Altay T1 (2019) - Intermediate Prototype

Suggestions Ground
1
Would you like to Altay T1 (2019) in War Thunder ?
  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

Altay

Background

Altay is a third-generation Turkish main battle tank based on South Korean K2 Black Panther. Design and development of the tank was undertaken by Otokar with assistance and technology transfer from Hyundai Rotem. Project started in 2008 with agreement between Otokar and Hyundai Rotem for development, assistance, and technology transfer for a main battle tank to be produced in Turkey. After approximately 10 years of design and development, Otokar submitted their final offer for serial production, subsequently refused by Undersecretariat of Defence Industry. Within the same year, BMC awarded with contract for mass produce of Altay.

Design and Development

Altay is product of The National Tank Production Project (MİTÜP) which was initiated in late 1990s to establish independent tank production and maintenance capabilities also acquire know-how for “National Tank”. Undersecretariat for Defense Industries approached Otokar as local partner, and an agreement signed between them in 2007. Otokar quickly set out to seek help from experienced foreign partner for design and development. In 2008 Otokar and South Korean firm Hyundai Rotem reached an agreement in 2008 and development started.

Otokar during Phase-I (Design and Prototype Production) produced five prototypes with ASELSAN electronic sub-systems, ROKETSAN armor package and MKE tank gun. Otokar also produced private venture prototype. In 2012, first two prototypes FTR and MTR rolled out from production facility and revealed to public in Sakarya. In 2015 two more prototypes, PV1 and PV2, produced for extensive mobility, firing and weather tests, which shows satisfactory results. Sometimes between 2012 and 2015, BHT prototype was produced and used in ballistic tests. In 2017, Otokar showcased last two of their Altay prototypes in 2017 IDEF defense fair, Altay AMT and Altay AHT. AHT was based on PV2 prototype and was pinnacle of Otokar’s design. AHT was produced with the experiences gained from Operation Euphrates Shield to create a tank fitting in urban and close-quarter engagements. AHT supports heavier armor, a dozer blade and sub-system which aims to increase overall survivability and situational awareness of the tank. Otokar’s prototypes are as follows:

● MTR, Mobility Test Rig
● FTR, Firing Test Rig
● BH&T, Ballistic Hull, and Turret
● PV1&2, Prototype Vehicle ⁽ˀ⁾

In 2010, Otokar signed contract with MTU and RENK for EuroPowerPack for 5 units. Further engine acquisition block by German arms embargo on Turkey. With BMC’s acquisition of program, Otokar handed over 4 remaining prototypes, barring AHT, to BMC. BMC upgraded PV1 based prototype with ASELSAN’s AKKOR APS and revealed it alongside Leopard 2A4 mated with FTR turret during the visit of Minister of National Defense, in 2021. Withing same year at IDEF 2021 both vehicles were presented to public eye.

Altay T1 (2019 IDEF Prototype)

BMC’s first Altay T1 prototype (labeled as Altay T1 Technology Demonstrator at the booth). It was first revealed in IDEF 2019 after BMC’s acquisition of Altay project. There are notable differences between Otokar PV2 and BMC T1 Prototype. T1 Prototype received long awaited AKKOR active protection system and additional hull armour. BMC’s venture is plagued with engine problems, and delayed production. As of 2022, agreement signed for Korean engine while BMC Power is developing indigenous engine.

General Specifications
Firepower

Altay’s main armament is MKE 120mm L/55 smoothbore cannon which is based on Hyundai WIA CN08. MKE tailored WIA’s design to meets requirements of Altay Project. Main difference between MKE’s and Hyundai’s gun design is that MKE’s design does not have mechanism for autoloader unlike WIA’s design. MKE 120mm L/55 is compatible with all NATO standard 120mm rounds. PV1 and PV2 secondary armament consists of co-axial 7.62mm machine-gun and 12.7mm heavy machine-gun on SARP remote controlled weapon system. Fire control system is ASELSAN’s state-of-art VOLKAN-II New Generation Fire Control System. It was specifically designed for Altay Project and also integrated into Leopard 2A4NG prototype.

SARP Remote Controlled Weapon Station


SARP is a compact, remotely operated stabilized weapon platform with high-precision surveillance capabilities and superb firepower. It can be integrated onto vehicles or fixed posts to provide firepower against air, ground, and asymmetric threats. SARP has ability to mount 7,62mm machine-gun, 12.7mm heavy machine-gun and 40 mm automatic grenade launcher in accordance with the operational needs.

Main Features
• Laser Range Finder
• Day and Night Imaging
• Gyro Aided Stabilization
• Automatic Target Tracking
• Automatic Ballistic Calculation
• Shoot-On-the-Move Capability for Stationary and Moving Targets

Brochure with More Information

Spoiler


Mobility

MTR is powered by EuroPowerPack which consists of MTU MT883 KA-501 Diesel Engine with 1500 horsepower coupled with RENK HSWL 295TM transmission system. EuroPowerPack gives MTR excellent top speed of 70 km/h with quite decent 27.2 hp/t power-to-weight ratio. Although Otokar and MTU signed a contract for proven EuroPowerPack in 2010, German Federal Arms Embargo against Turkey prohibit anymore sales to Turkey. Only five units delivered to Otokar four of which used on their prototype. Fate of the fifth units is currently unknown, but thought to be handed over to SSB alongside their prototypes.

German Federal Arms Embargo on Turkey effected Altay Project severely as embargo blocked any sort of access to MTU engines. BMC went to search for suitable replacement for German power pack, In 2022 Turkey and Korea signed an agreement for Korean power pack which consisted of Hyundai Doosan Infracore’s V27K Diesel Engine and SNT Dynamics’s EST15K transmission. Although Korean power-pack chosen for serial production, BMC Power currently developing indigenous engine for Altay. In 30 January 2023 agreement signed between SNT and BMC for export of SNT’s transmission system, though this prototype is not powered by Korean Power Pack instead it retains EuroPowerPack.

Altay's EuroPowerPack

https://i.imgur.com/hGfJDHw.jpg

Protection

Armor package of Altay Project is based on K2 Black Panther’s KSAP. Armor package is modified and developed by ROKETSAN with Boron Carbide elements to meets specifics of Altay Project. It is said to offer better ballistic protection than the original armor package though further information about protection levels is stays classified. Armor tests was done with prototype designated as BH&T, Ballistic Hull and Turret, and presumed destroyed during tests, there are no photographs of this armor test rig.

BMC’s prototypes have better overall protection than earlier prototypes with enhanced/increased armor package and AKKOR Active Protection System. Visually, BMC’s prototypes have bulkier design with the additional Explosive Reactive Armor units but it is unknown if overall thickness/effectiveness of armor increased or not except for the turret roof. BMC’s brochures/infographs specifically mentions their prototypes increased turret roof protection.

Specifications of KSAP


Armor Scheme

AKKOR APS

AKKOR, abbreviation of Aktif Koruma, is a soft-kill, hard-kill APS system developed by ASELSAN. AKKOR provides 360-degree coverage against incoming threats in both unconventional and regular warfare environment. Thanks to its modular structure, AKKOR can be integrated variety of fighting vehicles.

Main Features
• Hard-Kill Ability
• Soft-Kill Ability
• Fast Response Time Against Asymmetric Threats.
• High effectiveness against thermal and laser guided missiles with multi spectral smokescreen
• 360 degree protection
• Operational Against Multiple Threats

AKKOR Modules

ASELSAN AKKOR Brochure (In Turkish)

Spoiler

SSB Brochure (In Turkish)

Spoiler

AKKOR Info Video

Spoiler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwJzsLhSOgI

Similarities/Differences highlighted:

Between T1 (2019) and (2021)
• Angular Armor of Turret Sides
• Arrangement of Sensors and Cameras

Photograph of T1 (2021) for Reference

Spoiler

Between T1 (2019) and PV2
• AKKOR APS
• Arrangement of Sensors and Cameras
• Slat Armor to Back-Sides of Hull and Turret
• Additional Armor to Hull Sides

Photograph of PV2 for Reference

Spoiler

Otokar’s Altay Brochure

Spoiler

Specifications

  • Crew: 4
  • Dimensions and Weight
    • Mass: 65 Tons
    • Length: 7.3 m
    • Width: 3.9 m
    • Height: 2.6 m
  • Armament
    • Main Armament: MKE 120mm L/55 Smoothbore Cannon
    • Secondary Armament:
      • Co-Axial FN MAG 7.62mm Machine Gun
      • SARP Remotely Controlled Weapon Station Mounted M2HB 12.7mm Heavy Machine-Gun
    • Ammunition Capacity
      ∙ 40 Tank Rounds
      ∙ 10,000 7.62mm Co-Axial Machine-Gun
      ∙ 3,200 12.7mm Machine-Gun Rounds ˀ
  • Mobility
    • Engine: MTU MT883 KA-501, Diesel Engine 1500 Horsepower
    • Transmission: ENK HSWL 295TM Automatic Transmission, 5 Forward, 3 Reverse
    • Suspension: In-Arm
    • Maximum Speed: 70 km/h
    • Power to Weight: 23 hp/t
  • Protection
    • Armor:
      ∙ ROKETSAN Boron Carbide Armor Based on KSAP
      ∙ Explosive Reactive Armor
      ∙ Slat Armor
    • Active/Passive Protection System: AKKOR
    • Smoke Grenades: 16x
  • Accessories
    • Night Sight
      ∙ Gunner
      ∙ Commander
      ∙ Driver
    • Thermal Sight
      ∙ Gunner
      ∙ Commander
      ∙ Driver
    • CITV
    • Spall Liner
    • Laser Range Finder
    • Laser Warning Receiver
    • 360° Close Range Surveillance System
    • Hunter-Killer Capacity (Commander’s Override)

Implementation to War Thunder

All of the Altay variants/models should be reserved for future Turkish Ground Forces Tech Tree. Altay T1 (2019) with its high level of protection and firepower would be pinnacle of Main Battle Tank Branch. BR-wise I would say it would fit around somewhere between 11.7 to 12.0 Battle Rating.

Additional Photos

Spoiler

Videos

IDEF 2019

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLiZYIuFQIY

TEKNOFEST 2019

https://youtu.be/mKYPMQPenjM

Sources

Spoiler

Altay (main battle tank) - Wikipedia. - General Info

https://www.military-today.com/tanks/altay.htm - General Info

https://www.army-technology.com/projects/altaymainbattletank/ - General Info

https://www.armyrecognition.com/turkey_turkish_heavy_armoured_tanks_uk/altay_turkish_main_battle_tank_vehicle_technical_data_sheet_specifications_description_pictures_uk.html - General Info

Otokar Altay - General Info

Altay main battle tank (2012) - General Info

Altay Ana Muharebe Tankı – Millisavunma.com - General Info

MKE 120 mm gun - Wikipedia - MKE 120 mm L/55

ALTAY zırhında mükemmel uyum | SavunmaSanayiST - Armor

ALTAY Tankının En Büyük Silahı - Bor Karbür, Boron Karbid (B4C) Zırh - Armor

Altay Tankının Özellikleri | Turkish Defence Agency. - Armor

https://archive.md/dFVf7 - KSAP

http://samyangct.com/eng/lab/?ckattempt=3. - KSAP

MKE 120 mm gun - Wikipedia - MKE 120 mm L/55

ALTAY Tankı'nın şanzımanı için Kore ile sözleşme imzalandı - Agreement between SNT and BMC for SNT’s Transmission System

https://twitter.com/ssysfakb/status/1124257431293431808 - Altay T1 IDEF 2019

https://www.savunmasanayist.com/bmc-arifiyede-ilk-altay-tankini-uretti/ - BMC’s First Altay

BMC - ALTAY TANKI - Spall Liner
BMC - Spall Liner

Altay Suggestions’ List

Altay AHT

Altay AHT - Urban Operation Specialist

Altay FTR

Altay FTR - One Step Further

Altay MTR

Altay MTR - First Prototype

Altay PV1

Altay PV1 - Initial Prototype

Altay PV2 (2015)

Altay PV2 (2015) - Second Twin

Altay PV2 (2017)

Altay PV2 (2017) - Final Prototype

Altay T1 (2019)

Altay T1 (2019) - Intermediate Prototype

Altay T1 (2021)

Altay T1 (2021) - Combat Ready

Altay FTR (2023)

Altay FTR (2023) - Factory "New"

Altay T1 (BATU)

W.I.P

Altay T1

W.I.P

1 Like
2

I do think that it should be added but to a pre-existing tech tree. I don’t personally want another copy paste tech tree with their own MBT‘s 🇮🇱👀

1 Like
3

Thank you for support, I think you might want to check out Turkish Ground Forces Tech Tree Suggestion, it is far from being copy paste.

2 Likes
4

fine vehicle, definitely could be added as part of a turkish subtree to another nation. Adding it to a prespective independant turkish ground tree would be negative for the vehicle as it would only be played by a tiny portion of the playerbase and would suffer from having no cas, and worse crew skills than all the other nations. If you want to see this vehicle and vehicles like it represented well and enjoyed in war thunder it makes no sense to add a completely new tree for people to have to grind through, wheras if you add it as a subtree then it will be played by a much larger portion of the playerbase, and will be much more enjoyable to play as it will have good lineups, and your crew skills will be on par with the players around you.

2 Likes
5

First off, thank you for support

I’m not sure why it would be played by tiny portion though ? Why would player base purposefully avoid grinding the Turkish Tech Tree ?

That is just not true, hypothetical Turkish Air/Helicopter Tech Tree would be as much competitive as the other, sure not on the level of US or Soviet but still. Turkey has fixed-wing aircraft armed with variety of guided bombs, fire-and-forget missiles and air-to-ground missiles. Rotary-wing aircraft is even better than fixed-wing ones with more unique stuff both in helicopter and armament department.

That bring up quite a few times back then, my position stands still, where would you put Turkish Sub-Tree then ? Sure M60T could go Israel or US, what about Altay ? It has nothing to with the any nations represented in the game, what about quite large section of wheeled-vehicles, again has no ties to nations in War Thunder whatsoever. I also suggest you to check Turkish Ground Forces Tech Tree Suggestion, we could argue it there.

What makes you think standalone Turkish Tech Trees won’t have proper line-ups ? There are quite a few back-up Main Battle Tanks including M60Ts and Altay prototypes as well as Leopard modernisations, selection of wheeled vehicles with tons of different armament options to fit your play-style, one of the most competitive anti-air branch and dedicate modern ATGM carriers. There would be more then two different helicopter options to pick from to complement your line-ups and decent selection of aircrafts.

I do understand your point, do not get me wrong but that my perspective to things. I highly suggest you to have a visit to Tech Tree Suggestion post then we can argue further. And again, thank you for well constructed criticism

1 Like
6

I have had a look at the proposal post, i left a comment in a similar vein on it.

The same reason very few people play the Israel TT. The lineups are poor, and do not have a good mix of AA, light tanks, tank destroyers and Medium tanks/MBT’s. Also not having a rank 1-3 means that your crew skill are notably worse than all the other people you will face, as they have had to play through 3 ranks already to get there. As it stands, there is not air tree as part of the proposal. if there was added, again it would likely not have a rank 1-3 and i have a suspicion that many of the early vehicles would be inferior versions of other nations vehicles or trainers, which have a plethora of issues in game.

Wherever it would improve a nation currently. Italy would be a fine place for it as it could suppliment their existing vehicles at top teir, where they are noticably inferior to all other nations

The fact is that people do not generally play more than 2 nations in the game. there are people like me who play all the nations but i am in the minority. next time you are in a match just look at the amount of people playing israel. if you want these turkish vehicles to be played and enjoyed, they would be better placed in an existing tech tree that already has a playerbase, that can be combinedwith the turkish playerbase.

7

That part is kind of on Gaijin though, plus our proposal does not have such issue, again there is wide selection of vehicles from dedicate ATGM carriers to wheeled support vehicles, anti-air section is also competitive especially at the top tier.

Thats fair, I’m not fan of low tiers in current tree, higher ranks where the things gets interesting so there is that.

It is, never said we do not have air. Both fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircrafts have their own dedicate trees. Helicopter tree is pending right now, aircraft will follow soon. Considering high tier is the where Tech Tree shines, CAS is not a problem there is at least one CAS option for per line-up.

That is a flawed logic, no ? Italian-Turkish relation on every level falls flat, it makes zero sense to add vehicles just because that nation needs them.

That is a perspective, but again there is a proposal with solid line-ups. Why would you waste a potential.

8

How is it a waste to add it to another nation. Like with israel and all the other minor nations, a smaller percentage of the playerbase would play it, it is more of a waste to have less play it by making it an independant tree than to have it as a subtree where more people can play and enjoy the vehicles.

In real life relations should have no bearing on what gets added to war thunder. what matters is the player experience, which would be improved with turkey being added as a subtree.

9

It is a waste of potential, that is how it is a waste. A nation receiving a vehicle that has nothing to with them just so said nation can complete its line-ups ? Specially talking about Turkish Ground Forces Tech Tree (same could be said for similar trees such as Ukraine, Korea, Spain, Yugoslavia and many more), has more than enough vehicles, combined ground, aviation and helicopter, to have competitive line-ups on top of having unique and interesting options. Again, yes it is a waste because you left out actually interesting stuff for the sake of adding few main battle tanks.

Let’s chuck all the vehicles into one tree than shall we ? That not right, every nation has a player base because people want to experiences different play styles and vehicles. You cannot make it work by throwing irrelevant stuff into other trees. Sure some nation might not have chance to make their own standalone tree exactly perfect, those nation are better added as sub-tree no denying on that but claiming Israel would be better of sub-tree makes no sense.

That is also not correct. Other nations vehicles implemented to another nation’s Tech Tree always had some sort of connection between two nations. At very early stage Germany received Italian vehicles due to their historical ties, Britain received/receiving Commonwealth vehicles again due to their ties, Sweden receiving other Nordic countries due to their historical and current ties. Only exception I can think of addition of Merkava to US Tech Tree and maybe Soviet receiving Czech vehicles. Even that could justified with Warsaw Pact relations although I would not support it.

It was never purely about in-game balance and experience, that is irrelevant when it comes to vehicle implementation.

1 Like
10

What does this mean. What potential. the potential for some more vehicles to be added? subtree solves that, potential for unique vehicles to be enjoyed by lots of players? subtree provides a better solution for this. There is no reason to add this as an independant nation other than you arbritrarily wanting it to be. if it were added as a subtree i would want them to add the majority of the tree proposed, not just the MBT’s, i am not suggestin you leave out anything from the proposed tree apart from maybe some of the copy paste vehicles at the beggining.

Not what i am saying.

this maybe true when people are choosing a second or 3rd tt to play, but most people just go with interest when choosing the first tree to play, which is why america, russia and germany have the biggest playerbase. The minor nations have dedicated playerbases because of nationalism, which would be the same for a proposed turkish tt. That is fine, but what reason is there for a person new to the game, to pick this turkish tech tree over any other nation. There is simply no good reason to play it over something like germany, and the same could be said for all the other minor nations.

Yes you can, the south african subtree fits well into the british tree, and has fiilled plenty of gaps in the tree with AA’s and light tanks. Wether or not the specific vehicles have any ties to the UK has no bearing on war thunder, there are french vehicles in that subtree, some vehicles with russian guns and so on.

I dont know if you have played israel, but it is a shit tree. The air tree is largely copy paste, the ground tree lacks proper lineups with light tanks and AA’s and their top teir literally has no capable aa it can use, at the place where cas is most powerful. The majority of the tree is just MBT’s, and most of them are just M60’s with either a new round or a bit more era, or thermals and so on. it is a chore to actually play the tree and spade the vehicles, it should never have been added as an independant tree, and that is shown by the tiny amount of people who actually play it.

The Keyword in what i said, is “should”. in the past it has been that there is generally a connection, not always, but most of the time. What i said, is that it should not need to be linked to a nation to be added to that nation. vehicles should be added to improve player experience, with balance in mind when they are added. In war thunder, they will continue to add vehicles, so it is not a question of if, but when and should the vehicle be added. there are plenty of vehicles not suited to war thunder.

Either way, you have completely ignored what i said about the issues with crew skills and the simple fact that if added, only a tiny portion of the playerbase would ever play it. What is the point of adding a new tree in a way that very few people would play. Also, can you give one valid reason it should not be added to an existing tree.Lets say for arguments sake, “It is a waste of potential” is not a valid reason, and neither is “There are no real life ties to x nation”.

11

No ? It only mixes unrelated vehicles with each other. Sub-Trees should have some sort of relations with main trees.

Thats literally what are you doing too, you arbitrary wanting Sub-Trees to fix other nations problems. I on the other hand want every nation with enough capacity to have their own trees. Different perspective yet you calling other one arbitrary. Whatever you say I suppose ?

That would overwhelm the other tree, what is the point of making Sub-Tree if you have enough vehicles. Sub-Trees would only work if one nations simply does not have enough vehicles to form a Tech Tree.

Again I’m saying that would not work. Lets take example of Italy. If we leave out all the literal copy-paste vehicles, there would something like 90-100 vehicles left. There is still more Anti-Air vehicles, more dedicate ATGM/Anti-Tank vehicles, more main battle tanks and equalish number of light vehicles. Addition of Turkish vehicles in the way we proposed simply outnumbers Italian Tech Tree, and overwhelms it. What is the point of grinding Italian Tree if I’m not going to play any ? It is not like Italy does not have their own options, go see their suggestions there is more than enough to fill their gaps.

No, minor nations generally have smaller playerbase because they do not offer competitive vehicles, especially at top tier. Italy and Japan severely lacking anti-air vehicles, France’s main battle tanks got power creept etc. etc. You are talking with the data you don’t have.

That is literally your opinion and acting like it is a fact. Current Tree has interesting vehicles that other Trees currently don’t have.

Same as above, your opinion, that is not a fact. Plus there is nothing wrong with a Swedish/Finns to play Leopard operated by his own nation. This comes to chugging all the nations into few Trees to avoid grinding. On Gaijin’s side that is also not profitable, you can just use your already bought premium to grind them instead of buying brand-new one.

Gaijin planning to turn British Tech Tree to a prototype-Commonwealth Tech Tree, addition of South Africa, Indian T-90, and Australian vehicles all supports that. South African Army employs said French vehicle and Russian armed trucks thus made it into the Tree. Same with Sweden. Connections, relations and ties are important for Sub-Trees and they should in my opinion too.

That is again your opinion, I quite like Israeli Tech Tree, their implementation is flawed though there is no denying on that.

Fair, Ground is interesting enough for me. You need to compromise, and fine with that, you might not.

Israeli do have proper vehicles to fix that problem and make a fleshed Light Tank Branch. There are number of M113 modernisations, different version of Achzarit, Eitan and Namer, PT-76 and AMX-13 modernisations, tracked and wheeled Sabrah Light Tank with Tracked and Wheeled options. Those are more than enough to compliment Israeli line-ups, it is implementation what is wrong not the Israeli Tech Tree.

You are not well-versed and talking bold here. MIM-72 can solve issue around 8.0-9.0 while SPYDER and HVSD/ADAMS can solve top tier’s issue of not having SPAA.

And your point ? I’m fine with addition of said vehicles, yet again problem is not the Tree or vehicles it is the implementation. Gaijin should’ve folded much of the Magachs’. Leaving out of individual variants are just not the way, we have gazillion of T-34 and Shermans.

You simply don’t need to spade those vehicles if you don’t like, even you can skip them altogether that is not valid point.

My earlier statements stands still, people does not play not because it is a minor nation. People does not play because of lack of competitive vehicles and that is purely on implementation, I pointed out and can point out vehicles that could fit Israeli Tech Trees’s problems.

Your opinion, not facts. Can respect them but please stop talking like it is a hard fact.

It is quite literally the trend, there is very few vehicles to point out as exceptions, Merkava on US and Hunter on Germany are the only two solid examples I can come up with.

I see that point and I’m saying it should because it makes no sense otherwise which is my opinion.

It cannot be the sole reason, I gave Italian-Turkish examples a little above it makes no sense in any point. There has always been a connection between two nations in one way or another. Our suggestion is not few vehicles, if it was I would be happy to see M60T in Israel or US but there is a lot more than that, same goes of Israel, Ukraine, Korea, Spain, Yugoslavia etc. My points is stands the same for much of the possible additions.

No I did not, because it is the only valid point you’ve made. Why would I argue everything you say, it is valid thus I cannot say anything otherwise.

This one however, yeah just your opinion.

Not having relations is valid though, you just don’t accept it as you have different opinion. Italian-Turkish cooperation in defense industry limited it is even less then Israel, US even Germany. Italy has nothing to with Altay project whatsoever, and that applies for Light Vehicles, Anti-Air and Anti-Tank/ATGMs. Italy got T129 because it was based off Mangusta platform, again they received F-104G because Turkish F-104G bough from Italian production lines and that is it nothing more.

Another point is, propped Turkish Ground Forces Tech Tree has literally everything any other tree has, even whatever US, Germany and USSR offers:

  • Fully Fleshed Light Vehicle Branch,
    • Wheeled and Tracked Options
    • Armaments Ranging from Auto-Cannons to Tank-Cannons
    • Complimentary Laser-Guided and Fire-and-Forget ATGMs
    • Almost All of Them Turkish Designed Platforms

  • Two Complete Main Battle Tank Branches
    • Unique Designs and Modernisations
    • Offers Different Play-Styles
    • Solid Back-Ups

  • Rich Anti-Air Branch
    • Unique Platforms
    • Unique Weapons Systems
    • Fully-Fleshed has Every Type of Weaponry Needed
    • Meets Needs of Pretty Much Every Line-Up

  • A Dedicate Anti-Tank/ATGM Branch
    • Unique Options
    • Competitive Vehicles
    • Indigenous Platforms on Weapons Systems
    • Enough Vehicles to Satisfy Different Play-Styles

  • On Top of Them, Unique Sub-Tree and Variety of Different Premiums.

At this point, you are objecting sake of objecting. We can just agree to disagree there is no point of arguing further.

1 Like
12

Why?

image
I want it to be a subtree, for a reason. that reason is so that it can improve the player experience of the tree it is added to, and improve the experience of playing the subtree with more vehicles for lineups and cas. By its definition, this is not arbitrary. You wanting it to be independant tree because potential that you wont really explain or define, and nationalism, which is quite literally a personal whim. which makes it arbitrary.

it would become a more complete tree, with more vehicles, better lineups, better cas options, and better crew skills, saying it would “overwhelm” the tree is compltely meaningless.

To lessen the grind for players, improve the player experience for the tree it gets added to, it gives more, better lineups, better cas options, and better crew skills for the tree. Are you not reading what i am saying before responding or just not understanding?

Britain has plenty of vehicles to fill the gaps, and yet the south african subtree was added anyway and still works very well, same with the finnish subtree, sweden had plenty of MBT’s and the finnish ones just made the lineups better and more complete. It has worked in game already and would with other nations.

This is a moot comment, because it alreadyt has worked in game, go have a look at the south african subtree and the finnish subtree.

you dont have a rank 1-3. your proposed tree has its first vehicle at 4.7, then the next vehicle at 5.7, then 2 at 6.0. the first actual lineup is at 7.3. If there end up more turkish vehicles in the italian tree, that is still fine, you can just call it the Turkish and italian tree, however obviously they will not just implement 90 vehicles for a single tree in one update, so it would most likely be added in sections, along with more italian vehicles over multiple updates.

The point of the game is to play the vehicles in the game, not to rush to your favourite vehicle and only play that vehicle or few vehicles. If this was the case then gaijin would just let you research any vehicle you want right from the start of the game.

this is simply not true in many cases, sweden has the second best top teir in the game, britain hasa very capable top teir and so does china. Italies top teir struggles, which would be nicely fixed with a turkish subtree, and japan’s issues could be solved with other subtrees. the french Leclercs are still very capable vehicles same as the challengers, they are not as good as a leopard 2A6, but nothing in the game is.

every tree has unique and interesting vehicles, even the Israel tree has a couple. If you come into the game not really knowing anything about armoured vehicles, like more and more players are, what reason is there to, for example, play israel over germany. There is no reason, there are only reasons not to

I want you to name a single reason, that is not arbitrary.

More people but more premiums to grind italy, as opposed to a much smaller amount of people buying a new premium for a new tree, if you add the premiums from the subtree then people buy those premiums as well. truthfully, only gaijin knows what is profitable for them, as they have already added subtrees and premium vehicles from the subnations, i can see arguments for both being more proftiable, and do not know which would actually be more profitable.

Again, why should they be. I am geniunely interested to hear a proper reason, based in logic and good sense, that isnt just a personal whim.

Let me rephrase. Israel has been implemented poorly. it is at a significant disadvantage to all other nations and that shows in the amount of players who play it. Dont get me wrong, if you like M60’s you will probably enjoy the tree, and many of the vehicles themselves, when spaded, are not bad vehicles.

Or, you could just add it as a subtree, not have to suffer all the disadvantages of an independant tree starting at rank 4, and help another minor nation in the progress, and make the player experience for all the vehicles better. but no, lets just add a new full tree for every nation in the world that all of 10 people will play.

What matters is what the tree is right now, because that is what people are choosing to not play

I was talking about in game, right now which again is what people are either playing or not playing.

I am also fine with them being there, however they are a chore to spade like i said because their stock capabilites are mostly the same, just with ever increasing br’s. It would be more beneficial to the tree to add more light tanks or aa’s instead of 20 magachs

Why add them to the game if you are going to make them awful to play. the idea of skipping loads of vehicles to get to the one you want is not a good way to play the game, nor the way it is intended. What you are saying is: here is a vehicle we added, but we made it’s stock grind terrible so actually we reccomend just skipping it. It makes no sense, and would be exactly the same problem with all of the M60’s in the proposed turkish tt.

The Merkavas are perfectly competative top teir vehicles. People do not play the tree because there is no reason to play it over any other tree, it is just worse overall, and also because it does not have all of the classicly seen vehicles throughout history. There are many people who play america,germany and russia because of the WW2 vehicles and other vehicles that have seen action and attention in popular media. Turkish vehicles and israeli vehicles as well as many of the vehicles from other minor nations do not have this attribute to bring peopl to the tree.

Absolutely, but one based in reason.

It makes sense from a gameplay standpoint, which is what matters in game

Why, real world politics have no place in war thunder, and gaijin have made sure that they appear to be neutral in these aspects.

Fair enough

look at all the available statistics we have, look how many people you see in queue’s and in matches, even at the strong br’s for the nation

you have not said anything to explain why relations should matter in war thunder. just because it has been the trend in the past, does not mean it is a requirement or should be.

apart from an air tree, a naval tree, a rank1-3 and tank lineups from br 1.0 to 7.3

I am objecting because adding this tree as a subtree could be extremely beneficial for the game, and the precident of adding more subtrees to the existing nations in the game would help all fo the minor nations, as that is the main balance issue in the game right now, the different between minor and major nations. Like i said, i am more than happy to see these vehicles in game, i just want them to be fun to grind and play, which they would be more so if added as a subtree

13

I’m going to make something clear before continuing, if you wish to go on with aggressive tone I can do the same.

Because it does not make sense, you know you’ve been talks about logic use it. If a British Tech Tree receiving something, it should be related to Britain be it political, be it technological or be it military. Why ? Because you are adding a vehicle in British Tech Tree

It is your personal whim to propose fixing random Nation’s Tech Tree with irrelevant nations. It is arbitrary, it is your personal point of view of fixing “user experience”. You can very well fix Italy’s problems with Italian vehicles but you choose to use completely irrelevant vehicles to fill those gaps. And yet you still you are using logic while I do not. No you are propping your own opinion just as I do.

Stop bringing nationalism into this argument, what do you think is going to happen ? They will give me Medal of Honour ? That is just nonsensical.

No it won’t be a complete tree. Then just throw all the Western Tree into one, it would be even more complete no ? Your logic is here flawed, Italy was part of Germany at early stage, Gaijin would’ve leave it as it is if it was better than current version. Yes Turkish vehicles, or any other big Tech Tree Suggestions, would overwhelm original tree.

What a way to argue, whatever other opinion is meaningless. I’ll follow this suite then.

Do you have problems with comprehending ? I just said Crew Skills are the only valid thing you’ve said. There is absolutely no reason on Gaijin’s side to lessen grinds this way, in it end of they grinding is what makes the Tree profitable for the firm.

Our suggestion does not lack line-ups for the most part, sure there are some gaps there is no denying so does other tree and no slapping unrelated vehicles there does not solve it. If so, Gaijin should make a one giant research tree then you can make whatever line-up you wish to.

Aviation has just enough CAS option, nothing fancy but absolutely not zero. It is especially not a problem at high tier with introduction of helicopters.

I believe you just read whatever you want then nit-picking.

I especially talked about Britain and Sweden and how Gaijin projecting them. There is a relation between Britain and South Africa and there is relation between Sweden, Finland and Norway. It works because those relations are meaningful, if it does not you will certainly face with backlash from there community as it happened with Indian T-90.

You just did not read what’ve said about those tree, I said it again just above, please do read it then you have a look at Finnish and South African Sub-Trees.

There is literally separate part about Rank III and below, just have a look at before saying anything. And yes it is just full of copy vehicles and that is why it is not part of main suggestion.

Gaijin literally created new type of Tech Tree with Israel, you are acting like I’m making something up, it is an option and I’m using it simple as it is.

Yes, lower tier vehicles are there for a reason, there is absolutely no vehicle to fill that gap, instead of leaving that line-up without option, you can simply up-tier that vehicle like it is on literally every other tech tree.

That is just meaningless, you are arbitrarily making things just so it will fit into your narrative. It is absolutely meaningless to create artificial union between Italy and Turkey. It is not Portugal and Spain, there is no shared history, politics or technology on grand scale. You keep talking about logic what about you use it here for once ?

No, if there is that much of vehicle, close to what other Tech Tree has, it does not make sense to add them into another Tech Tree. If it was single main battle tank line and few ATGM carries with few Anti-Air then sure be my guest and add all of them into Israel or US or Germany not Italy because all of these nations have some sort of history in Turkish Arms Industry.

Italy has its own vehicle portfolio to fix its own problems, not entirely maybe but it can fix majority of them. Sure, they might not have SAM to compete with Pantsir so does much of other nations.

That is literally your opinion, stop acting like your opinions are just hard facts, just stop it is not efficient or proper way to discuss anything. People will grind just to play F-16, F-14 or Tornado, for ground just to play Abrams, Leopard, Leclerc etc. You are making your own rules and dictating them as correct way to play the game.

It is true for Sweden, and I did mentioned Sweden. China simply lacks many thing it must receive so does Britain.

My point again stands still, no. Nearly all of the Turkish Ground vehicles no relation to Italy whatsoever, zero. You are just throwing random vehicles to fix Italy’s problems, Italy has vehicles to fix those problems.

Japan’s main issue is lack of SAM and again there is Japanese SAM to fix it. Adding Korea it Japan is not way to solve it especially United Korea has enough stuff. (You did not bring Korea, I did as it is most obvious thing to offer.)

Both vehicles are power crept with better counterparts. Leclerc could be solved with better rounds while Britain simply needs better vehicles, ie Challenger 3s.

And how that is relevant ? Please do tell me, of course some random player will play Germany over anyone just because Tiger and Leopard or US just to fly A-10 and ride Abrams. That comparison is just meaningless.

Yeah, the reasons you made up and act like pure truths.

I did, care to read it properly ?

No, no one would every buy a M60T premium in Italian The Tree to grind new vehicles, only Turkish playerbase, collector and people who genuinely like that tank would buy it. If it is a separate tree, you have to buy it regardless or else you cannot grind it easily. This is complete from point of Gaijin, and you have to count it too, in the end of the day Gaijin makes to call and they do it just to profit, it is their business model.

Logic ? Lets use it. Because Italy and Turkey has nothing in common to be grouped up together, can you comprehend it. It is game based on real-life vehicles and militaries. There is a trend for Sub-Trees because it makes sense. Else you can just say, Japan does not have X vehicle at X Rank, can we add Y nations tanks to fill it ? Why because you say so.

Now use this, if a nation lacks something it is for the most part because of the wrong implementation. You can fix it within logical boundaries ie adding that nations other vehicles or related nation as Sub-Tree.

That is exactly your own personal whim and you keep acting like it is logical.

And also this one. You are finding ways to fix problems of trees and claiming it is the only true way. No it is not.

Pulling numbers from where ? You are being funny not gonna lie.

No what matter is implementation of a Nation. Isreal could have proper line-ups if Gaijin implemented its own Light Tanks and Anti-Air. Sure you might tank like Merkava, then you just do not play them.

And reason is Gaijin did not implemented what is needed, like Amit-Air and Light Tanks as you’ve said. Does Israel have them, yes they certainly do. If they did not ha anything I would not argue, just slap them to UK or US.

You are doing the same thing over and over again. Your opining are not truth or hard facts, I very well be playing the game just for Top Tier or just to play WW2 Era or Cold War Era. You are jt dictating your own view an calling it intended way

No, you simply seeing it as burden and I’m suggestion you to not play it. I’ll enjoy M48A5T1 or T2 just as much as I would enjoy Italian M47-105.

There is literally only two M60s same as in the other Tech Trees. Modernisation bring something relatively different, you are very welcomed not to enjoy in that case you can skip it. It is a real life vehicle built, and I’m proposing its implantation to War Thunder. Simple.

Not a competitive line-up, what are you going to do with Machbet at 12.0 exactly ? People won’t play it unless they have chance to actually play and resist.

Fair, I’ve also mentioned this popularity. Then lets throw everyone into US, Germany and USSR just because they are player favourites. Is that really what are you calling logic ?

Reason ? Imma laugh at this point.

No, War Thunder never really focus purely in-game balance or real world boundaries. It is mixture of both to have plausible game. You are just ignoring one side completely.

I don’t have any statics hence I’m not claiming anything related to numbers. It is simple logic, if I cannot play game properly, I won’t touch that tree. Our proposal offers pretty much everything you need to have proper in game experience.

I did countless time in my other post and in this one. Going from specifics example of Italy (its not like I have anything against Italy), my perspective is consistent, there should be a connection, tie, relation between nations and there is in-game. Why ? Because it is logical way to do so. If there is no consistent rules, you could just propose any vehicle to any tree just because they need it, exactly what you are doing here. Proposing Turkish Sub-Tree in Italy, why ? Because Italy needs it that is your whole logic. There are a lot more suitable nations if you wish like Hungary, Romania due to their ties (though its not like I’m proposing them to be added Italy as I do not have much information about either trees.)

You just do not read do you ? I literally said there is a Aviation Suggestion, not just ready to post it in Forum. Helicopter Tree is pending, Rank 1-3 is literally in the main post separated from main suggestion. From 7.0 onwards nearly every single line-ups are complete, sure few line-ups might not have exactly fitting options but in overall you cannot use it as excuse. There is naval too, it does not mean it does not exist just because we have not released the project. Plus France received it naval after years, stop acting like it is corner stone.

Oh, we don’t have 7.0 CAS, lets abandon whole tree.

Gaijin gave us this option and opens up new possibilities that is not “lacking” that is how it is better and unique rather than being full of copy paste.

You think so, it is how you look at it. In my view, wasting Nation’s vehicles (not just Turkey) sake of fixing another irrelevant nations problems is not beneficial at all.

Hence the difference major/minor right ? Nations receiving vehicles with some sort of historical background o importance. If nations lacks it, it lacks it you cannot solve by maiming another nations potential tree by throwing it in. Also as I’ve mentioned, there are better nations to fix Italy’s problems like Hungary which would offer proper vehicles for low ranks too something Turkey lacks.

See, personal opinon. I want trees to be as much immersive as they can be. Grouping unrelated thing together is not the way in my opinion.

And stop deflecting the main subject, if you have any more things to say, go to relevant topic not this one.

1 Like
14

image
wanting to improve player experience is not unusual, or unexplaned, and my desire to do so is not sudden. It is therefore, by definition, not a personal whim.

if you had said this about 4 posts ago, that would have cleared a fair bit up. I understand now that your logic is as simple as that, and thats fine. In my opinon, that is a very closed minded way to think about developing the game in positive ways, and if you adhere to such logic, there are many vehicles that do not deserve to be in the game that will be added to try and fill gaps, and many that do deserve to be added that will not be.

This shows you indeed have not understood what i am saying

I’m done either way. Your mind is set on the idea that because a tree has a flag and a name attached to it, it can only have vehicles related to that flag or name in some way. Your mind is also set that it wastes potential of your turkish tree to have it as a subtree because you think that if they did that, they would not add all of the vehicles from your proposal, and you do not want to have to grind through a rank 1-3 to get there.You also think that other than the nationalist playerbase for the nation, there are lots of people who would play the tree despite this not being the case with any of the other minor nations.You want the tree to be immersive and are happy for that to be the case at the expense of fun. I hope gaijin does not make the same mistake they have made with israel, but only time will tell.