I might disagree something
Vehicle Name
BAE Hawk 200 (Britain) 12.0 Tech tree
JH-7 (China) 10.3 Tech tree
AMX MMX595 (Italy) 10.7 Squadron
F-15A Baz (IAF/IDF) (Israel) 12.3 Tech Tree
Su-24M (Soviet Union) 12.0 Tech Tree
F-15A (USA) 12.3 Tech tree
Largest wish list I have ever seen
SA Cactus (name changed to Crotale in 1971)
TOG at 4.7??. That thing should be no more than 4.0 simply due to it being ligerlky less mobileand slower than a maus while not even being armoured
Like 100mm flat front, what?40 mm aides and 70mm turret all round?
And is thw Chruchil VII AVRE not just an spg churchil VII? So why 5.3
i want big stopid arty like m109 k2 palmaria pzh2000 caesar and all of the other boomsticks
T-62MV
RUAG Leopard 2 Upgrade
Tor M2KM
TOG II has 114mm RHA+12.7mm mild steel front, 76+12.7 sides, and 50+12.7 rear, and 114mm turret front and 76mm other sides. 17 pounder gun. Armour is nearly on par with the Churchill VII with the exceptional 17 pounder gun at the expense of mobility. I think it’d fit perfectly at 4.7.
Churchill VII AVRE has the 165mm BESH launcher which is a considerable upgrade to the OQF 75mm. It’s a derp cannon so it’d be equally effective really anywhere 4.7-6.0 but I think 5.3 offers the best BR where it still nukes things without having too good armour and still a decent lineup, filling a gap in British heavies.
I agree with most of the small BR changes; this list was made months ago before the last two BR changes and introduction of R-73/AIM-9M so some balances are off. But the JH-7 has PL-8s which would massacre 10.3.
I left the AMX intentionally generic because it would be cool to see the Brazilian and Italian versions both in game as separate vehicles or even better as interchangeable modifications.
F-15 would be too powerful for 12.3 IMO even without AMRAAMs.
Hawk 200 was assuming no AMRAAMS but 12.0 could work with AMRAAMs.
I’ve also created a 5-part complete Polish Tech Tree with ~400 vehicles ;)
Would you have it in the US or German tree?
Dunkerque class (Dunkerque and the Strasbourg wich is more armored) for a French 7.0.
And Richelieu class (Richelieu and in picture here, Jean Bart, my all time fav ship) for later with other similar ships (Iowa, Yamato, Bismarck etc)
Here the jean Bart back, full of secondary and AA
Dunkerque class would definitely be good to see, although I worry for its armour, but they’d lend themselves well to direct headon or angled engagements. Richelieu too and hopefully Gaijin will waive its rule on ships being laid down and change it to reasonably almost laid for Italy and France so the Alsace class could be considered.
Dunkerque have a really low armor, so for me it could even be a 6.3/6.7 ships (lower armor than some ships in these BR)
Strasbourg is really more armored, worth 7.0 for what i know.
Richelieu class have no problem, armor almost on par with bismarck, if not stronger on some parts of the ship.
I agree although the guns seem to be quite potent so I’d lean to 6.7 over 6.3 and given that HMS Renown is 7.0, I wouldn’t put it past Gaijin to stick it at 7.0.
Yes the belt of Strasbourg is something like 11 inches which would be very potent combined with the great angling ability and the good firepower.
This is true they will be superior in ways.
Wherever the planes are too.
Most likely the German TT. US has too much naval content.
Fair enough, just curious as its American built, but Argentina is strongly aligned with Germany and Germany already has Argentinian-German tanks.
It’s not so curious in fact. At the beginning of the 20th century, England, Italy and others manufactured ships for different navies around the world. Furthermore, they already said many times that Argentine vehicles would go to the German TT, so it makes a lot of sense.
I would hate for gaijin to do with Argentina what he does with Canada. All Canadian vehicles should be in the British TT.
