Well I don’t have the Japanese tech tree though, but those are some interesting vehicles. However, at the moment the BTRs dont seem to be doing well in game. They have come up with new maps to make all these new vehicles work, we cant just keep on playing in maps that are around 10 years old or some slight re-works of them.
The in-game BTR-80A is quite a bit different. The BTR-80A uses pretty much the same gun, the 2A72 which is produced in Ukraine as the ZTM-1 housed in the BPPU module. They do have the same RoF but some things the Ukrainian version has over the BTR-80A is that the combat module is vastly different. The BTR-3E1 uses the unmanned BM-3M Shturm-M Combat Module which uses a stabilized 30mm ZTM-1 autocannon that also features a stabilizer sleeve around the barrel for increased accuracy. Not only that, the vehicle is equipped with 2x RK-2S tandem-HEAT ATGM’s (w/ 6x stored inside) that can penetrate 800mm of armor behind ERA as well as a KBA-117 30mm grenade launcher, and KT-7.62mm coaxial machine gun. It also has good thermals. You’re getting a lot more bang for your buck. One thing that does suck is that you’re relegated to the same APDS round as the BTR-80A.
BTR-3E1
Also, the BTR-3RK is the tank destroyer version with 4x of the RK-2S missiles in the ready-to-fire position:
BTR-3RK
7 Likes
With all the improvements you mentioned and the ATGMS it would go up in br though most likely it would be placed in 8.7 to 9.3 br category. If it can get to places faster than mbts it could be a good flanking vehicle.
1 Like
Exactly, that’s the most likely BR bracket for both of them. The ATGM’s are pretty punchy and the autocannon can still cut vehicle modules and light armor pretty well. The missile has 2x versions, the RK-2S which is the anti-tank version with the tandem-HEAT warhead and the RK-2OF which is the HE version for light armor, emplacements, etc.
- The missile is the second one from the top. Sometimes designated as R-2S.
3 Likes
With a tandem warhead it will definitely pen 9.3s even top-tier mbts will be pend in weak spot area.
Yup, the missile will play in-game similarly to the M3A3 Bradley’s TOW-2A missile for its ability to punch through ERA/armor.
What about the 30mm cannon, does it fire mini-kenetic rounds like the bmp?
And when Russia and Ukraine are no longer in conflcit the exact same status quo will exist.
Problem with an Eastern tech tree is the biggest player in the East is combined Poland and DDR.
Ukraine will largely be Soviet tanks modernised (copy and paste or Western technology)
Argument about one tree having everything etc
I also dont see that was a viable leak as that is far too many nations to try and fit into a singular tech tree.
1 Like
Yes, they will be two independent nations with large amounts of vehicles that can see there way in-game in there separate, respective trees.
Easy fix to this is focusing on one nation’s vehicles for the tree while the rest are event/squadron, etc. This can be seen already within my tree formats and I’ve addressed this many times because the goal is to focus on Ukrainian indigenous developments. It’s not one nation gets all, its tailored. Besides, even if it was that we already have something comparable forming in-game in the form of the United Kingdom with India, South Africa, etc. This is more focused to prevent that.
This is subjective to opinion and even then, all nations exhibit a form of copy and paste. Some more than others such as in the Israeli and Chinese Tree’s. Any new tree, period, will heavily draw on copy and paste to fill in gaps. This applies to Türkiye, Poland, the Korea’s, etc.
There’s no rule or set limit by Gaijin. The most nations we have so far in one tree is 4x. Adding it in this way is the best way to avoid any issues and besides it’s logical. Ukraine uses a lot of Polish equipment and they both have developed quite a bit of stuff together. WPB Ander’s prototype even has Ukrainian hard-kill APS installed.
**Made a small edit, it was an unnecessary addition.
In the end, you’re more than welcome to your opinion as am I. It’s just waiting to see what happens.
2 Likes
much of the list is wrong, so it’s definitely not a real leak and it also has seen a few changes after some people called out issues with it.
It’s a roadmap, not a for certain as seen with the economy.
Much of the original list was correct. There was a whole discussion about it with Gszabi because the original list had ASEAN under China but that was revoked after further clarification with leakers
Edit: I also asked him directly about it (I won’t go in to details because I don’t want to make the guy mad) because I wanted to remake my Republic of Korea Sub-tree for the U.S. (also possibly doing a Iranian Sub-tree for Russia but we’ll see) as per the leak. The leak wasn’t fake, it’s likely a reach out attempt for feedback and a long-term planning list that could change.
1 Like
You may be right, but so far it’s been mostly wrong.
Even the European tree had Hungary in it before they edited it not long after someone called it out.
1 Like
Yeah it’s definitely not a perfect list. I agree. I honestly don’t know what they will do, Gaijin tends to surprise…not necessarily in a good way 😂
2 Likes
So real 😂
1 Like
What vehicle is that, is it a troop carrier with a machinegun/auto cannon on top?
Keyword might. We don’t even know if Japan is getting a Thai ground subtree, or if Thailand is its own nation. It was passed for consideration, but so was a lot of vehicles years ago, that have yet to come.
Well we will see what we gonna get in the future and which nation will get what. Theoretically Japan is missing heavily armored tanks.
not theoretically, they just are. A worse Tiger 1 @ 5.7 (that costs 80 GJN) and a 1.3 Premium. That’s it. No tech tree heavy. The only vehicle I’ve been able to consistently bulk shots in is the Ho-Ri.