personally, I'd rather see the T-80 prototype or something like a Czech or Yugoslav T-72 as a 9.3 premium instead.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, jackTIGR said:

 

Personally, I'd rather see the T-80 prototype or something like a Czech or Yugoslav T-72 as a 9.3 premium instead.

 

Both options are not mutually exclusive. Another interesting 8.7-9.0 premium would be the TR-85, a T-55 with the Leo 1 engine-transmission (among other major differences).

Edited by Alan_Tovarishch
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 23/12/2019 at 14:11, Alan_Tovarishch said:

 

Both options are not mutually exclusive. Another interesting 8.7-9.0 premium would be the TR-85, a T-55 with the Leo 1 engine-transmission (among other major differences).

 

I remember a thread on dev server last year when T-5AM-1 was about to be launched that was full of proposals with what Gaijin should replace this tank that even on dev server was obvious would not be able to compete. And to think that originally it had 9.0 BR...

 

There's also M-55S with 105 gun, composite armor and ERA.

 

On 23/12/2019 at 15:19, Futarrari@live said:

Id love to see the object 292 or the T-80 with the M-65 130mm . 

 

I'm just too lazy right now to check, does the M-65 fire APFSDS?

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, jackTIGR said:

 

I remember a thread on dev server last year when T-5AM-1 was about to be launched that was full of proposals with what Gaijin should replace this tank that even on dev server was obvious would not be able to compete. And to think that originally it had 9.0 BR...

 

There's also M-55S with 105 gun, composite armor and ERA.

 

 

I'm just too lazy right now to check, does the M-65 fire APFSDS?

 

59 minutes ago, jackTIGR said:

 

I remember a thread on dev server last year when T-5AM-1 was about to be launched that was full of proposals with what Gaijin should replace this tank that even on dev server was obvious would not be able to compete. And to think that originally it had 9.0 BR...

 

There's also M-55S with 105 gun, composite armor and ERA.

 

 

I'm just too lazy right now to check, does the M-65 fire APFSDS?

 

I believe it fired APDS , well when it was mounted on the obj 279 . What ammunitions they perhaps devoloped for it later on I do not know . 

I cant find the name of the T-80 that mounted the M-65 its hard to keep up with the obj names of all the Soviet tanks . 

Okay found it , Object 785 the 130mm M-65 was one of the guns tested on it . Says it was a improved version of the M-65 given that it was 20years after the object 279 and such tanks that mounted the M-65 I would think they probably had some sort of APFSDS for it . Says it was a "improved" T-80B with 7 road wheels .

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/12/2019 at 20:50, Futarrari@live said:

 

 

I believe it fired APDS , well when it was mounted on the obj 279 . What ammunitions they perhaps devoloped for it later on I do not know . 

I cant find the name of the T-80 that mounted the M-65 its hard to keep up with the obj names of all the Soviet tanks . 

Okay found it , Object 785 the 130mm M-65 was one of the guns tested on it . Says it was a improved version of the M-65 given that it was 20years after the object 279 and such tanks that mounted the M-65 I would think they probably had some sort of APFSDS for it . Says it was a "improved" T-80B with 7 road wheels .

 

Thanks for the info! Any idea on reload speed? It would not necessarily be same as on 279. For example, IS-3 had the same gun as IS-2, but it's AIMED rate of fire was 16 seconds from aimed shot to the next aimed shot.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/12/2019 at 15:57, jackTIGR said:

 

Thanks for the info! Any idea on reload speed? It would not necessarily be same as on 279. For example, IS-3 had the same gun as IS-2, but it's AIMED rate of fire was 16 seconds from aimed shot to the next aimed shot.

Well Considering there is about 30 years  from the obj 279 vs the object 785 both with the M-65 130mm , They probably made alot of advances for the gun .

It being based on the T-80B I dont know if it had a similar autoloading system or not . Really to get info on Russian tanks you need someone to translate . 

I was talking to a guy who owns a model tank company from Russia who was translating some of the 279 proposals for me . Things youd never find trying to google them here in the states .

Probably the weirdest was a idea to put a 10 meter barrel on the 279 to see how long you could make a tank barrel before it touches the ground when fully depressed . 

 

Seems the Russians toyed with the M-65 for decades for some reason I guess they really loved the idea of a 130mm .

 

 

  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/01/2020 at 11:09, Futarrari@live said:

Probably the weirdest was a idea to put a 10 meter barrel on the 279 to see how long you could make a tank barrel before it touches the ground when fully depressed .

 

LOL! I like that. :D

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.