Also a reminder the M1A1 AIM should have KEW-A2.
3 Likes
Rather than relying on third party speculative sources, because that says APDS only until 2000 which directly contradicts the forecastinternational dot com implied claim of Australian L64 production in the mid 80’s at the latest, if you really want to be sure, you should probably just ask the ADF, the Leopards have been out of service for twenty years they’d probably just tell you, the AS1 are all museum pieces now.
I had some questions on a few things at one point and the WO at the RAAC Museum was very helpful.
1 Like
The last time I asked an Army museum a question about a 40 year old vehicle I was ignored. I can try, but as a member of the public all I can usually get access to are these third party sources. Maybe I should just stop being a nuisance to everyone.
I didn’t mean you should stop, by all means keep investigating the thing you find interesting just don’t be deceived by red herrings thrown out by people who were inexplicably paid to publish their imagined reality, or future.
If I wanted for some reason to know if the AS1 had APFSDS service ammo and couldn’t get anything from the RAAC directly, possible alternative avenues are sales records, anything after '93 has to be imports (and probably a lot before then) and companies like to brag about who they flog stuff to, and I think US foreign military sales are even public info to an extent. The RAAC has an association I believe of ex-service personnel, they often seem to like talking but are also prone to telling a few tall tales. Defence Images has a pretty big stock of photos, I’d be looking for anything showing blue practice FSDS being used in exercises since that would imply the existence of war shots of the same type.
I happen to think for the moment that they were too cheap and just continued with APDS as “good enough”. If you find out otherwise, great, I learn something new, but I’d like to be official even if it is just a puff piece in an Army journal about “The Leopard’s New Claws - tanks demonstrate greater lethality than ever before with new ammunition blah blah quantum leap in capability blah overmatch blah giant metal arrow blah herald new era blah …”.
2 Likes
@GTP_Paulie-psn Not sure where I ran into this and I might be telling a lie, however I possible found a photo of captured (or impounded) armoured cars from East Timor rebels, while most where armed with LMGs and such I believe there was an armoured Land Rover (or Toyota ute not sure) armed with a recoilless rifle. I wouldn’t know what specs it would have or if it even existed, so I will try to find a photo of it.
1 Like
Wait, like FALINTIL operated ones? I’ve been looking for armed vehicles used by them or the F-FDTL recently, to fit into an ASEAN tree, so do post if you happen upon photos.
1 Like
If I find mate lol, I don’t even know how I found them but I do remember aussie DPCU.
2 Likes
Sorry mate, but this is a -1 from me.
Simply because of how many of these vehicles are copy paste.
Genuinely unique vehicles are welcome, but please, we don’t need to flood every tech tree with the same German and American vehicles. It makes the grind so much more of a slog for those of us who actually want to play multiple nations.
Yes but it’s as subtt and most these vehicles are from Britain, some from USA, but rather as unique modifications of cars, m113, some pattons but they are probably just the same.
1 Like
Your definition of copy paste must be different to mine.
1 Like
I know it’s as a sub TT. Where did I indicate that I thought otherwise?
The truth of the matter is that these strictly are not British vehicles. The M113 is not a British vehicle, it is American. The same goes for the Pattons, the Abrams, the bulldogs, etc. Just because we bought and used some doesn’t make them uniquely British.
The other, more important side of that argument is that whilst taking a foreign vehicle, adding an extra 7.62 to the roof, or changing the transmission to something slightly better, or using different gunner/ commander optics may be enough to argue that said vehicle is “uniquely british”, but it still adds absolutely nothing of value to the game that was not already there!
We can scrutinise and scrutinise and scrutinise, and we will always be able to find operational gaps in every TT because there will always be a vehicle that allows you to tackle a specific engagement slightly differently, and slightly is the key word.
It is my strong opinion, nothing more, that it is precisely these asymmetries between nations which makes each one feel unique. Like a tribe which all players can claim their allegiance to with a humorous degree of pride. It’s a piece of the game’s culture. One I’ve come to really appreciate.
That’s why I feel this is so important. Having to pick which nation to start your journey with, to make that massive commitment… It’s nothing short of integral. Right off the bat, it gives you a semblance of an identity to cling to. The more we homogenise our tech trees, the more of this magic we’ll lose.
This community has its downsides, but anyone who’s never laughed at the keyboard warriors insulting eachother’s nations in the all chat, or the players losing their minds over how much they hate fighting a vehicle from another TT that really isn’t all that great, those people have never truly enjoyed this game.
1 Like
Neither would these ones, they would be Australian. Also the UK can get a M113 under the UK flag just fine.
Problem is that having only vehicles built from the ground up is gonna make gaps (hello Germany air past rank 5). Sure not every nation has to be equally matched in every last regard but subtrees still give options that would otherwise be lacking if it was only vehicles built from the ground up.
Trees were pretty much going to be homogenised ever since the decision was made to go past ww2 aircraft. Doubly so thanks to collaborative projects and ground RB allowing helis and aircraft, making it so most brs need a good roster available. I mean you can also find a vehicle of UK origin in every tree, Germany is about to be the same (already is if you count the Sakeen as German instead of Czechoslovakian) with the USSR almost there as well since there’s none of the French and USA research segment.
Well the Grant IIs with a notable 38mm of extra armour and the M113A1 getting a Saladin turret or M40A2 are a lot more than that. Let’s not forget the domestic vehicles also available.
Same as the many countries that have a role in game or not. If we decided to axe all the subtrees then there goes all sorts of unique vehicles in game or not. There’s also countries with a historically large role in armoured vehicle production like Czechoslovakia, Poland, Yugoslavia that hasn’t gotten an official role in game.
I can agree that the UK doesn’t need 3 subtrees. I also think Australia and New Zealand deserve a concrete home. Would’ve preferred Canada, New Zealand and Australia to form into a new tree but here we are.
5 Likes