USAF upgraded their F-16’s past block 70/72 standard, they are actually better technically
IMO there wouldnt be any issues with adding an abrams to china if china didnt throw a tantrum about japan getting a VT-4
Just add a VT-4 to japan in the same update and i wont care anymore
1 Like
Or just add whichever one is finished first, and use that as justification for the other.
There’s a lot of maturation that needs to occur.
they started the program, and the company was and is American, by all means the Abrams is an American main battle tank
1 Like
I would imagine the VT-4 is ready already since it was supposed to come in the last update before the backlash
It’s only American when in American service.
Are you going to claim the M1 Garand is Canadian now?
Mr. Garand was only born in Canada before moving to the US at a young age, his exposure to firearms and career with them was fully American. The Garand was born from a US Army requirement too
why a lot people don’t understand chinese don’t want vt4 in Japan(just Japan,no Thailand) ,vt4 is not important,it’s a lot of other problems,like:99a is wrong,vt4a1 is wrong,630 is wrong and more mistakes,vt4 is never the most important thing,it just a trigger
2 Likes
China should absolutely get the M1A2T just as the US should get its oplot as an event vehicle
VT-4 is a strong T-series tank.
So is ZTZ-99A.
They don’t have to be as strong as Abrams, and Leopard 2A5+ to be good.
It’s okay if T-80BVM, T-72B3, ZTZ-99A, VT-4… aren’t meta. All that matters is if they’re competitive.
1 Like
Yeah but the point is that they keep modeling things wrong and refusing to correct it either out of being too busy with other projects or because they don’t want to ZTZ 99A turret armor for example is wrong and so is the Abrams mantlet block
1 Like
That’s classified armor for you.
They have to estimate, and they prefer conservative estimates.
@MokaMoki continuing to lie about ROC not being China when we all know it is because IT IS THEIR NAME.
1 Like
no response, wonder why
We are not gonna have those bc Brits having anything good is against TOS.
We can’t even have P-400 Caribou Mk 1 or Buffalo Mk 1.
Honestly, as a joke, even if we abandon Chally 3 and buy M1A2GB, no Abrams will be allowed to us. :/
Anyway, as I claimed earlier, what I think about this damn topic is three things.
- ROC can have M1A2T. They bought and used it.
- BUT. They need to allow Thailand VT4 first if they need M1A2T.
- No M1A2T if Gaijin don’t add Thailand VT4.
5 Likes
It’s missing an entire internal block that we have pictures of that they just haven’t added after two years
What could have been.
4 Likes
Honestly would have made more sense than what they have now
3 Likes
Both are currently in the only trees where they belong
Yes I know, that’s why I edited the British tech tree. :)
- No one has requested the addition of new American-made tanks to the Chinese tech tree. The so-called “high demand” is entirely a figment of Gaijin’s imagination.
2.In fact, it is completely correct to oppose the inclusion of VT4 in Japan, as VT4 belongs to Thailand, not Japan.
3.Finally, to provoke Chinese players, they created a brand-new VT4 model with a higher loader position, offering better protection than the previous VT4A1. Clearly, this model was intended for the rumored Japanese VT4, but due to pressure, they placed it in the Chinese tech tree. The most ridiculous part, however, is that they forgot to update the internal structure of the VT4A1.
6 Likes