BTR-80 with a 57
1 Like
Object 14
3 Likes
And I would guess that the great majority of the vehicles under soviet flag today in the USSR tech tree was made in Ukraine.
Is there any in depth information about the vehicle as a whole? Cannon, powerplant and so on? I’m quite interested on this design, remembers me a lot of the UDES-XX20 and Object 299 designs.
1 Like
That tank was developed as part of the sprut-sd project. It’s an amphibious tank which was built with a 152mm cannon and with the similar fcs found in T-64B.
It’s said to be discovered after the Russian missile strike, the tank was covered in rubles. Now it’s repaired and servers in one of the brigades of the armored forces of Ukraine.
1 Like
BM Oplot-M in a pretty Ukrainian camouflage.
With the way BVV_d explained why there won’t be any others, he did proceed to mention the Soviets directly after basically saying the plan for now is to add experimental vehicles there, it sounds like later they will add Ukrainian branch to the tree.
At least that what I got from it, curious if you got the same message.
It’s called the Great Britain tech tree.
The U.S were once part of Great Britain.
So therefore U.S should go in the Great Britain tree.
That analogy is wrong. Ukraine SSR was controlled by Moscow when the tanks were build. It was done with the Kremlin’s funding and approval.
Your argument would’ve made sense if the US independence war happened in 1976 and the Abrams were build before that.
1 Like
Pre-collapse makes sense, but post collapse no. They have no place in the tree past that because of general western alliance. In this form they are already in the USSR tree in-game. A better modern place for Ukraine would be in an Eastern-European, most likely the Polish, tree. Iran would make more sense for Russia, especially with the eastern bloc equipment they own.
Also quite frankly USSR is in a place already where they singlehandedly have so many prototypes, tank variants and other vehicles that you have to question do they really need a subnation? US is kind of in a similar position just because of the huge military industrial focus these 2 nations have.
1 Like
Allegiances don’t exist in War Thunder, Clearly we have East Germany and West Germany and Taiwan and China in the same trees. Post Soviet Ukraine makes perfect sense in this case.
China and Taiwan are both in the same tree because they both see themselves as “real” Chinese.
Similar issue with Ukraine and Russia, both see themselves as the modern successor to Kievan Rus (they both are) and East Germany and West Germany in the same tree is pretty obvious why this is the case.
1 Like
Gaijin is consistent in that they are inconsistent. It’s just my 2 cents on reasoning that doesn’t matter much since it’s hard to tell what they go off of when adding nations. But as I said they have too much to really need a Ukranian subtree.
I don’t think it’s a matter of needed but rather a matter of wanting, one of my main concerns about new tech tree specifically around the eastern Europe region is how could Gaijin implemented, is like a gambling game,
Is more likely to Gaijin take the short path and fill to the top with copy and pasted vehicle and sell a overpriced premium vehicle to experience the fewer unique vehicle behind a chunk of things we could get in the sovietic tech tree and following the current concept of separated tech tree—german and american vehicles as well.
1 Like
T72AG
I love T72, we need more T72
Export T90M version
T90M Arena
T80UM1 “bars”
more modern light vehicles
VKP 7829 Bumerang
BMPT-72 Terminator 2
Kazakhstan’s T72 modernized by Türkiye?
One Czech T72EA produced for Ukraine
1 Like
Pre-2014 and when Ukraine was still more aligned with Russia would actually make sense in-game. The definite border could be 2018 when it left CIS.
I see so many people wanting a Warsaw Pact or EE tech tree, unfortunately there is a lot more history to this region of the world beyond just the USSR and 2022.
I think Ukraine to Poland could upset both Poles and Ukrainians, there has been a lot of difficulties between these nations.
Additionally I feel a EE tech tree wouldn’t be able to be all of Eastern Europe, it would have to be either Western Slavs (Poland, Czechoslovakia, Possibly Lithuania as a plus) or Southern Slavs (Yugoslavia, which would also be contraversial). Ukraine is just in a very difficult place, and having it as a standalone tech tree would just be too small. Thus I feel the only goodish way would be to USSR in pre-2014 form.
I just don’t think this would work ingame
I honestly agree with this, but you have to understand the game is owned by gaijin, who does not believe in adding native vehicles (which was heavily seen in the recent post). Plus I mean look at Italy which has an incredibly large military industry and still remains arguably the worst nation in-game.
1 Like
I disagree with nation division by its state alignment.
At such rate, Germany needs to be split between ranks 5 and 8 due to West Germany going to the US TT as it was West-aligned and East Germany going to USSR TT because it was under commie’s command, oh right and Taiwanese China being sent to the US TT as well
Takes on “pre-2014” and “pre-2022” are insane as dividing nation in such way is of next level cynicism.
And yeah, them counter-takes like “West and East Germany are both Germany” and “Mainland and Taiwanese China are both China” are also cynical if you also decide to split nation to periods of its alliance(s) disregarding the entirety of the subject.
Damn, I ain’t giving you lesson on history of Ukraine, but in short, this statement is wrong.
1 Like
This would make a lot of Poles angry for sure, Poland has a lot of cool vehicles, it could have its own tech tree, and then gaijin could add things like Slovakia to Poland or Romania, But I still want Ukraine to be part of the Soviet Union tree, not just Ukraine, like Belarus, Kazakhstan, etc.
However, it would be better to add this separation, otherwise the War Thunder forum and the review bombs would catch fire.
Well, I don’t think so, and I stand by my words and opinion.
I believe that anytime we get sub-tree suggestion, the primary and main right to vote belong to citizens from “sub-tree” in question (e.g. Thai when Thai sub-tree, Swiss when Swiss sub-tree, Belgians/Dutch/Luxembourgers when BeNeLux sub-tree), and as being one, I oppose this suggestion.
It’s either entirety coming or nothing. This suggestion is even worse than Australia/Canada/Poland nation representation whereas these nations have no defined tt and are shared across several other established nations.
1 Like