tanks/vehicles M48A2GA2 - West German Modified Patton

[*AceArchangel 908]

3 minutes ago, Dundee93 said:

I support. I would like to see all nations get the vehicles that were used by their military. +1

Also, Gaijin may have ruined this by putting the M47 as a premium, but it seems to me it would have made sense to make the post war German tree the West German tree, with East German equipment as premium (given that West Germany is the political predecessor to the current German state and was responsible for developing uniquely German equipment). 

The introduction of the M47 as a premium did sort of mix things up, but I do understand why it was done as it is a copy and paste of the US one. Although I do believe enough is different on this vehicle to warrent a spot on the standard research tree. I understand your view of the East German tanks as premiums as they were not indigenous designs.

[stefffff1871 2,448]

This was my dream for the TierV/VI for Germany with the russian and american tanks

https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/358781-extended-war-thunder-project-wip/https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/14fdJYzjVli_IZ_tRdWeQr8prk_JqeVnozv88C7Ph9d0/edit#gid=0

https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/379326-alternative-german-airforces-tree/

 

I want nations to be realistic as possible in game, so i have nothing against pure copy&paste vehicles in the regular tree (m47, t54 ...). in my opinion tanks, which were intended only for export and not for the army of the originountry are worse.

 

Edited November 6, 2017 by stefffff1871

[AtomicPope 3,953]

Given the introduction of T6 and the fact that IT was used in large numbers and Germany having limited options for postwar vehicles I think it would be a good addition to the main tree. 

 

+1

[Dundee93 508]

11 minutes ago, *AceArchangel said:

The introduction of the M47 as a premium did sort of mix things up, but I do understand why it was done as it is a copy and paste of the US one. Although I do believe enough is different on this vehicle to warrent a spot on the standard research tree. I understand your view of the East German tanks as premiums as they were not indigenous designs.

I don't know why they didn't add the T-54 as a premium instead though. It would have made much more sense and might have been less work for the developers. 

11 minutes ago, stefffff1871 said:

I want nations to be realistic as possible in game, so i have nothing against pure copy&paste vehicles in the regular tree (m47, t54 ...). in my opinion tanks, which were intended only for export and not for the army of the originountry are worse.

My reasoning for East German vehicles as premiums is both that they were not indigenous designs, as AceArchangel said, and that they were almost certainly never used alongside indigenous designs like the Leopard I and Kjpz 4-5, as they were operated by a separate and more or less hostile military. As premium, they can be used in game but only for people who are willing to pay for them, which I think is an ideal solution. 

 

 

[*AceArchangel 908]

11 minutes ago, stefffff1871 said:

This was my dream for the TierV/VI for Germany with the russian and american tanks

*Snip*

I want nations to be realistic as possible in game, so i have nothing against pure copy&paste vehicles in the regular tree (m47, t54 ...). in my opinion tanks, which were intended only for export and not for the army of the originountry are worse.

 

I love the look of that tree, even though I know in my heart much of it will likely not happen, I would love to see those.

10 minutes ago, AtomicPope said:

Given the introduction of T6 and the fact that IT was used in large numbers and Germany having limited options for postwar vehicles I think it would be a good addition to the main tree. 

 

+1

My thoughts exactly, thank you for your show of support!

4 minutes ago, Dundee93 said:

I don't know why they didn't add the T-54 as a premium instead though. It would have made much more sense and might have been less work for the developers. 

My reasoning for East German vehicles as premiums is both that they were not indigenous designs, as AceArchangel said, and that they were almost certainly never used alongside indigenous designs like the Leopard I and Kjpz 4-5, as they were operated by a separate and more or less hostile military. As premium, they can be used in game but only for people who are willing to pay for them, which I think is an ideal solution. 

I still think we could see specific export variants of the T-54 and T-55 in the German main tree possibly in the form of the T-54AMZ or the T-55AM as they were not utilized by their nation of origin, although I do see your point about why it should be a premium as well. Personally I would be happy to see them either way.

[Banfly 588]

On 11/6/2017 at 8:18 PM, *AceArchangel said:

I still think we could see specific export variants of the T-54 and T-55 in the German main tree possibly in the form of the T-54AMZ or the T-55AM as they were not utilized by their nation of origin

 

That could be an option, but it would only make sense if the MM for GDR/FRG was separate but the issue of armor deficiency in top tier tanks used by the bundeswehr would still persist thus removing or replacing the MiG15bis (to keep in line with the designs fielded by the FRG which is clearly what Gaijin desires) and incorporating adaptions of western designs (such as the M48A2GA2) used by the BW under the FRG in the techtree would be a more sensible and logical solution. That's why I'm fully supporting this suggestion!

Edited November 7, 2017 by Banfly

[kev2go 5,112]

On 2017-08-04 at 10:38 PM, *AceArchangel said:

And Germany has one type of tank that by your standards has to fill the spot for the multitude of US and RU tanks...

Again that just clutters Germany with too many Leopards, that is the opposite of diversity. The M48 has a german gun on a US chassis and the only way that you are fine with this is if it is a somewhat under powered American gun on a German chassis, cool reasoning.

Difference is I am asking for one tank not 6, also it is an indigenous modification with German equipment, not a copy paste vehicle.

Double standard, especially given your following statement, seen below.

Then why has this not happened with Japan, why are people not begging for more American tanks? Germany used the M47, M48, T-54 and T-55 it won't get the T-55 as that is Russia's top vehicle the M47 works at 7.3 as Germany has nothing there, and the M48 and T-54 are the only alternatives and two tanks are not going to break the game, that is a major over reaction.

The T-55 has a two plane stabilizer and a much better gun and ammunition than the T-54 (the only tank Germany would get as it won't get a nations top BR vehicle), The M60 has better hull and turret armour, different ammunition and a two plane stabilizer something that all M48's don't have.

 

Nope M60 Is closer  to M48A5 than you think. ( or rather vice versa given that M48 upgrade came after the M60 production)

 

Quote

 

So no they won't ruin the point of grinding different nations trees, that is a ridiculous and unfounded claim.

Of course you would support another 8.0 American tank while also putting down another nations... really, this would make how many 8.0 tanks for the USA now? Compared to how many German? Japanese? British? Come on man, that is elitism and personal bias talking.

That happens a lot, again the CL-13 is a better variant of the US Sabre, the Japanese have a better variant of the Sabre as well, Italy has a better variant of the F-84... etc do you want me to go on?...

Again this is the same situation with the M48A2GA2 the CL-13 is a modification of a US vehicle used by the Germans with better performance than the US counterpart.

 

 

Quote

The M48A2GA2 is not the same as the M60 as the armour, engine, and internals are completely different plus the M60 AOS gets a two plane stabilizer which the M48A2GA2 doesn't get thus like the CL-13 it has a worse armament.

 

You realize he was comparing to something called the M60. Not the M60A1 AOS. That  is almost entirely differnt tank. There are 2 M60s in tier 5. Vanilla M60 ISnt much different From the M48A5.

 

You must be confusing the Two.

 

Spoiler

 

M60

 

 

 

M60A1 "AOS"

 

Differers From "vanilla" m60 by having New "needloe nose" Turret, Which is both thicker and more Sloped. And whilst the Hull is the same in Shape it is 16mm Thicker. PLus AOS modfication to the M60A1 gave it Stabilizers.

 

This had better Stock APDS ( M728 instead of M392A2 that the m60 has) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M60 has no Stabilizers and its turret isnt better, Nor its the Hull in Thickness ( just different Sloping) 

 

the M60 sports the same turret as the M48 patton series, merely reffited with a L7 105mm gun ( Like M48A5)  TAnk Hull/ Chasis is different AS the Frontal Sloping is shaped differently, but has the sam amount of protection ( 95mm thickness) sloping makes it only very slightly more efficient than the M48 hull. not enough to make a difference against APFSDS or HEAT. Ammo is the same. German DM13 is a Liscense built copy of the British L28. As is  American  M392 which has the same stats as Dm13 and L28 in war thunder. SO ammo is the same also.

 

Any internal Upgrades make hold no relevance as gajin does not model Fire Control SYstems, let alone implemented Historcal Tank sights  (UNless you count the Addition OF Stabilzers and Rangefinding Devices compared to tanks that dont have them.)

 

IM really against M48A2GA2 because its fits meta, But Germany needs Le1a4 and Leo1a5 and possbily 1A6 more than M48A2GA2 with DM23,  which lacks mobility and Stabs of other tanks at this range. . The extra  Armor  to the leopards series is redunant becasue at this range APFSDS and HEAT could pass through it like a hot knife through butter anyways.

Edited November 9, 2017 by kev2go

[*AceArchangel 908]

6 hours ago, kev2go said:

Nope M60 Is closer  to M48A5 than you think. ( or rather vice versa given that M48 upgrade came after the M60 production)

 

You realize he was comparing to something called the M60. Not the M60A1 AOS. That  is almost entirely differnt tank. There are 2 M60s in tier 5. Vanilla M60 ISnt much different From the M48A5.

 

You must be confusing the Two.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

M60

 

 

 

M60A1 "AOS"

 

Differers From "vanilla" m60 by having New "needloe nose" Turret, Which is both thicker and more Sloped. And whilst the Hull is the same in Shape it is 16mm Thicker. PLus AOS modfication to the M60A1 gave it Stabilizers.

 

This had better Stock APDS ( M728 instead of M392A2 that the m60 has) 

 

 

 

 

M60 has no Stabilizers and its turret isnt better, Nor its the Hull in Thickness ( just different Sloping) 

 

the M60 sports the same turret as the M48 patton series, merely reffited with a L7 105mm gun ( Like M48A5)  TAnk Hull/ Chasis is different AS the Frontal Sloping is shaped differently, but has the sam amount of protection ( 95mm thickness) sloping makes it only very slightly more efficient than the M48 hull. not enough to make a difference against APFSDS or HEAT. Ammo is the same. German DM13 is a Liscense built copy of the British L28. As is  American  M392 which has the same stats as Dm13 and L28 in war thunder. SO ammo is the same also.

 

Any internal Upgrades make hold no relevance as gajin does not model Fire Control SYstems, let alone implemented Historcal Tank sights  (UNless you count the Addition OF Stabilzers and Rangefinding Devices compared to tanks that dont have them.)

 

IM really against M48A2GA2 because its fits meta, But Germany needs Le1a4 and Leo1a5 and possbily 1A6 more than M48A2GA2 with DM23,  which lacks mobility and Stabs of other tanks at this range. . The extra  Armor  to the leopards series is redunant becasue at this range APFSDS and HEAT could pass through it like a hot knife through butter anyways.

You are arguing a 3 month old reply for what reason? It wasn’t even directed at you. I don’t know if you have some sort of grudge against me or something, maybe stemming from my other suggestion. but I am not going to stand to have someone intentionally trying to flame every suggestion I have made. You intentionally only argue my comments, which insinuates that you have some sort of vendetta against me for some ridiculous reason. This feels more personal than logical, unless you are going to have an open minded discussion, I warn that you leave me alone.

 

Your final argument results in you being against my suggestion just because you personally would like to see more Leo variants which is a fair belief, although that is not a reason for this suggestion to not be considered. But if you don’t agree you are free to say no in the poll.

Edited November 9, 2017 by *AceArchangel

[HMSD33Dauntless 1,257]

I would like to see this tank added in the German research tree at Rank V, with the Super M48 upgrade also added at Rank VI following the M48A2GA2.

[kev2go 5,112]

21 hours ago, *AceArchangel said:

You are arguing a 3 month old reply for what reason?

 

Why bother posting in this thread then if its this old?

Quote

 

It wasn’t even directed at you.

 

there were factual misconceptions that need to straigtened out for the record. IE  COnfusing the  vanilla M60 with M60A1 AOS. capabilties.

 

Quote

 

I don’t know if you have some sort of grudge against me or something, maybe stemming from my other suggestion. but I am not going to stand to have someone intentionally trying to flame every suggestion I have made. You intentionally only argue my comments, which insinuates that you have some sort of vendetta against me for some ridiculous reason. This feels more personal than logical, unless you are going to have an open minded discussion, I warn that you leave me alone.

 

 

 

You said it not I. perhapts its  personal to you, since you are the one Interpresting it as such for whatever reason.

 

I am not the only one replying to you.  Please realize that Just because people can correct factual misconspetions, Or Disagree with some of your reasoning, It doesnt mean We are all bogeymen With suppsoed Grudges out to get you.

 

You Preach open Discussion yet you yourself are intolerant of anyone NOt with your Viewpoint, or to anyone correcting any factual errors.

 

Quote

 

 

 

Your final argument results in you being against my suggestion just because you personally would like to see more Leo variants which is a fair belief, although that is not a reason for this suggestion to not be considered. But if you don’t agree you are free to say no in the poll.

 

Its because leo variants are better Suited at the 8.7 b.r range..... Diversity doesnt work IF the Vehicle in question is Inferior ( worse Mobility, and No stabilizers, with the extra steel armor not making difference aagainst HEAT and powerfull APFSDS.).

 

If you want the M48GA2 to actually be competitive, It should not have DM23, becasue Itl be forced to a 8.7 b.r and fight 9.0s.. With just Dm13 APDS ( Liscense built copy of L28 , it would be a 7.7 B,r grande vehicle like the Vanilla M60 in the US tree. And never meet 9.0 tanks at that range. Therefore it would be competitve and there ITs Alternate gameplay style would make more sense.

Edited November 10, 2017 by kev2go

[Admiral_Aruon 2,264]

41 minutes ago, kev2go said:

 

You said it not I. perhapts its  personal to you, since you are the one Interpresting it as such for whatever reason.

 

I am not the only one replying to you.  Please realize that Just because people can correct factual misconspetions, Or Disagree with some of your reasoning, It doesnt mean We are all bogeymen With suppsoed Grudges out to get you.

 

You Preach open Discussion yet you yourself are intolerant of anyone NOt with your Viewpoint, or to anyone correcting any factual errors.

 

uhh yeah... kev... i've seen "that" thread. if a moderator has to intervene and tell you to cool it and quit flaming, you aren't in the right. its because of that that it's fair to wonder if you have some issue with Ace, and it's more than fair to understand why he has an issue with you. it's not a matter of intolerance on his part, its him wondering why you keep going after his posts/comments over and over and over again. which you have. with gusto.

 

plus you kind of have a tendency to insult people's intelligence sometimes. i think Ace understands the difference between and M48A5 and the M60s.

 

41 minutes ago, kev2go said:

Its because leo variants are better Suited at the 8.7 b.r range..... Diversity doesnt work IF the Vehicle in question is Inferior ( worse Mobility, and No stabilizers, with the extra steel armor not making difference aagainst HEAT and powerfull APFSDS.).

 

lol if only gajiggles was seen this when they added the object 268- and promptly threw it to the wolves.

 

41 minutes ago, kev2go said:

If you want the M48GA2 to actually be competitive, It should not have DM23, becasue Itl be forced to a 8.7 b.r and fight 9.0s.. With just Dm13 APDS ( Liscense built copy of L28 , it would be a 7.7 B,r grande vehicle like the Vanilla M60 in the US tree. And never meet 9.0 tanks at that range. Therefore it would be competitve and there ITs Alternate gameplay style would make more sense.

 

ok now this IS a very fair thing to say. i'm hoping it avoids having the DM23. the regular M48 is only debatably a 7.7 considering 300mm+ penning HEAT-FS is now potentially common in the 6.3 and up category. even a faster M48 with an L7 is roughly equal to a regular M60 at 7.7. the only real difference is a slightly lower profile.

[kev2go 5,112]

1 hour ago, Admiral_Aruon said:

 

uhh yeah... kev... i've seen "that" thread. if a moderator has to intervene and tell you to cool it and quit flaming,

 

dont be naive to think that everyone in a position of Authority is alwasy in the right. When you get olders, maybe youl understand what i mean.

 

# trumped up Charges.

 

unlike in the real world , We dont get  a proper fair defense, and ability to reduce them to the ones that actually do apply. ( to be fair only 1 of them really would be if we had to be honest) 

 

Quote

 

 

you aren't in the right. its because of that that it's fair to wonder if you have some issue with Ace,

 

No  I dont.

 

I only have an issue with wilfull Ignorance,  Misleading others for personal Agenda ( I witnessed his  times over my times In the forums here. IN the G91 thread, and notably in the Many Gib T64 against M60 patton threads) , and lack of tolerance for opposing opinons despite apearing to maintaining a position of open mind. 

 

I correct for the sake of the recod to have as accurate information as possible. and so the community members can be properly informed.  

 

The latter IS opinion WHether or not M48 should be added, but my opinion is based on expereince on war thunder's. Gamplay Mechanics. Hence why I i wrote what i wrote re M48 effecivness and why its not 8.7 material.

 

 

Quote

 

and it's more than fair to understand why he has an issue with you. it's not a matter of intolerance on his part, its him wondering why you keep going after his posts/comments over and over and over again. which you have. with gusto.

 

There are a number of Russian Fanbois players that may  think i have an Issue with them, more than Ace would.

 

I dont go after His posts anymore than i Go after Any one elses. I View various threads incluing Suggestion section.

 

Look to be fair I can applaud ACe for  creatingthis  suggestion thread on a vehicle there is sufficient information on. ( or can be subsitited in certain areas to similarites to other platfrom if need be) 

 

Quote

 

plus you kind of have a tendency to insult people's intelligence sometimes.

 

 

no. I dont think you really havent been around long enough the forums.. Other usersKnow, that in the offtopic section i can be humours and Playfull. 

 

Quote

 i think Ace understands the difference between and M48A5 and the M60s.

 

He  said the m60 was far better than the M48A5 coud be because of Stabilizers and better ammo. Its clear it was mixed up with M60A1 AOS.

 

I got the wrong impression maybe.

 

 

EDiT:

 

sorry for further digression.. i needed to clear that up.

 

Also i gave my 2 cents.  on the m48.

Edited November 10, 2017 by kev2go

[Dundee93 508]

3 hours ago, kev2go said:

If you want the M48GA2 to actually be competitive, It should not have DM23, becasue Itl be forced to a 8.7 b.r and fight 9.0s.. With just Dm13 APDS ( Liscense built copy of L28 , it would be a 7.7 B,r grande vehicle like the Vanilla M60 in the US tree. And never meet 9.0 tanks at that range. Therefore it would be competitve and there ITs Alternate gameplay style would make more sense.

In my opinion it should be 8.0-8.3 with DM23. It would still be substantially weaker than 8.7-9.0 vehicles in practically every way, except with (unlockable) firepower to be competitive against top tier. I don't get why they set up the game so that in literally every category a 1.0 uptier (above about 5.0 BR) means you often end up with practically no chance against your enemies. For example, taking a Leopard 1A1 against (pre-nerf) Kpz-70s which are faster, better armored, better armed, and with a faster reload. Give the Leo DM23 and it is still bad odds, but it has a chance (although, HESH is still pretty good in that case). 

[P8triot 3,894]

There have been complaints from several persons about behavior in the thread.

 

I would like to politely suggest that we all make a greater effort to keep our posts strictly on topic and as objective as possible.  Any possible deviation from that really should be taken into private message so as to avoid misunderstandings or rule infractions.  The best course is to take issue with the post's points and not the person who authored it.

 

We are all trying to make this game better so patience and tolerance please even if you believe with all your heart and soul they are wrong. 

Even if they are, they are speaking from the goal of making a better game.

 

A reminder that the topic is:

M48A2GA2 West German Modified Patton

 

Insult and off topic will not be tolerated so please as a courtesy to the OP, stay objective and on topic and free of insult.

[*AceArchangel 908]

13 hours ago, Dundee93 said:

In my opinion it should be 8.0-8.3 with DM23. It would still be substantially weaker than 8.7-9.0 vehicles in practically every way, except with (unlockable) firepower to be competitive against top tier. I don't get why they set up the game so that in literally every category a 1.0 uptier (above about 5.0 BR) means you often end up with practically no chance against your enemies. For example, taking a Leopard 1A1 against (pre-nerf) Kpz-70s which are faster, better armored, better armed, and with a faster reload. Give the Leo DM23 and it is still bad odds, but it has a chance (although, HESH is still pretty good in that case). 

8.0 with DM23 sounds fair even without the stabilizer, if it does not get the DM23 round I do believe it should be 7.7 along with the Leopard I and Maus. Personally I would rather see it at 8.0 with the DM23 round to kind of round out the 8.0 lineup and aide the Leopard A1A1.

 

I see your point on the games compression although personally I rarely ever find myself in an engagement where I feel like I have no chance. I actually feel that the game is the best that it has been in terms of matchmaking, 6.7 isn't the black hole that it use to be and vehicles actually seem to work, mostly as intended for their BR (when used in their intended roles). Although my view is subjective and I certainly cannot speak for you. And I can understand why you would feel that way.

[Dundee93 508]

On 11/10/2017 at 12:20 PM, *AceArchangel said:

8.0 with DM23 sounds fair even without the stabilizer, if it does not get the DM23 round I do believe it should be 7.7 along with the Leopard I and Maus. Personally I would rather see it at 8.0 with the DM23 round to kind of round out the 8.0 lineup and aide the Leopard A1A1.

 

I see your point on the games compression although personally I rarely ever find myself in an engagement where I feel like I have no chance. I actually feel that the game is the best that it has been in terms of matchmaking, 6.7 isn't the black hole that it use to be and vehicles actually seem to work, mostly as intended for their BR (when used in their intended roles). Although my view is subjective and I certainly cannot speak for you. And I can understand why you would feel that way.

Agreed. I haven't played 6.7 much in quite a while, but it definitely seems to have been decompressed a lot since the addition of tier VI, although some of that was just shifting compression up a BR level (which is still a big improvement). 

[*AceArchangel 908]

48 minutes ago, Dundee93 said:

Agreed. I haven't played 6.7 much in quite a while, but it definitely seems to have been decompressed a lot since the addition of tier VI, although some of that was just shifting compression up a BR level (which is still a big improvement). 

Not to mention how all of those changes making many vehicles like the Leopard I, M60 and T54 1947 at 7.7 made 6.7 mostly uptiered games, thus making 5.7 a bearable BR to play at again. Also the IS-6 finally having its BR increased to 7.3!

 

I think that those changes will make both a 7.7 or 8.0 BR work fine with the M48A2GA2, I would love to have it in either my 7.7 or 8.0 lineup.

Edited November 11, 2017 by *AceArchangel

[Laviduce 1,779]

Here might be something useful at the Freiburg Archives about it:

 

Archive ID: BWD 53/1632,  TDv 1015/023.- Unterrichtsmappe Kampfpanzer M48 A2 GA2 - Sept. 1980  --> Operational Manual 1015/023 - Teaching Map for Main Battle Tank M48 A2 GA2 - September 1980

[*AceArchangel 908]

5 minutes ago, Laviduce said:

Here might be something useful at the Freiburg Archives about it:

 

Archive ID: BWD 53/1632,  TDv 1015/023.- Unterrichtsmappe Kampfpanzer M48 A2 GA2 - Sept. 1980  --> Operational Manual 1015/023 - Teaching Map for Main Battle Tank M48 A2 GA2 - September 1980

I appreciate the support, although I can't for the life of me seem to navigate the Archives webpage, if you could is there any way to provide a link for it?

[Laviduce 1,779]

12 minutes ago, *AceArchangel said:

I appreciate the support, although I can't for the life of me seem to navigate the Archives webpage, if you could is there any way to provide a link for it?

For some reason i can not give out direct links:

 

Search for "Kampfpanzer M48 A2 GA2" on here:

https://invenio.bundesarchiv.de/basys2-invenio/main.xhtml

[*AceArchangel 908]

29 minutes ago, Laviduce said:

For some reason i can not give out direct links:

 

Search for "Kampfpanzer M48 A2 GA2" on here:

https://invenio.bundesarchiv.de/basys2-invenio/main.xhtml

Thanks

[Dabtk 1,248]

Looks like a good tank, would be nice as a premium or maybe a one off rank V in normal tech tree. However, I bet the outer steel would be the only part of the mantlet modeled.

[QuickAndPainless 521]

Totally support the addition of this tank at rank 5! It would be a nice compliment as a backup to the leopard 1 at 7.7 and will be a unique modification of an already existing model.

GG for finding the sources and information about it guys, I hope this gets passed to the developers!

[Kempston 342]

I like this, I think it would be great in rank five as maybe a mini-tree with the mKPz M47. +1

[*AceArchangel 908]

On 2017-11-15 at 4:45 PM, CptFlyingFort said:

Looks like a good tank, would be nice as a premium or maybe a one off rank V in normal tech tree. However, I bet the outer steel would be the only part of the mantlet modeled.

While I don’t think it should be restricted to any only being available to those who purchased the German M47, this would make a great premium bundle or GE purchase.

 

On 2018-01-07 at 5:12 AM, QuickAndPainless said:

Totally support the addition of this tank at rank 5! It would be a nice compliment as a backup to the leopard 1 at 7.7 and will be a unique modification of an already existing model.

GG for finding the sources and information about it guys, I hope this gets passed to the developers!

Much appreciated, I really hope we get it passed to the developers!

 

On 2018-01-07 at 7:11 AM, Kempston said:

I like this, I think it would be great in rank five as maybe a mini-tree with the mKPz M47. +1

Again I don’t exactly agree with it being a sub tree of the M47 as It should not require the purchase of another highly priced vehicle but I appreciate the support non the less!