This is a Leopard 2RI, similar to Leopard 2PL but with better armor, used by indonesia
it can make up a good 12.0 tank
2 Likes
Yeah I came back to this post to change my Malaysia vote for Sri Lanka because apparently they actually do have some pretty cool Indigenous vehicles
This tank is beautiful. I don’t know why but I’ve fallen in love with it
indonesia has more stuff, trust me
1 Like
This can easily go to India since Tamil Tigers were backed by India.
1 Like
You can choose two votes
Bofors on domestic chassis, ideally it would replace the Type 76 which doesn’t really work now that Thailand is a subtree
Source
3 Likes
So yet another low effort copy pasted tech tree. No thanks
open your eyes, rank 5 and above has some of the least copy/paste in WarThunder
2 Likes
i bet you didn’t even check any of the comments on this post
2 Likes
Lmao so it’s like china with slight variations in capabilities and different names. Big deal. It doesn’t warrant a brand new tech tree. In fact we don’t need more tech trees. Redesigned maps and new game modes are what players should be demanding. Not this low effort garbage
Give some examples
Of what?
These vehicles with only slight modifications
Literally every light tank is a derivative of or inspired by the BMP or BMD. The Vijayantas are modified Vickers. The Ajeyas are modified T-72s. The Bhishmas are for all intents and purposes T-90s. The SPAAs are either foreign sourced and part of other tech trees already or use non-Indian weapons like the R-73 or R-27 in the case of the SAMAR. If gaijin gives it the R-73, it’ll be identical to the Strela and the R-27 will be SACLOS similar to the Osa. The differences will be no more than cosmetic.
The Kestrels and CBRNs look like knockoff Strykers and will probably handle similarly. The Famagusta is a modified Centurion Mk.3 or Mk.7 can’t remember which. The NAMI series are all based on the BMP-2 chassis with only the weapons systems being different. The Sarath is yet again another BMP-2 mod. The Zorawar looks and will probably play a lot like the 2S25s. The SPG line is full of a hodgepodge of existing foreign tank chassis mated with different gun systems, nothing we haven’t seen before in the chinese tree.
Only the Arjun tank and its variants can be considered “unique” but considering the current state of top tier that’s not saying much. The Jonga could be a funny meme vehicle like the R3 T106A but no more.
I’m not going to waste my time on ranks 1 to 4 since it’s so obvious they’re overwhelmingly foreign sourced and part of other tech trees already. It took me less than 2 minutes to find all this. If I missed anything you can do the same. Only an Indian air tree would be more copy paste.
Now tell me if these are worth an entire tech tree. Naturally gaijin won’t mind adding it because lazy copy paste seems to be becoming the norm rather than the exception these days.
First of all your entire argument revolves around similar play styles. With that logic why don’t we have one heavy tank, light tank, tank destroyer, etc. for each nation?
Secondly you admitted to having only spent a few minutes looking through the TT. If you had spent more time you would have realised that most of the modified vehicles are very heavily modified.
And finally why do you care so much about the chassis of SPAA? It’s going to stay at spawn anyways the speed and size doesn’t matter.
1 Like
First my argument centers around both playstyles and aesthetics all of which we’ve have already seen in the British and russian trees. None of it warrants a whole new tech tree
Second I took another longer look at the “heavy” modifications you’re talking about and “most” is not true at all. Only the SPGs would fall under that category along with a couple of the light tanks under the NAMI series. Everything else would for the most part be only aesthetically and internally different. The internal differences would only be seen in X-ray in the hangar which is meaningless for gameplay.
Finally when I brought up chassis I was talking about the SPGs and light tanks not the SPAAs. Except for a few maps where you don’t have a choice, staying at spawn in a dedicated SPAA is predictable behavior and asking for a bomb or rocket to the face. My argument about SPAAs is that they’d play exactly the same or very similar to what we already have in russia with only a few of the platforms looking slightly different. What’s the point of that?
There’s so much wrong with this statement. No big surprise since you literally admit that you didn’t looked at it properly
It took me less than 2 minutes to find all this. If I missed anything you can do the same. Only an Indian air tree would be more copy paste.
I’ll put a pin in the claim that the Indian Air TT is Copy n Paste since I have a lot to say in regards to that. In the meantime I’ll highlight specific points of interest in terms of ground and break down what’s wrong with them
The Kestrels and CBRNs look like knockoff Strykers and will probably handle similarly.
By your logic vehicles like the VBCI, ICV/RCV and ironically the Strykers/LAV III’s themselves shouldn’t be in the game because they play too similarly if not identically to the VBC (PT2). That’s assuming if the Kestrels/CBRN’s are Stryker knockoffs which they aren’t, they were designed from the ground up in India the only thing that the Kestrels/CBRN’s share in common with any other wheeled vehicle it’s the BTR-90 which both share a BMP-2 turret typically without ATGM’s.
The Zorawar looks and will probably play a lot like the 2S25s.
Except it’s not since it uses a 105mm Cockerill cannon not the 125mm that the Spruts are armed with. If anything the Zorawar gameplaywise would play closer to a cross between the VT-5 and the Ikv-91 105
The NAMI series are all based on the BMP-2 chassis with only the weapons systems being different.
If you actually looked to the images more closer since you didn’t, it’s very clear that the NAMI series are ATGM carriers exclusively meaning that yes it does share the same hull as the BMP’s gameplay wise it would be unique from the other BMP’s since there’s no pure ATGM carrier variant of the BMP-1/2 ingame
The Vijayantas are modified Vickers.
Because the Vickers Mk.1 is intended for the Export market and never to be used in the British Army so this point is completely mute. Same goes for the Mk.3, Mk.7 and even the Mk.11
Literally every light tank is a derivative of or inspired by the BMP or BMD.
That would have be a fair point except of the fact that most if not all of the BMP-1/2’s were heavily modified in some way either in the form of armour packs for increased survivability, a different turret(either from another manufacture or one built domestically), different weapons, new electronic systems (FCS, NVD’s, Thermals, APS, etc), a combination of the previous mentioned modifications or all of the above essentially being a complete rebuild. What that means is that the Indian BMP’s at least most of them will play different from the BMP-2 that we have in game.
Also the BMD-1 Is not in game and the Abhay is a unique IFV design so that argument doesn’t hold much water anyways.
The SPG line is full of a hodgepodge of existing foreign tank chassis mated with different gun systems, nothing we haven’t seen before in the chinese tree.
There’s nothing wrong with that since the different Hulls have different driving and survivability characteristics. i.e the Indian AuF1 and the French AuF1 will handle differently despite sharing the same turret. The Bhim controls completely differently from the G6. The Catapults are literally the SPG equivalents of the Archer TD. Also it’s completely false that all Indian SPG’s are just “Foreign tanks mated with different gun systems” since there are domestic SPG’s with domestic Guns in the proposal, it’s just most if not all of them are wheeled.
Just a side note the claim that the SPG’s in the Chinese TT’s are all foreign designs aren’t true either since the two SPG’s we have currently in game in the Chinese TT (PLZ-83 & PLZ-05) are both Chinese designs with Chinese built weapons
The Jonga could be a funny meme vehicle like the R3 T106A but no more.
I find this line very interesting since if there is one vehicle type where the criticism of “They all play the same” is valid it’s Armed Jeeps. Like how does the Jonga with the 106mm would play different from let’s say a Willis Jeep with the same Recoilless rifle or the Type 73 Jeep with the same weapons. I point this out since one of your points that you keep re iterating is that everything plays the same only for you to advocate for the one vehicle where that “argument” has some weight to it. This alone already self sabotages that argument alone
But nope you decide to complain about everything else “being/controlling/feeling the same”
considering the current state of top tier that’s not saying much.
The reason on why so many more recent designs feel so homogenous with some exceptions is because when weapon manufactures have to choose between the choice of making something radically new that either would succeed or fail horribly and making something with proven designs and tech, only marginally improving on it over time. Most manufacturers will choose the latter, the latter option is also cheaper since war now days is also a business venture and it’s all about making the most profits.
This philosophy is reflected in the game with a lot of the higher tier stuff felling very similar to each other. Do I like this? no not really but that’s the unfortunate reality we are in
nothing we haven’t seen before in the Chinese tree.
If you are going to whinge about “TT’s being ‘Oops all Copy n Paste/all foreign designs’” whinge about the Israeli TT, not the Indian or even Chinese TT’s since the Israeli TT is a way worse example of this.
I mentioned Israel in this specific context because of this statement
Only an Indian air tree would be more copy paste.
The existence of aircraft such as the Kiran, Sitara, Tejas and Marut disproves that point since those 4 aircraft are Domestic Indian combat aircraft with several more in development. Even among the foreign designs there are significant differences. The Indian Sea Harriers for example used French and later Israeli AAM’s for example. Indian Jags all used French AAM’s as well. Indian MiG-27’s used not only French weaponry but also has ASM capabilities. the Ajeets were domestically built Gnats with expanded ground attack capabilities as well as the ability to use Soviet ground weapons.
The Israeli TT in comparison though their foreign aircraft do have extensive modifications they don’t have any domestic designs and no the Nesher and Kfir don’t count since they are unlicensed derivatives of the Mirage 5F & Mirage IIING respectively
Naturally gaijin won’t mind adding it because lazy copy paste seems to be becoming the norm rather than the exception these days.
Partially that but also because Gaijin is a business and in the end of the day their main Modus Opperandi is to make as much profit as possible. Compounded by the fact that Gaijin has a monopoly on this specific genre of game so Gaijin has little to no incentive to try
5 Likes
prob the worst take i have ever seen in my life.
lets see, zorawar has higher thrust to weight, lower reload, lower calibre but more pen, better gun elevations and mobility, different weaponries with ready to fire ATGM launchers.
other points are equally bad
3 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.