Well, Gaijin just never defined them as “sub-trees” or “tech trees”, but they are implied “filler nations” as they were never directly named what they are in tt scale, but have their purpose clearly defined.
Even though with the addition of Australian and Canadian Hornets, one might speculate Canada and Australia to become sub-trees for the UK.
They got it as an addition for air, since there isnt much to add for the future, not the case for ground.
Furthermore they got canada as a premium as well, since they shared models and it was easy.
Uk wont just get every australian / canadian vehicle in the future. The hornets in this case fit the criteria. Air is not line up dependent and affects additions way less then ground would
Agree, but that’s just usual Gaijin practice that affects all additions, not country-specific ones.
I perfectly know that, but again, it contradicts your previous statement “vehicles go where they fit best”, and that “fit best” is 99% of the time vehicle origin (e.g. America, Germany).
Maybe the UK would benefit from a tank that actually gets proper round and is not crawling to battlefield, you know.
But it is defined by aforementioned “fit best”.
True to most extent, but why did Ram I join the UK tree only? Why not the US as well, there is like only 1 researchable 3.0 vehicle, but somehow the only nation appears to be the UK (even though Ram II was originally in the US tt only)
I also understand that the UK is not getting all commonwealth nations, thus not their vehicles. At that rate, the UK would have more than half of the world as sub-trees, with these sub-trees encompassing all vehicles in the world.
That’s my view at things, at least.
EDIT: I also think that I am getting off-topic in the thread covering Swedish additions, so I’ll stop here.
i am quoting Smin there, fitting can have several ways
yes, cause they canada and australia only have a small industry for indiginous vehicles.
Unique vehicles as seen with 2a4m can as example go to germany.
US already has several F/A 18 variants, the australian and canadian ones arent specialy unique, thats why Uk got them.
UK pretty much gets the scraps, that arent worth adding elsewhere.
Or in the rare example i can name , the australian Redback K21 IFV would go to UK, since korea aint a thing yet.
canadian 2a6 scraps oh wow, there is not more australia or canada could even deliver to begin with.
By far the wrong countries if you look for MBT solutions, 2a6 is becoming old quite fast.
Still other modernised T-90 Bishma version that can be implemented
And the Arjun tank indiginous tank 2a4 from wish.
MBT options are in india that can be implemented
thats the answer, it fit better into Uk , where a line up was already possible
on a sidenote about gaijin’s cv90, i cant really understand why and how gaijin decided about the armor for the cv90.
if we compare the cv9030 fin and cv9040b, the fin has some addon composite screens, adds a better engine (adds ~100kg) and smaller gun (removes ~500kg), for that it gaijin adds 4.3t, which means that 4.7t are kind of unaccounted for and if you count the ammo the weight decreases it by another ~250kg, but there are still the addition of the composite screens, idk if composite screens the increase the weight adds up to 4.7t
if we compare the cv9030 fin and cv9035dk, the dk has less composite screens, adds spall liners in the hull (adds ~100kg - ~500kg), gives it a bit bigger gun (adds ~60kg) and a better version of the fin’s engine (maybe adds ~100kg), for that it gaijin adds 4.3t, which means that 4t - 3.6t are kind of unaccounted for and if you count the ammo the weight increases it by ~22kg, there are still the composite screen changes, but the increase in weight probably aint adding up to 4t - 3.6t if an increase at all.
if we compare the cv9030 fin and cv9030 Mk4, the mk4 has more composite screens on the hull (2x in the front & 3x on the sides), but take away almost all composite screens on the turret, takes away spall liners (removes ~100kg - ~500kg), gives it spike-LR’s (maybe adds ~150kg for launcher, electronics & ammo), a better version of the fin’s engine (maybe adds ~100kg) and adds hydropneumatic suspension, for that it gaijin adds 9.5t, which means that 9.35t - 9.75t are kind of unaccounted for, and if you count the ammo the weight decreases it by another ~145kg, which seems like a big increase in weight for what it adds / changes, there are still the composite screen changes, but the increase in weight probably isn’t adding up to 9.35t - 9.75t
have i missed something or is gaijin just being wierd?
Okay, so I modeled the penetrator based on the cross section image of the m/95 and it is indeed about 8mm thick. This also gave me the volume of the penetrator, which is about 1.6 cubic centimeters (1.6 cc). Considering tungsten penetrator alloys are around 17 - 18.5 g/cc, that gives it a weight of 28 - 29.6 grams.
Though, there’s only so much accuracy you can get from an image, so I’d give a gram or so in plus/minus to account for any discrepancies. Still, 53-54 mm in pen isn’t too bad.
Very nice fellas, still a bit aways from unlocking it me. Also very nice to hear about the camo, not a fan of the standard cold green color, same on the Finnish tanks.
I think people really want 50cal on trucks at low tier because of there general utility of rushing around. If I was Gaijin I would add a 50cal jeep because almost every nation had one. Did Sweden or the sub trees get any jeeps?
Length: 5.32 m (5.05 m excl. spare wheel) Height: 2.8 m (2.44 m excl. roof equipment) Width: 2.21 m
Protection level: NATO AEP-55 STANAG4569 Level 1.
Wheelbase: 2.90 m Curb weight: 7,885 kg (Series 1: 6,920 kg) Max payload: 1,500 kg (Series 1: 1,000 kg) Ground clearance: 437 mm Tire dimension: 335/80 R20
Gradeability: 60 % Fording capability: 80 cm water Obstacle clearance: 30 cm Trench crossing: 50 cm Side slope: 40 % Turning radius: 17 m
Fuel tank volume: 140 liters
Armament: Mount, ring mount or Vapenstation 01 with Ksp 90, Ksp 58, Ksp 88. etc.
Engine: Steyr-Daimler-Puch M 16, 6 cyl, 3.2 liter turbo diesel with intercooler Power: 181 hp (135 kW) at 3,800 rpm with emissions control Euro III, 215 hp (160 kW) at 4,000 rpm if emissions control is disconnected Torque: 420 Nm at 1,800 rpm
Transmission: Allison 1000 SP, Automatic 5+1 (high/low) Top speed: 110 km/h Fuel consumption: approx. 2 liters/mil (1 mil = 10 km)
Has anyone got a bug report I can upvote about the C&P of mods from the old CV90105 TML to the one they added to the tech tree, since they haven’t given it new features like the drone, which is odd given it’s rank 6 status, and just a general issue since it makes mods cost marginally more
Nej, ive been on a hiatus, for bug reporting i got the quadricolor camo bug report and called it a day lmao. I dont believe a bug report has been pushed but i could make one of there isnt one