Polish Ground Forces Tech Tree

[olek_z17 29]

OK, the other way around, here's:

a) A list of vehicles which are violating Gaijin's rules on paper vehicles:

• PT-94 Goryl - Just never existed.
• PL-01 Concept - Cardboard and plywood mock-up based on the empty (minus the engine and driver's seat) CV90 chassis, which violates this rule:

  Quote

  Do note that these vehicles were often planned with purpose-built equipment, such as powerplants, but during their performance projections may have utilized existing equipment or were speculated to use commonly available equipment upon completion. This will not count as "partially constructed" unless historical sources state that these equipment pieces are in fact intended as standard for the vehicle.

   

• BWP-1 Brimstone - The same as above, except the chassis is the BWP-1.
• PT-16 - As above, it's a mock-up completely built on the pre-existing T-72M1 or PT-91.

b) A list of the vehicles that objectively shouldn't be in this tech tree regardless if they existed:

• SMK 120 Rak - It's a self propelled mortar for God's sake. Would you like having a wheeled vehicle with a crewed turret that can be shredded by 7.62mm AP, which's only round is a 120mm HE? I wouldn't either.
• SMG 120 Rak - The same as above, just tracked.
• AHS Kryl - This thing has no place for the gun crew, it has to stop to shoot (soldiers reloading the gun are walking on the ground around the vehicle).
• WR-40 Langusta - It's an unarmored truck (STANAG 4569 Level I, so a 7.62mm AP belt would penetrate it) with 40 rocket, each with a filler roughly equivalent to 155mm NATO. It also can't shoot straight in front, because of the cabin. How in the hell you wanna balance that.
• 2S1T Goździk - It's a 122mm SPH, which means its explosive filler is roughly equivalent to the 120×570mm NATO. It would also have HEAT-FS rounds with around 500mm of penetration. Do we want that when we have the BMP-1 (BWP-1 in Polish) which could do literally the same thing but better thanks to ATGMs?
• Robur LO-1800A ZPU-2 -This and other five SPAAs below shouldn't be added for the reason I posted in my first post, especially the Robur and Hibneryt - we don't need technicals in this game.
• Hibneryt
• Hibneryt-P
• Hibneryt-KG
• MT-LB Promet
• MT-LB-23M Krak
• Samochód pancerny wz. 34 (Armored car model of 1934) - this thing is armed with the Puteaux SA 18, the worst gun in the game. Both tanks armed with this gun (H.35 and FCM.36) were removed from progression for being unplayable and are now out of the normal progression.
• SOMUA S35 - Poland never had this vehicle.
• Landsverk L181 - This vehicle and all below it are just gap fillers, and half of them are bad ones.
• Praga LTL
• Vickers M1937

• 75mm Dion Bouton wz.18/24

• AB-41

• WB-10

• LSPZRA Sopel
• LSPZRA Stalagmit

c) A list of vehicles from the regular tech tree that should be in the premium part:

• WWO Wilk - It existed, but only at a couple of MSPO military expos (and that's a recurring theme for a lot of vehicles here).
• PT-17 - As above.
• PT-91M2 - As above.
• Rosomak AMUR - As above plus the armament module itself was a prototype not ready for production at that point.
• LSPZRA Sopel - If you want to put the Sopel and/or Stalagmit in the game, they should go into the premium tree since these were prototypes and there's a more realistic (less prototype) vehicle serving the same purpose
• LSPZRA Stalagmit
• SKOT 2AM - It's not a good vehicle (it's nice for a collectible event vehicle, but not a tech-tree one) - it's big, wheeled, has no armor and is armed with two 9M14 Malyutka and a 14.5mm machine gun. Besides, there weren't many of them.
• WPB Anders - I don't even know if it should be in the game in the first place - it was made with a technology demonstrator turret that didn't even have a stabilizer (and the hard-kill APS placement on this thing is just ridiculous). But if it has to, definitely as a premium.
• KTO Rosomak-2 (the name is wrong, it would be just named KTO Rosomak) - It's the variant with the Hitfist 30P turret with Spike-LR ATGMs. But the point is this vehicle and the two below are all failed prototypes and they have counterparts which will very soon enter production (regular KTO Rosomak, KTO Rosomak with ZSSW-30 turret and the BWP Borsuk).
• BWP-2000
• BWP-1M Puma

d) A list of copy-paste vehicles, not counting premiums as they're optional (just to show that the original proposal also has quite a lot of them):

1. SU-76M
2. Crusader Mk.II
3. Sherman IB
4. T-70
5. SU-85
6. Sherman III
7. Cromwell Mk.I
8. T-34-76 (1943)
9. ISU-152
10. T-34-85M1 - No differences that would impact the game whatsoever, so I consider it a copy-paste. It's like the Chinese Type 69 - it has a different name, but for all intents and purposes, it's a T-55.
11. T-34-85M2 - As above.
12. BWP-1M Puma - As above (it's a modernization attempt that includes things like rubber track pads, new internal communication, new radio, passive thermals and so on. The only big difference from the geme's perspective is the LWS)
13. T-54A ZET-1 - It's like the wire mesh armor modification for the Soviet IS-2 (1944), so it could be just a researchable upgrade, while the vehicle itself is a copy-paste.

15 hours ago, Mahiwew said:

I can agree there are a few questionable ones, and especially the balance can be worked on.

So, this is my take on those "questionable ones" and on the balance. That's why I made my own tech tree suggestion.

And regarding copy-paste vehicles, yes my version of the tech tree has twice of that number (around 30), but they're mostly there for balance reasons. Plus the original suggestion is full of gap fillers that are not necessary whatsoever.

Edited June 30, 2022 by olekz17

[RazNaRok 616]

14 hours ago, olekz17 said:

Didn't it? Last time I've checked my sources, they stated that all prototypes were destroyed in combat.

 

Explain please... How an unarmed partialy completed prototype could  take part in combat?

 

Its AT gun and MG's were removed and returned to armament factory just before the prototype take evaluation ride in a long distance rally... 

 

After evaluation ride the prototype was returned to factory where it was dismantled to examine its parts wear and tear.

 

Acording to some old sources parts of 10TP protope were canibalized to study or build incompleted 14TP pototype. However its more plausible that dismantled incompleted 10TP prototype was either destroyed by factory workers or destroyed in Luftwaffe bombing maybe even captured by german forces ocupying Ursus factory as couldbe sugested by photos of captured PZInż130.

 

 

P.s.

Don't even try to tell us there was also eleven of new reinforced 7TP defending Warsaw...

[RazNaRok 616]

53 minutes ago, olekz17 said:

• T-34-85M1 - No differences that would impact the game whatsoever, so I consider it a copy-paste. It's like the Chinese Type 69 - it has a different name, but for all intents and purposes, it's a T-55.
• T-34-85M2 - As above

 

Some could polemize there regarding this topic...

 

Polish T-34/85 undergo many modernization changes... 

 

Electric turret drive, difrent ammo rack layout, new engine, new engine equipment, new engine cover plate, less crew, night vision equipment, aditional stowage racks (in game those are destructibles so they could act as kind off spaced armor)

[olek_z17 29]

22 minutes ago, RazNaRok said:

Explain please... How an unarmed partialy completed prototype could  take part in combat?

Here you go: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/10TP

It wasn't unarmed, it had armament.

 

Besides, if this abomination doesn't bother you:

This tank definitely shouldn't:

 

6 minutes ago, RazNaRok said:

Electric turret drive, difrent ammo rack layout, new engine, new engine equipment, new engine cover plate, less crew, night vision equipment, aditional stowage racks (in game those are destructibles so they could act as kind off spaced armor)

Still counts. If people complain about vehicles like the Tiran 5 or the T-34-85 Gai as copy-pastes, they would do so even more about the T-34-85M1 and M2.

 

Also, what sources?

Edited June 30, 2022 by olekz17

[RazNaRok 616]

10 hours ago, olekz17 said:

This tank definitely shouldn't:

 

Spare me please the Wikipedia as a reliable source with all its trash garbage... thrown in by kids.

 

Your example is the photo of prototype at the courtyard of the Experimental Workshop of BBT Br. Panc. in Ursus. The photo was taken at the turn of late winter-early spring of 1938. For the purposes of this special session, the tank was provisionally completed, an early 7TP turret was installed on it, with was only used as production prototype model, it differs from the serial turret in details.

 

Didn't other photos from evaluation rally On the route of Warsaw-Białystok-Grodno-Wielka Brzostowica-Waliły-Białystok-Warsaw, 610 km long, which took place on April 22-25 of 1939, did make You wonder?

Edited June 30, 2022 by RazNaRok

[Mahiwew 529]

2 hours ago, olekz17 said:

OK, the other way around, here's:

a) A list of vehicles which are violating Gaijin's rules on paper vehicles:

• PT-94 Goryl - Just never existed.
• PL-01 Concept - Cardboard and plywood mock-up based on the empty (minus the engine and driver's seat) CV90 chassis, which violates this rule:

  Quote

  Do note that these vehicles were often planned with purpose-built equipment, such as powerplants, but during their performance projections may have utilized existing equipment or were speculated to use commonly available equipment upon completion. This will not count as "partially constructed" unless historical sources state that these equipment pieces are in fact intended as standard for the vehicle.

   

• BWP-1 Brimstone - The same as above, except the chassis is the BWP-1.
• PT-16 - As above, it's a mock-up completely built on the pre-existing T-72M1 or PT-91.

These I would most certainly agree with, incomplete vehicles should indeed not be added. 

 

2 hours ago, olekz17 said:

b) A list of the vehicles that objectively shouldn't be in this tech tree regardless if they existed:

• SMK 120 Rak - It's a self propelled mortar for God's sake. Would you like having a wheeled vehicle with a crewed turret that can be shredded by 7.62mm AP, which's only round is a 120mm HE? I wouldn't either.
• SMG 120 Rak - The same as above, just tracked.
• AHS Kryl - This thing has no place for the gun crew, it has to stop to shoot (soldiers reloading the gun are walking on the ground around the vehicle). - It's an unarmored truck (STANAG 4569 Level I, so a 7.62mm AP belt would penetrate it) with 40 rocket, each with a filler roughly equivalent to 155mm NATO. It also can't shoot straight in front, because of the cabin. How in the hell you wanna balance that.
• 2S1T Goździk - It's a 122mm SPH, which means its explosive filler is roughly equivalent to the 120×570mm NATO. It would also have HEAT-FS rounds with around 500mm of penetration. Do we want that when we have the BMP-1 (BWP-1 in Polish) which could do literally the same thing but better thanks to ATGMs?
• Robur LO-1800A ZPU-2 -This and other five SPAAs below shouldn't be added for the reason I posted in my first post, especially the Robur and Hibneryt - we don't need technicals in this game.
• Hibneryt
• Hibneryt-P
• Hibneryt-KG
• MT-LB Promet
• MT-LB-23M Krak
• Samochód pancerny wz. 34 (Armored car model of 1934) - this thing is armed with the Puteaux SA 18, the worst gun in the game. Both tanks armed with this gun (H.35 and FCM.36) were removed from progression for being unplayable and are now out of the normal progression.
• SOMUA S35 - Poland never had this vehicle.
• Landsverk L181 - This vehicle and all below it are just gap fillers, and half of them are bad ones.
• Praga LTL
• Vickers M1937

• 75mm Dion Bouton wz.18/24

• AB-41

• WB-10

• LSPZRA Sopel
• LSPZRA Stalagmit

Here's where my issues arise. 
I don't see why the majority of these "objectively shouldn't be added". 

Regarding the Rak vehicles, their HE would be more potent than most guns of said caliber. Russian MBT's in game have proven to use their 125mm HE effectively against other tanks, so why wouldn't this be able to? And sure, the armor is poor, but that's just a part of the vehicles that must be taken into account when making the vehicle. There are plenty vehicles at all tiers that are incredibly poorly armored, even vehicles such as WMA-301 can't stand .50's.

As for Kryl, I don't think that crew moving around would be much of an issue. There are plenty of vehicles that would operate with external crew irl, that don't do so in game (M56 Scorpion being one such example). The main issue with Kryl, is that it seemingly can't depress the gun below it's cabin, nor move the gun to either side of the cabin, hence making it unable to properly engage vehicles unless it is on a decline.

Honestly I don't see the issue that's is supposedly present with Gvozdika. It'd simply be another arty, except with more proper AT potential. If anything it'd be a drive to add it with more priority than things such as 2S3M. Whether certain vehicles would do it's in-game job as a "tank destroyer" better shouldn't matter too much either, so long as the system itself can function in game.

Regarding the Robur and Hibernyt vehicles, I would have to agree on them not being a priority whatsoever, although it does have to be said that similar vehicles can already be found in game, like the Ystervark (which actually made for a good anti-air in the British tree).

Regarding the Promet, I would simply point to the BTR-ZD that was added this update. Same goes for Krak.

Samochód pancerny wz. 34 would indeed have incredibly poor armament and would likely be better off left out, I'll have to agree there.

S.35 in Poland is also a no.

The L-181 wouldn't be a poor vehicle whatsoever, regardless of whether it is filler or not. If anything filler would be appreciated, as Poland doesn't have the same growth potential as other trees.

No clue what's the issue with Praga LTL either, seems like a fine addition.

Vickers M1937 doesn't seem horrible either.

Regarding the 75mm Dion Bouton wz.18/24, I would like to point to the Lancia 3Ro that was added in this update.

AB-41 is indeed unnecessary, with all the other more unique vehicles that are available.

WB-10 wasn't functional that I know of, so that gets left out.

Soper and Stalagnyt are absolutely fine vehicles, I seriously don't see why they couldn't be 7.7 - 8.3 SPAA's

 

3 hours ago, olekz17 said:

c) A list of vehicles from the regular tech tree that should be in the premium part:

• WWO Wilk - It existed, but only at a couple of MSPO military expos (and that's a recurring theme for a lot of vehicles here).
• PT-17 - As above.
• PT-91M2 - As above.
• Rosomak AMUR - As above plus the armament module itself was a prototype not ready for production at that point.
• LSPZRA Sopel - If you want to put the Sopel and/or Stalagmit in the game, they should go into the premium tree since these were prototypes and there's a more realistic (less prototype) vehicle serving the same purpose
• LSPZRA Stalagmit
• SKOT 2AM - It's not a good vehicle (it's nice for a collectible event vehicle, but not a tech-tree one) - it's big, wheeled, has no armor and is armed with two 9M14 Malyutka and a 14.5mm machine gun. Besides, there weren't many of them.
• WPB Anders - I don't even know if it should be in the game in the first place - it was made with a technology demonstrator turret that didn't even have a stabilizer (and the hard-kill APS placement on this thing is just ridiculous). But if it has to, definitely as a premium.
• KTO Rosomak-2 (the name is wrong, it would be just named KTO Rosomak) - It's the variant with the Hitfist 30P turret with Spike-LR ATGMs. But the point is this vehicle and the two below are all failed prototypes and they have counterparts which will very soon enter production (regular KTO Rosomak, KTO Rosomak with ZSSW-30 turret and the BWP Borsuk).
• BWP-2000
• BWP-1M Puma

Won't comment anything here, as it is not much within my interest as to where the vehicles should be located, considering it is just a vehicle showcase.

 

3 hours ago, olekz17 said:

d) A list of copy-paste vehicles, not counting premiums as they're optional (just to show that the original proposal also has quite a lot of them):

1. SU-76M
2. Crusader Mk.II
3. Sherman IB
4. T-70
5. SU-85
6. Sherman III
7. Cromwell Mk.I
8. T-34-76 (1943)
9. ISU-152
10. T-34-85M1 - No differences that would impact the game whatsoever, so I consider it a copy-paste. It's like the Chinese Type 69 - it has a different name, but for all intents and purposes, it's a T-55.
11. T-34-85M2 - As above.
12. BWP-1M Puma - As above (it's a modernization attempt that includes things like rubber track pads, new internal communication, new radio, passive thermals and so on. The only big difference from the geme's perspective is the LWS)
13. T-54A ZET-1 - It's like the wire mesh armor modification for the Soviet IS-2 (1944), so it could be just a researchable upgrade, while the vehicle itself is a copy-paste.

And finally this
It is indeed true that copy/paste vehicles should be avoided as much as possible, although the latter of the mentioned vehicles aren't copy/paste tbh, as they add some meaningful changes to the vehicles. 

[RazNaRok 616]

5 hours ago, olekz17 said:

Also, what sources?

 

Rajmund Szubański, Polska broń pancerna 1939, Warszawa 1989

Igor Witkowski, Czołgi świata, Warszawa 1993.

Sylwester Kaliski, Walery Kujawski, WAT - 22 lata w służbie ojczyźnie. Powstanie i rozwój WAT, „Wojskowy Przegląd Historyczny” 1974 nr 2, s. 285-308.

Jerzy Szkoda, 50 lat WITPiS, „Wojskowy Przegląd Techniczny i Logistyczny” 1997 nr 4

Robert Rochowicz, Pancerna pięść polskiej armii. Lata 60. i 70. XX w.

Jerzy Kajetanowicz, Prace nad rozwojem sprzętu pancernego w Polsce – przegląd lat 1955-1990, Poligon Nr 5 (22) wrzesień-październik

Piotr Zarzycki, Prototypy broni pancernej, Wielki Leksykon Uzbrojenia Wrzesień 1939. (tom 151)

Jędrzej Korbal, Prototypy broni pancernej cz.1 - cz. 2, Wielki Leksykon Uzbrojenia Wrzesień 1939 - wydanie specjalne (tom 24, 25)

Jędrzej Korbal, Droga ku 10TP, TW Historia nr specjalny 5/2018

Jędrzej Korbal, Syndrom TP, czyli polski czołg średni., TW Historia nr specjalny 6/2018

Robert Michulec, Niemiecko-polski pochód na Moskwę 1941?, TW Historia nr 5/2021 (71)

Mariusz Zimny, Czołg Lekki 12TP, TW Historia nr 5/2021 (71)

Karol Rudy, Polski czołg A.D. 1939. - Oczekiwania a rzeczywistość, NTW Numer Specjalny 4

Karol Rudy, Czy można było zrobić więcej? Polska broń pancerna w przededniu września 1939 roku., NTW Numer Specjalny 13

 

And that is just an Iceberg tip of reliable sources...

Edited June 30, 2022 by RazNaRok

[olek_z17 29]

On 30/06/2022 at 14:23, Mahiwew said:

Regarding the Rak vehicles, their HE would be more potent than most guns of said caliber. Russian MBT's in game have proven to use their 125mm HE effectively against other tanks, so why wouldn't this be able to? And sure, the armor is poor, but that's just a part of the vehicles that must be taken into account when making the vehicle. There are plenty vehicles at all tiers that are incredibly poorly armored, even vehicles such as WMA-301 can't stand .50's.

No it wouldn't. It's TNT equivalent would be around 2 kilograms. That's 5 times less than the best howitzer (155 or 152mm) rounds, about 2.5 times less than 3OF26's 5.24 kilograms around 2 times less than the (very few) 120mm NATO HE rounds. It also doesn't have any HEAT rounds, so it would shoot what is an equivalent of the French 105mm HE shell (around 25mm of penetration).

 

On 30/06/2022 at 14:23, Mahiwew said:

As for Kryl, I don't think that crew moving around would be much of an issue. There are plenty of vehicles that would operate with external crew irl, that don't do so in game (M56 Scorpion being one such example). The main issue with Kryl, is that it seemingly can't depress the gun below it's cabin, nor move the gun to either side of the cabin, hence making it unable to properly engage vehicles unless it is on a decline.

I think it can move gun to the sides to the cabin, I don't know about the depression. The main issue is however the operation of the gun. And I don't know if we understood each other but this is what I had in mind:

It would need a separate "firing mode" in which it can shoot but it can't move, like the Katyusha does.

 

On 30/06/2022 at 14:23, Mahiwew said:

Honestly I don't see the issue that's is supposedly present with Gvozdika. It'd simply be another arty, except with more proper AT potential. If anything it'd be a drive to add it with more priority than things such as 2S3M. Whether certain vehicles would do it's in-game job as a "tank destroyer" better shouldn't matter too much either, so long as the system itself can function in game.

My issue is that if there are two vehicles that can destroy tanks (so they are both playable), but only one of them was designed as a frontline vehicle (so only one is realistic), the one that fits two requirements should be chosen (in this case it would be the BWP-1 over the 2S1 Goździk). Besides, it's not even a Polish vehicle, so why is it proposed in the first place?

 

On 30/06/2022 at 14:23, Mahiwew said:

Regarding the Robur and Hibernyt vehicles, I would have to agree on them not being a priority whatsoever, although it does have to be said that similar vehicles can already be found in game, like the Ystervark (which actually made for a good anti-air in the British tree).

Regarding the Promet, I would simply point to the BTR-ZD that was added this update. Same goes for Krak.

I'd quote myself from my first reply here:

Quote

I know there's a gap in the SPAA line between the Crusader AA Mk III and the ZSU-57-2, but first of all, I think the Crusader will do well throughout the whole WW2 part of the tree and vehicles like the Ystervark, BTR-ZD, ZSD63 or, in Polish case, Hibneryt (ZU-23-2 gun mount strapped onto a Star 266 truck) are just unnecessary.

 

On 30/06/2022 at 14:23, Mahiwew said:

The L-181 wouldn't be a poor vehicle whatsoever, regardless of whether it is filler or not. If anything filler would be appreciated, as Poland doesn't have the same growth potential as other trees.

No clue what's the issue with Praga LTL either, seems like a fine addition.

Vickers M1937 doesn't seem horrible either.

None of them were used by Poland.

 

On 30/06/2022 at 14:23, Mahiwew said:

Regarding the 75mm Dion Bouton wz.18/24, I would like to point to the Lancia 3Ro that was added in this update.

Yes, that's why I didn't say anything about the vehicle further in that line, the "75mm PF621L", or rather Polski Fiat 621L (wz. 1897/14). I have in fact included it in my tech tree suggestion (which makes me think you didn't read it). My issue with Dion Bouton is that it's a gap filler that's almost identical to the Fiat 621L, and since neither of those would be very good, why implement two of them?

 

On 30/06/2022 at 14:23, Mahiwew said:

Soper and Stalagnyt are absolutely fine vehicles, I seriously don't see why they couldn't be 7.7 - 8.3 SPAA's

Loara could be at 8.3, so there's no need of adding another SPAA at the same BR. If you really want a 7.3-7.7 BR SPAA, the PSR-A Pilica would fit. Yes, it's a double 23mm autocannon on a truck, but the truck is armored, it has 3rd gen gunner thermals and it has two PPZR Grom or PPZR Piorun missiles, the latter of which is virtually resistant to flares. And, the best part is, it's not a prototype.

 

On 30/06/2022 at 14:23, Mahiwew said:

It is indeed true that copy/paste vehicles should be avoided as much as possible, although the latter of the mentioned vehicles aren't copy/paste tbh, as they add some meaningful changes to the vehicles. 

Both of the T-34 variants are almost identical with regards to the stats you can see and feel in the game, the T-54 is merely a modification for a copy-paste vehicle, and the BWP-1M Puma adds just the LWS. 

Edited July 16, 2022 by olekz17

[AftiksPL 197]

On 29/06/2022 at 17:42, olekz17 said:

So here's my idea: instead of trying to make the tree unique at all costs which results in it being packed full of prototypes and cardboard mock-ups, I went for realism. That makes my tech tree authentic at a cost of having copy-paste vehicles throughout WW2 and (partially) Cold War. If you have any vehicle in mind that could be added let me know here and I'll consider updating the tree.

So, just think from the perspective of a new player. He gets a new tree to play and there are 4 unique vehicles in the 1st rank and 2 on the top. (I'm not counting the Crab and the spa as they usually only serve as support.) For the most part, you do not use Polish-made vehicles or unique vehicles used by the Polish Armed Forces. Just try harder...

[olek_z17 29]

13 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

So, just think from the perspective of a new player. He gets a new tree to play and there are 4 unique vehicles in the 1st rank and 2 on the top. (I'm not counting the Crab and the spa as they usually only serve as support.) For the most part, you do not use Polish-made vehicles or unique vehicles used by the Polish Armed Forces. Just try harder...

How many? Six in total? I'd really like to know how are you counting them, because I just did it and I counted seventeen - seven in rank I, one in rank V, six in rank VI and three in rank VII. That is without counting the Krab or any of the premiums.

[AftiksPL 197]

3 hours ago, olekz17 said:

How many? Six in total? I'd really like to know how are you counting them, because I just did it and I counted seventeen - seven in rank I, one in rank V, six in rank VI and three in rank VII. That is without counting the Krab or any of the premiums.

So, rank I: TKS, TK-SD, 10TP and 7TP. The others either have too weak primary weapons or take no ammunition. Rank II-IV, full of CP, despite the large possibility of using vehicles that are not in the game or modified. Okey, one BRDM in rank V, but why there are no Polish-made vehicles. (And by the way, why is a vehicle only used in number of 2 in the LWP okey when the tested prototypes are not?) Rank VI, 2 unique SPAA, but they're only support vehicles. T-55AM Merida, and yes, it might be a nice modification of T-55, and it would be better in the game than its Soviet counterpart, but for most players it's still CP. And 2 Rosomaks.

[olek_z17 29]

40 minutes ago, AftiksPL said:

So, rank I: TKS, TK-SD, 10TP and 7TP. The others either have too weak primary weapons or take no ammunition. Rank II-IV, full of CP, despite the large possibility of using vehicles that are not in the game or modified. Okey, one BRDM in rank V, but why there are no Polish-made vehicles. (And by the way, why is a vehicle only used in number of 2 in the LWP okey when the tested prototypes are not?) Rank VI, 2 unique SPAA, but they're only support vehicles. T-55AM Merida, and yes, it might be a nice modification of T-55, and it would be better in the game than its Soviet counterpart, but for most players it's still CP. And 2 Rosomaks.

So yes, we counted them really differently. Here's what I counted:

 - Rank I:

• TKS (20mm)
• TKD
• TKS-D
• 10TP
• Vickers E (it's not in the game, so it would be unique)
• 7TP

• Fiat 621L (wz.1897/14)

 - Rank IV:

• AHS Krab

 - Rank V:

• 9P133 Malyutka-P (again, it's not in the game, so it's unique here)

 - Rank VI:

• KTO Rosomak
• KTO Rosomak (ZSSW-30)
• T-55AM Merida (although I didn't count it above as it's essentially the T-55AM-1 with an LWS)
• T-72M (it doesn't have composite turret armor which makes it sit at much lower BR, so it's unique enough)
• T-72M1R (it has gen. 3 gunner thermals, so again, unique enough)
• PZA Loara
• SPZR Poprad

 - Rank VII:

• BWP Borsuk
• PT-91 Twardy
• Leopard 2PL (I know it's in the game already, but it's in there only because there is no Polish tech tree)

• ZSU-23-4MP Biała

 

So counting like that would give twenty. That's a bit more than six. And no, I don't buy "not counting support vehicles", because they're still in the tech tree.

[olek_z17 29]

19 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

For the most part, you do not use Polish-made vehicles or unique vehicles used by the Polish Armed Forces.

Also, which Polish vehicles used (used, not never-finished-prototypes) by the Polish Armed Forces did I skip?

[AftiksPL 197]

On 30/06/2022 at 14:23, Mahiwew said:

Regarding the Rak vehicles, their HE would be more potent than most guns of said caliber. Russian MBT's in game have proven to use their 125mm HE effectively against other tanks, so why wouldn't this be able to? And sure, the armor is poor, but that's just a part of the vehicles that must be taken into account when making the vehicle. There are plenty vehicles at all tiers that are incredibly poorly armored, even vehicles such as WMA-301 can't stand .50's.

As for Kryl, I don't think that crew moving around would be much of an issue. There are plenty of vehicles that would operate with external crew irl, that don't do so in game (M56 Scorpion being one such example). The main issue with Kryl, is that it seemingly can't depress the gun below it's cabin, nor move the gun to either side of the cabin, hence making it unable to properly engage vehicles unless it is on a decline.

Honestly I don't see the issue that's is supposedly present with Gvozdika. It'd simply be another arty, except with more proper AT potential. If anything it'd be a drive to add it with more priority than things such as 2S3M. Whether certain vehicles would do it's in-game job as a "tank destroyer" better shouldn't matter too much either, so long as the system itself can function in game.

As for Rak, in addition to HE ammunition, anti-tank guided ammunition is being developed. And yes, it is only at the prototype stage, and it is more likely that it will never enter serial use, similar weapons are already in the game (SRAAM and 12.8 / 8.8 Pzgr.TS, maybe even more.)

 

And Kryl, well. You gave the M56 as an example, but the Scorpion has several advantages over the Kryl, not only does it have armor-piercing ammunition, small size, but the most important thing is that it can shoot straight ahead without any problems. Which is impossible with Kryl.

 

2S1, a vehicle used in large numbers, manufactured in Poland, modified and equipped with powerful HEAT ammunition. I either don't know what's the problem with adding it to a tree.

[AftiksPL 197]

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

TKD

Prototype, to weak wz.25 Pocisk gun, only 33mm pen. Maybe an event troll vehicle, but thats all.

 

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

TKS-D

Also, both are prototypes. They served 10 BC, but there is no evidence that they took part in the fighting. Probably abandoned during the march.

 

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

10TP

Prototype.

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

Vickers E (it's not in the game, so it would be unique)

Okey, but with ones? Single turret with weak Vickers-Amstrong QF Mk E gun or dual turret maybe better Nkm wz.30? Both are too weak to add to the game, slow, with poor armor, and insufficient guns.

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

Fiat 621L (wz.1897/14)

No ammunition transported on the vehicle = can't be ingame

 

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

T-55AM Merida

Just copy paste for majority of players. Even though it is very different from its Soviet counterpart, as long as it looks similar to the Russian T-55AM, most people will consider it as CP.

 

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

• T-72M (it doesn't have composite turret armor which makes it sit at much lower BR, so it's unique enough)
• T-72M1R (it has gen. 3 gunner thermals, so again, unique enough)

Both normal T-72M, one worse, one better than ones ingame.

 

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

KTO Rosomak (ZSSW-30)

 

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

BWP Borsuk

Ironic... Both are "unfinished prototypes". Borsuk not even completed military tests. So far, only factory testing has been completed. So, both are not suitable for a tree according to your standards. 

 

On 01/07/2022 at 18:58, olekz17 said:

Also, which Polish vehicles used (used, not never-finished-prototypes) by the Polish Armed Forces did I skip?

Okey, let's start

 

PSZ:

-Renault R-40,

-Staghound

-Humber III and IV

-Marmon-Herrington Mk.IV

-Covenanter

-Centaur

-Valentine IV (bigger turret from late models with old 2-pounder gun

-M-C C/9B

-Sexton

-Churchill IV, cast turret, QF 75 (But I'm still not sure as only one source and one photo so far proves that tank servs in PSZ)

 

And LWP:

-Topas-2AP (unique and acceptable as SPAA)

-Robur LO-1800A

-Hibneryt

-GAZ-69M with B-10

-T-34-85M1 and M2. Produced in poland, less crew, more powerfull ammo, visually different. Other things were mentioned earlier by RAzNaRok.

-BWR-1S

-DANA

-2S1 and 2S1M, as before, produced in Poland, powerful ammunition...

-9P110

Edited July 2, 2022 by AftiksPL

[AkIvonDemolka 352]

Therapist: You don't need to be scared, the battleship truck doesn't exist and can't hurt you. Meanwhile in Poland... a self-propelled howitzer 2S1 Goździk trainer vehicle based on the Star truck 266. Shooting real ammunition. Without armor.

[olek_z17 29]

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

TKD

Prototype

 

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

TKS-D

Also, both are prototypes

 

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

10TP

Prototype.

 

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

KTO Rosomak (ZSSW-30)

 

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

BWP Borsuk

Ironic... Both are "unfinished prototypes".

Yes, ironic indeed. Very Ironic how you mind prototypes in my tech tree and for some reason don't consider them as unique, but don't mind them in the original tech tree and consider them as unique there.

 

 

 

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

TKS-D

Also, both are prototypes. They served 10 BC, but there is no evidence that they took part in the fighting. Probably abandoned during the march.

No, there are first hand sources saying they (TKD and TKS-D) took part and were destroyed in combat. You can read Polish (at least that's what I think based on your nickname) so go on Wikipedia and check the "Sources" part of the article. TKDs took part in taking of the Trans-Olza Silesia, and TKS-Ds took part in the September campaign.

 

 

 

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

KTO Rosomak (ZSSW-30)

 

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

BWP Borsuk

Ironic... Both are "unfinished prototypes". Borsuk not even completed military tests. So far, only factory testing has been completed. So, both are not suitable for a tree according to your standards. 

So, there are couple of issues to unwrap here, some on my part, some on your, but first of all you should stop lying - neither of them are unfinished, and Borsuk completed the initial army trials. The contract for ZSSW-30 turrets for Rosomak APCs will be signed likely next week (source: https://defence24.com/armed-forces/rosomak-apcs-to-be-outfitted-with-the-zssw-30-turrets-contract-imminent) As for the Borsuk, yes it it still a prototype, so I feel like I have to clarify one thing. There's a distinct difference between vehicles like these two:

and "vehicles" like these two:

The difference is the first ones are prototypes that are ordered by the army, designed for the army and wanted by the army, while the second ones are private ventures of the companies designed either to at best show the rough development direction of the platform (like PT-16) or at worst to snatch money from the Ministry of Defense (like the PL-01). In other words, there's a difference between a prototype of a vehicle made for the army (that the army says it wants adopted as quickly as possible) and a technology demonstrator made to show off the company's potential at an expo or a mock-up made by an industrial design company out of plywood and cardboard. I'm kinda OK with the first category and very much not OK with the second one.

 

 

 

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

Fiat 621L (wz.1897/14)

No ammunition transported on the vehicle = can't be ingame

OK, didn't know about that, I guess the SPAA line would look like the Chinese one and start from the 2nd rank.

 

 

 

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

TKD

Prototype, to weak wz.25 Pocisk gun, only 33mm pen. Maybe an event troll vehicle, but thats all.

 

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

Vickers E (it's not in the game, so it would be unique)

Okey, but with ones? Single turret with weak Vickers-Amstrong QF Mk E gun or dual turret maybe better Nkm wz.30? Both are too weak to add to the game, slow, with poor armor, and insufficient guns.

Dude. Look at the French rank I tanks. Some of them are even worse, but nobody wants half of the French rank I out of the game.

 

 

 

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

 

On 01/07/2022 at 17:52, olekz17 said:

T-55AM Merida

Just copy paste for majority of players. Even though it is very different from its Soviet counterpart, as long as it looks similar to the Russian T-55AM, most people will consider it as CP.

Yes, it's a copy-paste, but from a premium part of the tree, not the regular one (or at least the last time I've checked the T-55AM-1 was a premium). and that already happened in the game a couple of times: LVT(A)(4) (ZiS-2) was a US event vehicle, then it got added to the Chinese tech tree, the same with the M8 Greyhound.

 

 

 

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

On 01/07/2022 at 18:58, olekz17 said:

Also, which Polish vehicles used (used, not never-finished-prototypes) by the Polish Armed Forces did I skip?

Okey, let's start

 

PSZ:

-Renault R-40,

-Staghound

-Humber III and IV

-Marmon-Herrington Mk.IV

-Covenanter

-Centaur

-Valentine IV (bigger turret from late models with old 2-pounder gun

-M-C C/9B

-Sexton

-Churchill IV, cast turret, QF 75 (But I'm still not sure as only one source and one photo so far proves that tank servs in PSZ)

OK, I see I have to be patient here. You go on a rant how my tech tree is almost all copy-paste, I ask you about Polish production vehicles that I didn't mention and you answer me by listing 10 foreign designs. So tell me please, which one of the above is Polish?

 

 

 

18 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

On 01/07/2022 at 18:58, olekz17 said:

Also, which Polish vehicles used (used, not never-finished-prototypes) by the Polish Armed Forces did I skip?

 

(...)

 

And LWP:

-Topas-2AP (unique and acceptable as SPAA)

-Robur LO-1800A

-Hibneryt

-GAZ-69M with B-10

-T-34-85M1 and M2. Produced in poland, less crew, more powerfull ammo, visually different. Other things were mentioned earlier by RAzNaRok.

-BWR-1S

-DANA

-2S1 and 2S1M, as before, produced in Poland, powerful ammunition...

-9P110

OK, let's start:

• TOPAS-2AP - It's an APC armed with one 14.5mm machine gun and one coaxial 7.62mm machine gun in so called "AA turret" (called that because of high elevation). May I ask where do you want to put it and how do you want to balance it?
• Robur LO-1800A - No. The only objectively correct answer to a request for putting what essentially is a technical at early WW2 BR is a big NO. What's next? Toyota Hilux armed with a KPVT at 1.0 for Japanese? Oh, I forgot, PikPikker in his infinite wisdom proposed a BTR-60 at 1.0 for a North Korean tech tree...
• Hibneryt - As above, it's a glorified technical - double 23mm autocannon on a truck. If you want one of those SPAAs added, let it be the PSR-A Pilica.
• GAZ-69M with B-10 - You mean this:
  
  If so, once again, it's a technical, but this time literally - it's a utility 4×4 truck armed with a crew served weapon, this time with a recoilless rifle.
• T-34-85M1 and M2 - Sure, I agree, they could be added.
• BWR-1S - For all intents and purposes it's a BMP-1 with thermals, laser rangefinder and LWS. Could it be better (slightly more unique) than the regular BWP-1? Yes, likely. But you're calling the T-55AM a copy-paste and meanwhile showing the BWR-1S as "Polish"? Really?
• Dana - Sure, it could be added, but why? As a completely unnecessary gap filler? I've already included the Krab.
• 2S1 and 2S1M - As above.
• 9P110 - As above, I already included the 9P133 Malyutka-P.

 

 

 

19 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

And Kryl, well. You gave the M56 as an example, but the Scorpion has several advantages over the Kryl, not only does it have armor-piercing ammunition, small size, but the most important thing is that it can shoot straight ahead without any problems. Which is impossible with Kryl.

So do we finally agree on something? Because I wrote what I wrote to justify why I don't want Kryl in the game.

 

 

 

19 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

2S1, a vehicle used in large numbers, manufactured in Poland, modified and equipped with powerful HEAT ammunition. I either don't know what's the problem with adding it to a tree.

As above, it serves no purpose other than inflating the tech tree with as many vehicles as possible.

 

 

 

19 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

As for Rak, in addition to HE ammunition, anti-tank guided ammunition is being developed. And yes, it is only at the prototype stage, and it is more likely that it will never enter serial use, similar weapons are already in the game (SRAAM and 12.8 / 8.8 Pzgr.TS, maybe even more.)

My God... You mean the APR-120, don't you. It's not guided like ATGMs (I mean, it is a SACLOS round, but it's by no means a direct-fire munitions) and the vehicle itself has no way of guiding it. It's like the Excalibur 155mm round. Besides, once again, this vehicle has no purpose of being in the game other than serving as a gap filler.

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, AkIvonDemolka said:

Therapist: You don't need to be scared, the battleship truck doesn't exist and can't hurt you. Meanwhile in Poland... a self-propelled howitzer 2S1 Goździk trainer vehicle based on the Star truck 266. Shooting real ammunition. Without armor.

Ah yes, the Star 266 is truly immortal, you can mount just about everything on it.

Edited July 3, 2022 by olekz17

[AftiksPL 197]

19 hours ago, olekz17 said:

Yes, ironic indeed. Very Ironic how you mind prototypes in my tech tree and for some reason don't consider them as unique, but don't mind them in the original tech tree and consider them as unique there.

Well, only you have a problem with prototypes, so I it just shows that your tree is not up to your standards.

 

19 hours ago, olekz17 said:

Dude. Look at the French rank I tanks. Some of them are even worse, but nobody wants half of the French rank I out of the game.

No, this thing has no armor, is slow, gun as bad as SA18. The French at least have armor, and there is a possibility that the SA18 will get APDS ammunition with a penetration of around 50mm.

 

19 hours ago, olekz17 said:

So, there are couple of issues to unwrap here, some on my part, some on your, but first of all you should stop lying - neither of them are unfinished, and Borsuk completed the initial army trials.

No, Borsuk only completed factory test, the production of 4 pre-series units for the army has not ended either.  https://defence24.com/armed-forces/land-forces/polish-army-to-test-borsuk-ifv-this-year

Not to mention the fact that it is not known if a certain nation starting with J will allow the installation of Spike AGTM on Polish towers.

19 hours ago, olekz17 said:

The contract for ZSSW-30 turrets for Rosomak APCs will be signed likely next week (source: https://defence24.com/armed-forces/rosomak-apcs-to-be-outfitted-with-the-zssw-30-turrets-contract-imminent)

Yes, yes, I've been hearing it for over a year. Write when they have signed this and the first towers will come into use.

19 hours ago, olekz17 said:

TOPAS-2AP - It's an APC armed with one 14.5mm machine gun and one coaxial 7.62mm machine gun in so called "AA turret" (called that because of high elevation). May I ask where do you want to put it and how do you want to balance it?

We already have similar APC, a Pbv 301, so at rank II, around 2.3 BR...

 

19 hours ago, olekz17 said:

Robur LO-1800A - No. The only objectively correct answer to a request for putting what essentially is a technical at early WW2 BR is a big NO. What's next? Toyota Hilux armed with a KPVT at 1.0 for Japanese? Oh, I forgot, PikPikker in his infinite wisdom proposed a BTR-60 at 1.0 for a North Korean tech tree...

No, thats not a technical. Just a light SPAA on a truck chassis. Besides, such vehicles are already in the game, so where's the problem?

 

19 hours ago, olekz17 said:

Hibneryt - As above, it's a glorified technical - double 23mm autocannon on a truck. If you want one of those SPAAs added, let it be the PSR-A Pilica.

Again, thats not a technical.

19 hours ago, olekz17 said:

• BWR-1S - For all intents and purposes it's a BMP-1 with thermals, laser rangefinder and LWS. Could it be better (slightly more unique) than the regular BWP-1? Yes, likely. But you're calling the T-55AM a copy-paste and meanwhile showing the BWR-1S as "Polish"? Really?
• Dana - Sure, it could be added, but why? As a completely unnecessary gap filler? I've already included the Krab.
• 2S1 and 2S1M - As above.
• 9P110 - As above, I already included the 9P133 Malyutka-P.

Ahhh, you really don't understand... More unique vehicles - better community opinion about the tree. Nobody wants a tree where the only new vehicles are 3-4 vehicles on rank I and a few SPAA and MBT on top.

[RazNaRok 616]

On 03/07/2022 at 14:15, AkIvonDemolka said:

...a self-propelled howitzer 2S1 Goździk trainer vehicle based on the Star truck 266. Shooting real ammunition. Without armor.

 

Huh... did they really fire a live ammunition, wasn't they only used to train crews and mechanics in procedures and maintenance ?

Edited July 4, 2022 by RazNaRok

[RazNaRok 616]

On 02/07/2022 at 21:01, AftiksPL said:

Robur LO-1800A

 

A very interesting proposal, but wouldn't be there anything as much interesting on the iconic STAR 25, 66 or 660 chasis?

Edited July 4, 2022 by RazNaRok

[AkIvonDemolka 352]

2 hours ago, RazNaRok said:

 

Huh... did they really fire a live ammunition, wasn't they only used to train crews and mechanics in procedures and maintenance ?

Apparently there were a few reworked to do this. But there were also training crews on them and it was possible to load real ammunition for the gun, but later this possibility was eliminated. There is still a lot of confusion about this vehicle.

[olek_z17 29]

On 04/07/2022 at 11:26, AftiksPL said:

Well, only you have a problem with prototypes, so I it just shows that your tree is not up to your standards.

I've already clarified my position on that. I did it here:

On 03/07/2022 at 15:44, olekz17 said:

I'm kinda OK with the first category (prototypes that are at the end of the evaluation phase or even past it and everything indicates that they'll be adopted by the army) and very much not OK with the second one (cardboard mock-ups that blatantly violate Gaijin's rules on paper vehicles).

 

 

 

On 04/07/2022 at 11:26, AftiksPL said:

No, Borsuk only completed factory test, the production of 4 pre-series units for the army has not ended either.  https://defence24.com/armed-forces/land-forces/polish-army-to-test-borsuk-ifv-this-year

Not to mention the fact that it is not known if a certain nation starting with J will allow the installation of Spike AGTM on Polish towers.

OK, fair, point for you here, these were factory, not state trials. But as for Jews, you are lying once again. Spikes are already integrated with ZSSW-30 turrets, so there likely won't be any big problems here. We might have a problem with exporting those turrets (But only with Spikes, not without them. So we could offer integration with other systems, whatever the client prefers.), but it's not really Israel's fault - when you have a Soviet (Russian speaking immigrants from the Soviet times) minority large enough to easily influence elections, you have to be careful.

 

 

 

On 04/07/2022 at 11:26, AftiksPL said:

We already have similar APC, a Pbv 301, so at rank II, around 2.3 BR...

No, not similar. TOPAS is 7 meters long, 3.14 meters wide and 2.1 meters high (height without the turret), which makes it about 1.5 times bigger than the Pbv 301 (4.66 meters long, 2.23 meters wide and 2.64 meters high). That coupled with a weaker armament would make it one of the worst vehicles in the game.

Besides, the Pbv 301 is another vehicle that serves no purpose whatsoever other than being a pointless gap filler - diversity for the sake of diversity.

 

 

 

On 04/07/2022 at 11:26, AftiksPL said:

No, thats not a technical. Just a light SPAA on a truck chassis. Besides, such vehicles are already in the game, so where's the problem?

On 04/07/2022 at 11:26, AftiksPL said:

Again, thats not a technical.

OK, let's play a little game: tell me how much differences in functionality of these two vehicles do you see:

Because I don't see any functional differences whatsoever.

And just so that I don't hear "it isn't a Hilux armed by terrorists so it isn't a technical", here's exactly what I said:

On 03/07/2022 at 15:44, olekz17 said:

what essentially is a technical

 

 

 

On 04/07/2022 at 11:26, AftiksPL said:

Ahhh, you really don't understand... More unique vehicles - better community opinion about the tree. Nobody wants a tree where the only new vehicles are 3-4 vehicles on rank I and a few SPAA and MBT on top.

Yes, I really struggle to understand why a game that advertises itself as historical gets away with nonsense like the R3 T20 FA-HS fighting 76mm Shermans, Panthers, Tigers and T-34s (just one of way too many examples).

 

 

 

Besides, if nobody complains about more than half of the Israeli tech tree being copy-paste, why suddenly everybody complains about the Polish tech tree suggestion being similar?

Edited July 5, 2022 by olekz17

[olek_z17 29]

On 04/07/2022 at 11:26, AftiksPL said:

Yes, yes, I've been hearing it for over a year. Write when they have signed this and the first towers will come into use.

Here, by the Ministry of National Defense:

I told you.

 

And for those of you who can't speak Polish, here's an article: https://defence24.com/armed-forces/land-forces/poland-inks-procurement-of-unmanned-turrets-for-the-rosomak-apcs

Edited July 6, 2022 by olekz17

[AkIvonDemolka 352]

The first of 28 Polish training tanks Abrams SEPv2 version

[RazNaRok 616]

 

K2 tanks for Poland

 

 

 

Quote

 

Krzysztof Płatek @krzysztof_atek

We are finalizing the negotiation process with the Korea regarding the acquisition of K2 / K2PL tanks, K9 / K9PL howitzers and FA-50 / FA-50 PL aircraft

along with a wide transfer of technology to Poland.

More Information soon.

 

Quote

 

wPolityce.pl @wPolityce_pl • 2 g.

We buy South Korean weapons. It will be 48 FA-50 fighter planes and at least 180 K2 tanks