Again, I am talking purely on the makeup of the tree and am not talking about anything other than that.
Quit pretending that I am complaining about their performance or whatever when it is more than obvious that I am purely talking about tech trees and their contents…
Very ironic for you to call my opinions baseless when you are the one roping unrelated things into the argument and then subsequently backing out…
lol what is this?
KIA KM414 with M40A1 106mm recoilless rifle
2.3 BR but will be a machine gun pinata, plus we will have to put down the front windshield as well as do something about the gun phasing thru the crew
2.3 is far too low of a BR for that cannon with that mobility.
It is difficult to estimate BRs for such vehicles, but it would definitely be 5.7+ at the very least.
i doubt that tbh.
with a possible limited turret traverse allowance as well as a slow reload and poor ammunition choice… itll be nearly reserve teir
More likely than not Gaijin would add this vehicle with lowered glass, thus making traverse a non issue.
still crew will be a traverse hinderance
In any case, with the arguments you present we should be expecting vehicles such as FIAT 6614 with the same armament to be at a much lower BR than 6.3. It isn’t.
Light vehicles for obvious reasons don’t take their protection into account as much as other classes of vehicle do.
Yes, obviously this doesn’t mean their protection is to be ignored, but much more emphasis is placed on whether the armament works at the BR in combination with the mobility.
This being an incredibly mobile vehicle with a gun that is particularly powerful and present at the mid-tiers should therefore be compared to those similar vehicles that can be found at those ranks.
It would therefore also be placed at a similar BR.
And yes, it would be a very easy target at low tier. So what? Same goes for many similar vehicles in regards to their armament and protection.
you make good points but i was suggesting this as a low teir to boost the lineups by assuming it was poorly armed with ammunition
It’s meant to be used this way
(It’s not the same vehicle)
Turret traverse shouldn’t be a issue. It can traverse over the crew’s head just like what we see in some truck based SPAAs
Hisar O+ for Bangladesh. It’s going to delivered this year.
I really want to see Pakistan+Bangladesh, but they are almost completely copy and paste. World War II involved purchasing American/Soviet style equipment, while Cold War modernity involved purchasing American/Soviet/Chinese style equipment. It’s almost complete replication.
Compared to independent technology trees, I think they are more suitable as subtrees or to place these vehicles on the technology trees sold in their country, or as a secondary technology tree for the new folding technology tree
its no denying C&P is high, but considering this is the inevitable direction of WT’s progression if gaijin wants this game not to die.
these kinds of TT will be something we just have to accept.
what we need isnt uniqueness if the matchmaker can learn to place vehicles of a similar origin from different nations into the same team
the british shouldnt have colonised us if they didnt want us to have their vehicles ;P
and americans shouldve kept to their own continent but noOOOO
stop! i still want to play WT (
What about a combined Pakistan + Bharat + Bangladesh tech tree?
i think its not OK :(
Why not? If you meant the rivalry between Pakistan and Bharat, we already have China and Taiwan in the same tree.
No