Romania would have been better suited to Italy than Germany, since it had its own versions of Soviet weapons, which were radically different from the versions of the USSR.
As for Germany, Italy has projects with a German flavor, and to the first one you need to add Argentina (Totally, not partially), Switzerland and Austria, and various projects in which she participated in other countries or sold
Please feel free to use the sources and information I’ve made of my vehicle posts of Romanian vehicles to give brief information on them within this tree discussion and the images on my posts.
It can fit well if you:
Yes I 100% think that those things you listed are true and needed aspects when building a sub-tree.
And I followed it, I put no copy paste, no tigers, pz IV and Panthers. No soviet equipment, only what Hungary modernised I added.
Yes I put Hungarian AAs in the AA line and ATGM carriers and tankdestroyers in their line too.
Yes I made premiums/event vehicles as well.
And I foldered vehicles together.
It just that these two nations have a lot of vehicles, which is good.
I do wonder how Gaijin plans to do this because at one point they said Italy would become the tree for the other Axis nations.
Just so you know, the Romanian Coastal sub-tree I made has been approved! I’ll link to it here: Romanian Coastal Sub-Tree
TR-85M1 brochure:
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/714838496728186913/1138672104905125948/1_Datasheet-TR-85-M1.pdf
I voted yes for a subtree and I hope it won’t be like the Hungarian heli TT addition.
Much of this is copy-paste, sometimes disguised under a changed name (I counted 20 copy-pastes), or slightly modified foreign vehicles. Considering the Hungarian subtree (which had more available indigenous vehicles) has been so poorly implemented with mostly copy-paste, I can’t see this being implemented to Italy anymore, and Gaijin would probably implement this even worse/with even more copy-paste than the Hungarian subtree. With that being said, I do still think the more unique vehicles can come as premiums/event vehicles for Italy, or as a small subtree for France (as they had a pretty close alliance).
I believe that only the first 5 vehicles should be added since there are unique,the rest IS copy paste.
I find that Romania has more potential in the game than Hungary.
Unlike Hungary, Romania had a fair aviation industry that produced mostly local aircraft with the exception of Cold War jet fighters.
I’d also argue that Romania has superior ground options due to their capabilities being more spread out across the ranks as opposed to Hungary, which is very low and mid tier centered. While I would say that Hungary is superior at these low and mid tier ground ranks, I still wouldn’t say it is vastly so when compared to Romania.
And while both Hungary and Romania didn’t have local helicopter manufacturing, Romania did have foreign helicopters with unique payload options, though this is not very significant.
Naval is a strange case for both, Hungary may have a bit of an edge due to Austro-Hungarian inheritance.
Saying Romania doesn’t have many unique vehicles due to their foreign roots while also ignoring the fact that the majority of Hungarian vehicles are also foreign products originally is quite unfair too.
No, Hungary completely outclasses Romania in low and mid tier ground. Romania’s tanks for the whole of WW2 (rank 1-4) are: VDC R-35 (just a French tank with a Soviet gun), TACAM T-60 (Soviet hull turned into a TD with a new Soviet gun), TACAM R-2 (Czech hull turned into a TD with a new Soviet gun), and the Maresal (Romanian TD).
That’s just 4, most of which are made entirely from foreign vehicles.
Compare that to Hungary: 39M Csaba (indigenous Hungarian armoured car), Straussler V-4 (indigenous Hungarian LT), Toldi I (Hungarian LT based on Swedish L-60), Toldi II (upgraded Toldi I), Toldi IIA (upgraded Toldi II), Toldi IIAK (up-armoured Toldi IIA), Toldi III (upgraded Toldi IIA), Toldi Pancelvadasz (Toldi turned into a TD), 40M Nimrod (Hungarian SPAAG based on Swedish L-62), 40M Turan I (Hungarian MT based on the incomplete Czech T-21 prototype completed by the Hungarians), 41M Turan II (Hungarian MT, upgraded Turan I), 43M Turan III (Hungarian MT, upgraded Turan II), Zrinyi II (indigenous Hungarian TD), Zrinyi I (indigenous Hungarian TD), 44M Tas (indigenous Hungarian heavy tank), and that’s before we consider things like the Hungarian Buzoganyveto and Sorozatveto rocket launcher vehicles, as well as SPAAG/gun trucks. That’s 15 tanks, before considering the 4 rocket launcher vehicles and several gun trucks. And these vehicles are much more indigenous and unique than Romania’s TACAMs and VDC R-35 which are just slight modifications of foreign supplied or captured tanks. If that’s not ‘vastly superior’ to you, then I don’t know what is. Hungary actually built their own tanks unlike Romania, which converted or captured theirs. On top of that Hungary operated a more impressive set of German vehicles including Panthers and Tiger Is, unlike Romania.
And it’s not like Romania’s postwar ground vehicles are very indigenous. The MLI 84 is just a copy-paste BMP-1 clone with a new name. The OAPR 1989 is just a 2S1 turret on a BMP-1 hull. Hungary also had similar frankenstein vehicles like a BTR 80 turret on a BMP-1 hull. The MLI-84M Jderul is almost exactly the same as Hungary’s less-well-known BMP-1 OWS 25, not very original at all. Even Romania’s TR series MBTs are just modified Soviet MBTs, Hungary also has some of their own modified Soviet MBTs such as the CURRUS tanks.
Hungary’s WW2 ground is vastly superior to the 1 original Romanian WW2 tank, and 4 in total. Romania’s postwar/modern ground vehicles are only marginally better than what Hungary can also provide, as I have just shown by showing Hungarian equivalents to the cold war Romanian vehicles. Overall Hungary’s ground is much better than Romania’s, so it’s not a surprise that Gaijin chose to add a Hungarian ground subtree than a Romanian one.
When it comes to helicopters, Romania probably has the edge, when it comes to navy, Hungary (through Austro-Hungarian ships) probably has the edge, so fairly even here.
When it comes to air, Romania does have a better situation than Hungary, but not by much, most people completely undervalue the Hungarian aviation. Hungary had several less-well-known prototypes that most people don’t even talk about in this discussion, not to mention that Hungary actually produced hundreds of their own variants of Me 210 German aircraft and hundreds of Bf 109s (Romania only managed to make around 7 Bf 109s themselves iirc). This is almost completely ignored in this discussion usually. Some of Hungary’s WW2 aircraft include the WM-16, WM-21, WM-23, RMI-1, RMI-8, MAVAG Heja I, MAVAG Heja II. That’s not even counting Hungarian unique variants of the Me 210, modified Italian CR.32s and CR.42s, and other aircraft not yet in-game that Hungary could get like the Ju 86 K-2. The problem is, Romania just switched sides when they started losing the war, thus avoiding having to defend their country. Hungary was first bombed to the ground by the USA, then invaded by the Germans during a coup, then invaded by the Soviets, then the Soviets ruled over Hungary for the next 45 years and talk of Hungarian developed WW2 tech was strictly forbidden. Over this chaotic period literally millions of documents were lost, which is why much less is known about Hungarian vehicles than Romanian ones, who had it easy and got to keep all of their documents and blueprints for their vehicles. This is why we know about the most irrelevant “Romanian 1943 medium tank proposal” (yes it literally had no name), but not much about Hungary’s most impressive fighter prototype, the RMI-8. To say that due to the scarcity of info about the Hungarian vehicles (due to war), they actually had no aviation industry is just wrong. Hungary’s was only a little worse than Romania’s.
But this is a discussion about Romanian ground forces, which Hungarian ground forces completely outclass.
With that being said, the unique Romanian vehicles are still ofc welcome in War Thunder.
I have marked this response in spoilers as it is substantial in size.
Of note:
I do not say all this to berate or hate on Hungary and its vehicles, these are simply my responses to a view which I find very hypocritical and ignorant.
Clearly you are a huge fan of Hungary when looking at your profile. Having preferences for nations that could be seen in game is very normal. We all have our preferences, but there has to be a certain degree of acknowledgement and/or insight into whether a reaction on a certain comment is a sound correction or a disjointed rambling of bias, because this by all accounts is the latter.
There are a bunch of nations that I have a personal dislike towards (won’t name which) that would still have potentially quite good additions for the game, be it as a sub-tree, independent single tree or alliance tree. Depending on the vehicle selection I will still support these. My personal bias should matter as little as possible when it comes to advocating for what (sub-) trees could be added in the game.
I would expect the same level of understanding from someone who is quite active on the forums, so this is quite a disappointing sight.
If there are wishes to continue this conversation, then I recommend doing so in private as it could lead to a long and stupid conversation where neither side convinces each other.
If the reaction is presented in this topic, then I will not respond any further.
That being said:
Pardon me but my respect goes down the drain here.
It is completely unfair to lump all Romanian tank variants into one class and then name every Hungarian vehicle as an individual piece.
If I were to use your way of referring to Romanian vehicles and applied it to Hungarian stuff, then you’d be left with 6 vehicles (which would be Csaba, V-4, Toldi, Turan, Zrinyi and Tas). This is obviously a ridiculous way of looking at things, as the unique vehicles and their differing performances are all worth noting.
Using the Hungarian method for Romania you’d have two variants of VDC R-35, two variants of TACAM T-60, one variant of TACAM R-2 (unless it was made on different models of R-2) and EIGHT variants of Maresal. Not to mention that you’d also have the R-2C, which could be argued to be unique. That would leave you with 15 vehicles also.
It is also unreasonable to then criticize Romanian vehicles for largely being based on foreign platforms that have “slight modifications” only to then gloss over the fact that the only indigenously designed tank hull would be the Csaba, Straussler V-4 and Tas. That would be three of fifteen vehicles as you mention them. No, Zrinyi wouldn’t count under this logic because it would be based on the Turan which is based on the T-21.
And excuse me, but to say that Hungary would have an “impressive assortment of German vehicles” yet claim that Romania didn’t is just plain ignorant.
This is something they have in common.
Romania had the Pz.III N. Pz.IV G, H and J, Panther D, A and G as well as the Sd.Kfz.222 and StuG III G.
Sure, no Tigers, but Romania still had a big selection of German armored vehicle types, just like Hungary.
Double standards are not appreciated.
Onto the second paragraph.
Let’s just tackle this chronologically.
While the MLI-84 would practically speaking have copy/paste performance to the BMP-1, it is not a copy. It had a lengthened hull and added armament on the back. It is incredibly similar, but not a copy. It would be like calling the Toldi a direct copy of the L-60, which it is not.
Saying “OAPR 1989 is just a 2S1 turret on a BMP-1 hull”, which is wrong by the way, it’s based on the MLI-84 (which I already explained is not a direct copy of the BMP-1 but rather a very close derivative) is like saying “Toldi tanks are just L-60s with different cannons” or “Turan tanks are just T-21s with some different armament and armor”. It’s a ridiculous statement because in both examples I give it is a gross and incorrect simplification of what the actual vehicles are, yet this is what you hand the Romanians.
Doesn’t feel nice, does it?
Now I don’t know much on the BMP-1 OWS-25 from Hungary, but especially depending on which country got their modification first this could very much swing your argument the other way around, making it so that the Hungarian product is not original as opposed to the Romanian vehicle.
Yet even despite this it wouldn’t matter, because they are ultimately different vehicles anyways.
You conveniently forget to mention that the MLI-84M has a new and more powerful American engine that makes the MLI-84M more mobile than the BMP-1 and MLI-84. Though the impact on gameplay wouldn’t be so huge, it is still quite a big modification in real life to change one engine for another, this is a genuine major difference between the MLI-84M and Hungarian BMP-1 with OWS-25 weapon station, nevermind when we compare either to the original BMP-1.
And oh really, we’re doing this now?
Saying Romanian tanks are “just modified Soviet MBTs” is so disingenuous, especially when compared to your previous Toldi and Turan timelines.
Let’s sketch one of our own: (TR-580, lengthened T-77), (TM-800, export variant with a bunch of new domestic components), (TR-85, modified TR-580 that has a more powerful engine, thicker armor and domestic FCS), (TR-85M1, a further evolution of TR-85 that mounts even thicker armor and an LWR).
Interesting, the Romanian post-war tanks are now suddenly comparable in differences, if not greater, than the Toldi series and Turan series. It really is a matter of perspective and presentation, huh?
And this is ignoring the other modified Soviet stuff that Romania also had more of than Hungary, so trying to give them an equal footing in this regard is simply wrong.
You cannot discredit Romanian post-war developments when it comes to their military production, especially when compared to Hungary, which basically just made the FuG family.
The rest are upgraded vehicles, not produced. This honestly shouldn’t matter, but I figured I’d bring this up anyways considering you did so too, since Romania does in fact produce the TR family itself with mostly locally made components.
So no, in conclusion Hungary is NOT vastly superior in low tier and only marginally worse in post-war.
Hungary is decently superior to Romania in WW2 and very much outclassed after the fact.
At least that’s something that we can agree upon.
Finally, the air paragraph.
Bluntly said, yes, Romania IS in a much better state when it comes to aviation than Hungary.
Here’s why.
Hungary did have all the aircraft you mention, but there are caveats.
The WM-16A is arguably unsuited for the game due to its incredibly slow speed.
The WM-16B would likely solve this, but would still be 1.0 capable only.
The WM-21 would be workable as a 1.0, but its role as a bomber would be… poorly achieved in the game.
It would likely work mostly as a proxy fighter, which is alright tbh.
Then again, Romania would find alternatives of its own in the IAR.37, 38 and 39. These alternatives are also applicable to WM-16.
The WM-23 was an unfinished product as it did not have armaments.
Now this would likely not stop its potential addition to the game, as it was actually flows and just lacked armaments. It would be comparable to Pyorremyrsky in that sense.
The issue is that when compared to its Romanian counterpart it loses out, since Romania produced many aircraft of the IAR.80 and IAR.81 family that were fully armed and combat capable.
This of course does not take away form the WM-23s potential in the game, but for the purposes of comparing it to Romania it is not favourable.
The RMI-1 would’ve been cool… if it had actually flown and was armed.
And again, Romanian alternatives in the IAR-47, though this one like the RMI-1 never flew.
As before mentioned though, not impossible.
RMI-8 would’ve been Hungary’s magnum opus, but alas, there is again no evidence that it flew.
Now I’m not sure on the state of completion, but if I’m not mistaken it wasn’t fully completed either. Correct me if I’m wrong on that.
This may be the one of the only aircraft from Hungary that Romania doesn’t have an equivalent for, but I don’t think that changes the fact that it is still arguably wasn’t even taxi ready and thus not conventionally qualified for War Thunder.
Won’t go much into detail for the Me-210s, these are just good additions for Hungary, simple as.
Romania doesn’t have direct domestic equivalents either, so that is at least three (?) Hungarian aircraft that Romania wouldn’t have an answer for.
The other modified things are cool too, but Romania does have answers for these in their earlier IAR series and their SM.79 modifications.
Your point on Hungarian production of BF-109 doesn’t matter that much in the context of tree potency either, as these would be copy/paste fighters as opposed to the majority unique stuff for Romania.
This isn’t even mentioning post-war, where Romania produced their IAR-93 and IAR-99 jet aircraft, something Hungary never managed to do.
Romania also has the MiG-21 Lancer, which is one of the more unique MiG-21 modifications out there (bar what China produces).
Indeed, the Hungarian situation is overlooked when it comes to wartime production, but for the purposes of War Thunder that doesn’t matter. Romania has the greater amount of unique aircraft for both pre-war, WW2 and post war.
A further note:
I do not hate Hungary and in fact wish to see it implemented to its fullest potential when it comes to functional vehicles.
I also do not regard Romania as a top priority nation for War Thunder to add as either a full or sub-tree.
This was just my gripes with your response that I wrote down and I hope you understand why.
Again, if you wish to continue this conversation then we can do so in private.
I’m not going to respond to everything here as these are getting very long, and clearly we disagree on the topic.
With that said, I’ll just respond to a few things:
If I were to use your way of referring to Romanian vehicles and applied it to Hungarian stuff, then you’d be left with 6 vehicles (which would be Csaba, V-4, Toldi, Turan, Zrinyi and Tas). This is obviously a ridiculous way of looking at things, as the unique vehicles and their differing performances are all worth noting.
Using the Hungarian method for Romania you’d have two variants of VDC R-35, two variants of TACAM T-60, one variant of TACAM R-2 (unless it was made on different models of R-2) and EIGHT variants of Maresal. Not to mention that you’d also have the R-2C, which could be argued to be unique. That would leave you with 15 vehicles also.
I see your point but you are just using it completely wrong. The Hungarian vehicles are vastly different to one another so I call them separate tanks instead of variants - the Turan I, II and III are all completely different. The Toldi I, Toldi IIA, Toldi III, and Toldi Pancelvadasz are all completely different. The Zrinyi II and Zrinyi I are largely different. Now let’s compare to the Romanian stuff which are literally miniscule changes from one another: the TACAM T-60 can in no world be considered 2 tanks. IIRC, the only difference between the 2 “variants” was a 5 mm armour plate. That is literally no difference at all. The two VDC R-35 variants are almost the same too, then you mention the R-2C which is hilarious because IIRC it is just a Panzer 35(t) with a slightly different looking turret-rear. That doesn’t qualify as a different tank, whereas the differences between the Hungarian tanks I mentioned are a completely different calibre and type of gun, totally different turret, more armour, etc. - that’s much more different which is why the Turans should be counted as 3 tanks and things like the R-2C can’t be counted as a separate tank. When it comes to the Maresal it didn’t even have 8 variants, only 7. And those weren’t even variants, those were the different prototype vehicles, and the last time I checked only the final tank matters, not every single pre-production prototype idea. Also the differences between those “7” are again mostly negligible, only 2 can be considered separate vehicles - the earlier 122 mm howitzer Maresal prototype and the final 75 mm gun Maresal design.
So your count of 15 is wrong. Firstly you mis-counted and this should actually be 14 (because 2+2+1+8+1=14). We have established the VDC R-35, TACAM T-60 and TACAM R-2 are just one vehicle each and the R-2C is just a Panzer 35(t). The Maresal can be counted as 2, not 7 (and definitely not 8). So 1+1+1+2=5. 5, not 15.
You’re right that I overcounted the Hungarian vehicles, but not by as much as you say. The Toldi I and Toldi II are too similar, yes, the Toldi IIAK and Toldi III can be counted as one, and if we ignore Hungarian rocket launcher vehicles (Romania had none of these) and Hungarian/Romanian gun trucks, then Hungary’s improved count is 13 (15-2=13). 13 Hungarian tanks is still nearly triple what Romania offers, and again, that’s not counting several Hungarian rocket launcher vehicles that Romania has no equivalents for.
When talking about German vehicles, I’m just saying Hungary operated far more German tanks than Romania. Firstly, you can’t count Romanian Panthers, as they never had any in WW2 and were given them as postwar trophies by the USSR, before they were scrapped. Hungary operated every single Romanian operated German tank that you listed, plus Tigers, Marder IIs, Panzer 38(t)s, Panzer III Ms, Hetzers, and some obsolete Panzer Is and IIs. Hungary simply operated more German vehicles too.
For your second spoiler you say the actually, lengthening a vehicle is a huge, very significant change, which it absolutely is not. The same way the Chinese copies are marginally different to the original Soviet vehicles and are still refered to as copies, I will refer to a lengthened BMP-1 and T-77 as copies instead of anything unique. We both know the Toldis and Turans had MUCH more differences than a slightly longer hull. Gun, armour, turret, suspension changes are far more significant than tiny dimension changes.
Ofc, I know Romania would have a better postwar era than Hungary in War Thunder, but considering I found many Hungarian equivalents to the Romanian stuff, and a bunch of Romanian stuff is glorified foreign copies, I really don’t think Romania outclasses Hungary in this era by that much. You make it sound like postwar Romania would be 5x better than Hungary, I say it would be 1.5x better than Hungary.
Nothing to say about 3rd spoiler since we agree.
About the 4th spoiler:
You mention that Romanian IAR 80/81 production and usage gives them an advantage, then you completely discredit Hungarian Bf 109 production, I say these points are roughly equivalents and cancel out.
I know I didn’t mention postwar Hungarian/Romanian aircraft because I didn’t research the subject so can’t talk about it.
Also don’t forget about Hungary’s pre-war AVIS I, II, III and IV fighters, as well as their modifications of Italian aircraft (CR.32s, CR.42s, Re.2000s)
Yes I know Romania’s air situation looks better, but I’m arguing that it’s not by as much as you might think. Furthermore, the entire time I’m arguing you saying “Romania has more potential in the game than Hungary.”, I’m not trying to discredit Romania (as much as you might believe that’s what I’m trying to do), I’m arguing against that statement, saying Hungary has at least as much potential in-game, if not a bit more.
+1, would def wanna see this added to the game
Tho with as much vehicles as this is, Romania still has plenty more unique vehicles to potentially add, ill list the ones i know:
R-2C:had cemented armor plates, wouldnt have any gameplay changes, however the turret rear, and turret hull are slightly diffrent
Carul de Lupta R35 Modern (CDL (M)): similar to VDC, but with a more rounded gun mantlet
R35/T-26: a R35 hull with a T-26 turret
Tacam T-60A: basically the same as the other, just built on the T-60A chassis
There are also 7 Maresal TD prototypes
T-34-85R (1959): basically made water tight so it can go into 5m deep water, improved various mechanical features, and uses a Czech radio
T-34-85R (1980): a further modernized version with night vision, 2 plain stabalizer, laser range finder, T-55 engine, dozer blade, and a number of other features
^honestly those two T-34s im a bit unsure of, cause i could only find two fairly unreliable sources on.
TR-77-580M1: basically a TR-77 with an extended turret bustle to house the first stage ammo stowage to imprive reload rate
T-55AM2R: a T-55AM2 with Romanian built Ciclop FCS
RN-94 OWS 25R: an RN-94 APC with same israili turret as MLI-84M,
RN-94 Nexter: a version built for Turkey that has a more sloped upper front plate, and has a Turkish built Nexter systems 1 man turret with a 25mm autocannon
Zimbru 2000: a B33 APC with same turret as MLI-84M
Saur 2: a modern Romanian APC with an autocannon and a missle launcher with 3 rocket pods (unsure if its an IFV or SPAA variant)
TR-85M1A: a TR-85M1 with 4 extra smoke launchers, turret composite screens that take up slightly more volume, and an extra steel armor plate welded to the UFP
TR-85M2: an unofficial term for a TR-85M1 with an IVECO 1,200hp engine
TR-2000: basically a leopard 2a5 turret mounted on a modified TR-125 chassis (tho no physical prototype was built, it was considered by the army, and had 3 variants proposed, each with 3D models designed) i actually made a forum post about this tank thats currently pending approval as of right now. I think id make for a much more unique alternative to the Abrams
Im sure theres more, but you get the idea
first off, i meant to vote France, but i accidentally hit other, and the forum wont let me change it
I personally think that France would be a much better choice than pairing it with Germany or the USSR
Because Romanias biggest allies in the Interwar era were Czechaslovakia, and France, and because of that, their military relied heavily on equipment provided to them, in Frances case (relating to tanks) Romania would licence produce a decent number FT-17s, and their own version of the Renault UE Carrier. Later they would purchase a decent number of R35s.
However Romanias relationship with Germany at the time was done more out of despiration from the threat of the USSR, and since by then, Germany now occupied BOTH of their biggest military allies. And tho their relationship has since improved in the modern era, France and Italy have a longer history of good relations
As for the Soviets, that was primarily done because they had no choice, and even throughout the cold war, romania would try to distance its reliance on the Soviet Union.
As for Italy, tho its relationship also has a long standing positive history, the addition of Hungary in the next update complicates things, because on top of Italy now getting a large sum of vehicles from another nation, Hungary and Romania have a decent amount of resentment for one another even to this day, primarily due to Romania taking Transylvania during WW1
Imo now since Italy has Hungarian subtree, there is no doubt there will be a lot of Romanian stuff as well. Also they say more Romanian vehicles may come to supplement the Italian TT, hopefully not only premiums, but regular in a similar way to Hungary, Romania will make the addition of Hungarian line way more reasonable.
+1
Also, there are some other Malyutka ATGM carriers that were not mentioned:
Based on RN-94 with Malyutka M2T possibly (shown at EXPOMIL 1999)
At the time of EXPOMIL 1999, the Malyutka M2T was already developed.
Based on B-33 with an unknown variant of Malyutka
Based on TAB-C with Malyutka 9M14M (in 1989)
Sadly, no pictures available.
More info:
RN-94 & B-33 Rachete antitanc in Armata Romana: Maliutka/AT-3 Sagger | RomaniaMilitary
TAB-C Nicolae Ceauşescu şi programele industriei de apărare
This is very nice, though I am concerned about the AB md. 1941. It is a separate vehicle from the Italian AB 41, one developed by Romania independently which just shares the same naming scheme.
The unfortunate problem is that we don’t know what it looked like since only one prototype was ever produced and I for myself have been unable to find pictures of it.
As for the Abrams, it has been confirmed that a new export Abrams tank would be separately developed specifically for the needs of the needs of the Romanian army, under the designation “M1A2R”.
The vehicle is currently under development but we don’t know any specific details about it yet.