They do, but M48s are rather common for a reason, same as the T-54 and Centurion. They were the staples of the Cold War and exported extensively. Their commonality only reflects how often they were seen in conflicts across the globe. In Israel’s case, they fought Centurion Mk.8 models used by Jordan with their own Sho’t Kal variants.
I personally want them to slap on Israeli field mods and decor at a minimum, like how the Tiran 6 has an M2 mounted to the gun. In other cases, Israel modified many Soviet guns to use the US-supplied M68 cannon instead of their original 100mm guns, which are usually designated under “S” of some form, from my experience. This gun swap also applies to their Centurions, which takes the form of the Israeli “Sharir” cannon.
I find people who are against an Israeli tech tree confusing, considering how profound Israel’s mark on Cold War tank history is. In terms of combat testing, there were few better opportunities for Western powers to learn how their tanks performed against their Soviet counterparts (and vice versa) than the conflicts Israel fought with its neighbors during this period. For a game that focuses on tank history and includes the Cold War, refusing to include the Israeli tech tree is simply unacceptable.
Entirely depends on the tank. If it has a place in Soviet/Russian military history then it’s fine. If it was only a trial vehicle, then I’d be against.
They might be premium, but it would be remiss if the Soviets didn’t get the M3 Lee or Valentine, given the importance these tanks have to the course of the Easter Front.
On the other hand, the Centauro and T70 GMC (Hellcat) shouldn’t be added, since they were only trialed and did not contribute in any meaningful way to Soviet/Russian tank history/development
And they are not needed, USSR has their own similar domestic stuff
The Mi-28 and the AHS were very needed (and the T-80U in some extended) meanwhile Russia dosent need any trialed vehicle as they have their own domestic stuff
Hello, I know visually it looks like a regular IS-3 (mostly because the headlamps, but in this suggestion I am using written sources that claim to be an IS-3M. Also that there wer normal IS-3s but with the V-54 engine (even if not the rest of changes to the standard M version were made, like gun, infrared night vision, ammo rack, etc.)
Also you said smth about the M designation entering service in 1962, but USSR was supplying IS-3 tanks to Egypt until late 60s (1967).
The sources are even the same you used.
Russia could use a higher BR light tank, as I’m unaware of any better that can be added outside of the T-15. Maybe some are slipping my mind at the moment, though.
All I can think of for now is the other variants of the 2S25 “Sprut” that were tinkered with, but none of them would be substantially better than our current variant.
PS: PLEASE ADD PNEUMATIC SUSPENSION TO THE 2S25 GAIJIN
For some reason I forgot, probably because I haven’t ever seen any period photos of it. But even if the Matilda is a museum piece now, I think it’s possible to add if the Israelis ever drove it under its own power, which would constitute as “testing” by virtue of it being functional and with IDF personnel operating at the same time.
Of course, as mentioned above it won’t be of any use for heavy tank tasks, so I’d rather not see it for the time being, but the option is there.
You can also easily identify IS-3 from IS-3M via the roof MG, and in at least one close up you have provided, said MG is visibly a DShKM (if you understand the difference between the regular and modernized variants of DShK, you can look for yourself).
