Should be around mid to late September iirc
Well later than I thought …But I still think they should put this upadte in to the next next edition
Same here as the November one is too small and too close for the Christmas one
Well you are right too
Both of them would be fine to add. The VT4 would plug the gap between the T-84 BM Oplot-T and the earlier M60s. The ZTZ1969-IIA would be between the M60s and the M48A5, with a potential premium of the ZTZ1969-IIA that was rearmed with the 105-mm L7, and the earlier lineup would be filled by M41s, Scorpion, and T17E2 variants. The VN16 and the BTR-3E w/ 90LP would both be good premium candidates, while the BTR-3E1, BTR-3RK, and VN1 could all find a placement within the normal lines somewhere.
4 Likes
Absolutely brother!
What about Type-69?
Squadron battles
Thailand purchased ZTZ1969-IIA in 1987 and used them in active service until 2004 when they ran out of spare parts for them. At least some of them had their main guns replaced by the 105 mm Type 83-A gun, presumably since that Chinese gun is a license production of the L7 and thus could use the plentiful ammunition stockpile that Thailand had from their M60s.
They were referred to as main tank type 30 in Thai service, with no distinction in the name between the 100 mm and 105 mm-armed variants.
3 Likes
I really hope VT-4 won’t be a premium. There already exists a good grinder in the TT, the type 90 fuji and the VT-4 is one of Thailand’s main tanks. This is the same bs as with the Hungarian Pzh2000, a main line of equipment being made premium.
Remember when premiums used to be extremely rare variants/prototypes or specific vehicles with history/beauty markings? Yeah me neither.
7 Likes
It wouldn’t be because Type 90 is already there.
If it’s not tech tree it would be squadron [prediction].
1 Like
You can say the same thing about the the T-84. Both that the VT-4 would end up in the 11.X range, though part of that is dependent on if Thailand has access to the DTC-10-125 munition or not. Otherwise, with only 3VBM17 available to them, they could end up in the 10.X range.
That is very nice when it happens (like with Type 90 Fuji) because you can always try out the tech tree vehicle to see if you’ll like the premium.
Fun fact the Type 10’s and TKX’s armor ingame last time i checked is incorrect and even on the TKX the composites dont even work
not to mention these tanks are existing bug reports spanning since release
the VT and T84 would be a nice addition especially for the thai bro’s who were really wanting it
2 Likes
Absolutely insane take.
No other export vehicle is treated like chinese players want VT-4 to be treated.
Why should the VT-4 be special in this regard?
13 Likes
Reject Thai Oplot, Embrace Ukrainian BM Oplot for Soviet tree
Spoiler
obviously this is a joke, they’re both great
4 Likes
That is an outright lie. The placement of many other vehicles have been reconsidered for a variety of reasons.
For example, the exported F-14 Tomcat has been in service longer with the IRI than Imperial Iran. Yet, the F-14 IRIAF was put into the US tree, not USSR as would be logical given alliances, because US players would have been angry their technology was put into the tech tree of a hostile nation. Is this not an example of the same issue, one which ended well? This can be applied for the situation we have here.
Another example is modern Ukrainian vehicles, many using technology designed/produced in other Western countries, including vehicles that are modifications of Soviet technology (such as T-series tanks), are not present in the USSR tree. Even though Ukraine, as a former SSR, would logically be an USSR subtree from a Soviet perspective. This is because of specific current events. If modern Ukrainian vehicles were placed into the USSR tree, there would undoubtedly be much uproar among the Western playerbase. Therefore Gaijin has not done so, and are instead planning to release Oplot in the tech tree of a Western country, Japan.
Gaijin has shown an amount of cultural and political consideration before. It is not unreasonable that they do the same in the present situation.
2 Likes
While I get your point, the example is invalid because there is no such Iranian branch that the F14 Tomcat would be put to instead of the US tree. To my knowledge there are no concrete reasons as to why a country is put as a supplementary branch to another. Alliances, history, whatever ties may be. My point is, an alliance with Russia isn’t a concrete reason to put the F14 in the USSR tech tree, and where is the evidence that political factors were the reasoning that the F14 was placed in the US tree.
Let’s look at other alliances. The commonwealth for example. Canadian and Australian vehicles are split off from each other instead of being consolidated under Great Britain. Why can’t the Thai VT4 be split off from the Thai branch? because Australia and Canada does not have a standing branch that consolidates their vehicles while Thailand does.
I do believe there’s an underlying East vs West sentiment that shouldn’t be interfering. Logically the Ukrainian players may have strong feelings against this but personally I can understand history and see vehicles from Kharkiv Morozov plant be put into the USSR. I just don’t assume what ‘western players’ want or think when I don’t even know who counts as ‘western players’. I think it’s a little presumptious but that’s just me.
RE-up:
Iran isnt a sub-tree of USSR, So there’s not really a reason for it in the USSR tree.
in my opinion US should’ve gotten it with the Imperial Iran version (before the Islamic Republic & modernization w/o fakour-90s, yasser & Russian missiles), leaving the F-14AM (as it was called) as a proper vehicle to be added elsewhere since its a nation who is hostile to the US. But that ship’s already sailed
2 Likes