It really saddens me to see this be worded like this as if pre 2020 Ukraine has nothing to offer. I know this wasnt meant this way but it’s rather poor way to word it.
All those T-64 mods, BMP-1 modernizations, BTR-4’s and T-84 line are something to actually wait Ukraine TT in game for.
In all honesty Gaijin will see all the copy paste slop from NATO it can add and will proceed to make Ukraine just Israel but with even less unique stuff.
Very similar situation to Finland, they will just add shit they can copy paste into Ukraine TT and proceed to release it like T-64BV thats already in game, T-72A, Leo2A4/2A6 and same BM Oplot
Instead of earlier variants of BM Oplots or T-84’s or anything else that’s actually unique to Ukraine.
With how updates have been I see no reason to be hopeful for Gaijin
hmm … yea maybe it wasn’t worded the best
but judging by the way people have been commenting here —and by the volume of comments opposing the addition of trees over the past two years ~you can’t expect the literature to be accurate every time (countering claims such as “Ukraine has/had nothing unique” or “never made anything unique of its own”)
yea thats why a ukrainian TT is a bad idea, I am all in for TT to have tanks from 2-3 countries but Ukraine has Challengers, Ambrams, LEOs 2 and T80s i am in as a subtree but with only the modifications in USSR tanks like T84 or all the other Ukrainian tanks and IFVs that they made for the USSR tree not as a independent TT or a subtree to other TTs
but i agree poland to be added as a TT with other eastern and central european countries(like ukraine), poland has Leo2, T series, Abrams thats 3 and its ok (K2 isnt yet in the game)
Well remember too, not all of them have to be Tech Tree or have to come to the game at all. It’s turning into a German-style East/West Tree with all of its NATO equipment as well as new vehicle’s it’s coming out with are of NATO standard. Not to mention the unique conversions of the T-72-120 into a NATO round-firing MBT with a bustle autoloader like the Leclerc amongst others are crazy.
I wouldn’t be opposed to Ukraine being in an Eastern/Polish TT as a sub-tree but preferably after issues are sorted out between the two.
yea thats what i said i like to see all the ukrainian modifications in all the USSR vehicles as a subtree in USSR ( samethink that a lot are theorizing is that USSR = Russia ant thats the mistake USSR is russia, ukraine, kazakstan, armenia all the 17(?) countries that was part of the union and so ukraine belongs to USSR TT as much as russia)
The thing is a lot of the modifications can be seen as almost as an equivalent to nations like Czechia upgrading there own variants of T-72/Soviet equipment.
Let’s take the T-72M4CZ of Czechia and the T-84-120 ‘Yatagan’, both use unique/indigenous ERA, both had new systems installed that are NATO compatible, both featured power systems upgrades, etc. Not to mention both have major upgrades in firepower whether its NATO-compatible ammunition or indigenous ammunition.
The same comparisons could be extended to the Slovakian BVP and the Ukrainian BMP-1TS.
Best more to think of it as a “former-Warsaw” style nation since it’s heavily integrated with NATO equipment now.
I really think if added this should be a subtree of the USSR tree not enough unique vehicles and itll just make grinding stuff like the oplot much longer
Why not just create a tree with three or more countries, such as Poland, the Czech Republic, and Ukraine, so that only unique and interesting vehicles can be added? Individually, these nations are not enough for a tree, but together they could make the best tree in the game.
By the look of things it’s not BM Oplot but T-84 produced in 2000, as the thing the author describes in the video (which is literally named “T-84” and not “BM Oplot”) has the base armor of T-80UD (3x HHRHA + 2x textolite layers) + single “Nizh” module layer, whereas Oplots have Duplet module which gets one textolite layer replaced by Nizh ERA (thus forming “Duplet”).
The problem here is the armor composition: author describes the 5-layer T-80UD base armor + “Nizh” frontal armor, which is a trait of Object 478DU4 (the DU model that was going by its “soviet” naming T-84), thus the armor package of the thing is that of T-84 and not BM Oplot (which is Object 478DU9).
However, the author also shows the insides of the tank, and there we have seen 1A46 day-time sight with TPN-4E thermal imaging sight as a part of FCS for gunner and PNK-5 combined sight for commander which were part of DU9 model package.
Thus it seems like it is a DU4 brought to DU9 standards via the switch of optical systems (that of Oplot). However, armor-wise, it is not Oplot but T-84 (Oplot’s defining feature is Duplet, whereas T-84s had a single Nizh layer on UFP)
