tech tree Visegrad Group - Ground tech tree

[GrumpyStranger 723]

I think in this case 'early' and 'late' mean just pre- and post 1938 production runs, because padding. The tree, I mean, not that the late variant had any additional padding.

 

Besides, between the mild steel (iron, actually) and limited quantity, it's not like pzinż 120 is a good idea for the tree.

[RazNaRok 616]

Well...

 

Lose then 7TP early, replace it with 7TP Late and in it's place use the 7TP wz.39 (the one with new armour shape, and different internal module placement).

We have no photos of 7TP wz.39, but preserved documentation would be enough to create gaming model.

[AkIvonDemolka 352]

On 03/07/2021 at 00:50, Miltaccfd said:

Hello!

I made a visual tech tree for you, you can find new additions in it. As always, the BRs are based on the claimed firepower, protection and mobility data, the tree is built up just like Gaijin would do.

What you would like to see next?

 

Here is a photo of Early production single-turret 7TP tank.

 

  It looks interesting, but where is the Krab howitzer? next version Hibneryt - Polish self-propelled anti-aircraft set consisting of the Star 266 truck? Poland WR-40 Langusta? Or the Czechoslovak RM-70 used by Poland Czech Republic and Slovakia instead of Daisy.

 

[Miltaccfd 240]

On 07/07/2021 at 10:21, AkIvonDemolka said:

 

Here is a photo of Early production single-turret 7TP tank.

 

  It looks interesting, but where is the Krab howitzer? next version Hibneryt - Polish self-propelled anti-aircraft set consisting of the Star 266 truck? Poland WR-40 Langusta? Or the Czechoslovak RM-70 used by Poland Czech Republic and Slovakia instead of Daisy.

 

Thank you!
This photo of 7TP jw. will be used in the next version, but I wont export another one right now because its technically not wrong.

Krab howitzer - I do not yet know that the vehicle has a laser designator to guide its guided munition or not. (IRL the unit does that close to the target  Also Im not sure about that munition and how it would affect the combat effectiveness ingame. The thing is that it probably will be less effective than a missile with the same warhead. Speaking of the warhead, it has only a high explosive one, not more than 8 kgs of explosives. If its TNT, then the round is less powerful than the unguided ones in the czech vehicles (up to 10 kg). Its also fast, so the guideability is not that big of a deal, probably it can hit a slow moving target more often and thats it.
It worth a BR of 7.3-7.7 in my opinion even with this modern ammo. Im not sure that Gaijin and the WW2 tanks would like it tho... I want to wait for some new info. I also would like to see a true AP ammo (maybe HEAT warhead in APR 155), which would make it at least 8.0+.
Rak mortars are at least reportedly have HEAT warheads and have slow moving guided projectiles so more of a top down approach. Also more time to guide them if it helps. And the Rosomak is fast.

Late Hibneryts have missiles and some modern stuff. Between 8.0 and 11.0 V4 has 3 SPAAs. Until the update Ixwa Strike this year noone had more. Now GB has 5, because they got the ZA-35 and the Falcon had been put into 8.0 (it was 7.3-7.7 before). So I would say adding a new SPAA is not needed, especially a late Hibneryt, if I will add anything it will be the Biala or the Strop II (first because its easy to model and seems interesting, second because it has a radar unlike most of other V4 anti-air)

Now we have to speak about the Daisy. It might should actually be designated also an anti-aircraft vehicle, so we can say V4 has 4 of them between 8.0 and 10.0. It shoots airburst rockets at slow moving flying targets. Its not compareable to WR-40 or RM-70, which are good only for spamming artillery HE rockets. This is not a popular playstyle, especially in higher battle ratings (look at Type 75 MLRS for example).
I think Daisy will be more popular as it can shoot S-8KO rockets with 400 mm penetation, RS-80 rockets with 430 mm penetration or RS-80P programable rockets with airburst against air targets (and possibly also with 430 mm penetration, but im not sure about that).
It has a search radar in the system but not on the vehicle, so we wont have radar ingame. But it has a GS400 optronic sensor which lets us to aim with a calculated lead (optical target tracking, like in Sidams for example). IRL it can lock on any slow moving air target (drones and helicopters) up to 6 km and can engage it from 4 kms away.
The reason why its not in the anti-aircraft line is it shouldnt be able to lock on the fast jets, and the rockets are also too slow to aim at them properly anyways, so I put it into the "artillery" line, which it belongs to as its other role is MRLS. Ingame its anti-aircraft capability will be like the Begleitpanzers (it has airburst shells but its a light tank, not an SPAA).

Edited July 9, 2021 by Miltaccfd
Wrong info before

[AkIvonDemolka 352]

Suggestion: 155mm 52inch. SpGH DIANA - the effect of the Polish-Slovakian cooperation on the refined Polish UPG-NG of Polish manufacturer BUMAR-LABEDY chassis and the Slovak Zuzanna 2 cannon.

Edited July 11, 2021 by AkIvonDemolka

[Miltaccfd 240]

On 11/07/2021 at 10:34, AkIvonDemolka said:

Suggestion: 155mm 52inch. SpGH DIANA - the effect of the Polish-Slovakian cooperation on the refined Polish UPG-NG of Polish manufacturer BUMAR-LABEDY chassis and the Slovak Zuzanna 2 cannon.

Ookay, I think we have to list these modern (mid cold war to present) 152-155 mm artillery pieces. There is a lot and we have to choose, I would say, max 5 of them. (Thats even more than Gaijin might agrees of). I think the number of artillery pieces with only HE shots should be reduced as much as possible.

Here are most of the 152-155 mm artillery pieces:
2S3 Akatsiya - tracked, 152 mm L/27, HE, HEAT, APHEBC
ShKH vz.77 Dana - wheeled, 152 mm L/36,6, HE, HEAT
Ondava - wheeled, 152 mm L/47, HE, HEAT
Modan vz.77/99 - same as vz.77 Dana but less crew, faster reload
Dana M1 CZ - basically a vz.77 Dana capable of shooting long range HE ammunition, with new cockpit and slightly increased mobility (inc. steering, engine power, shifting time)
Dana M2 - ingame not more than a Dana M1 with slihtly better crew protection
Zuzana vz.2000 - wheeled, 155 mm L/45, HE, experimental APFSDS (missing info, there is a chance we will never find it)
Zuzana 2 - new cockpit, 155 mm L/52, HE, stronger engine, faster
A 40 Himalaya - tracked, Zuzana vz.2000 turret on T-72M1 chassis
Diana - tracked, Zuzana 2 turret on Polish UPG-NG hull
Dita - New look, widely automated, only 2 crew, faster (like Zuzana 2), 155 mm L/45, HE shots
AHS Krab (UPG-NG) - tracked, 155 mm L/52, HE and laser guided HE shots
AHS Krab (K9PL) - Krab on K9PL chassis (more power, more mobile)

+ 122 mm 2S1 and 2S1M
+ 120 mm M120G and M120K
+ 80 mm MRLS ZRN-01 Daisy

The artilleries I have now in the tree are:
7.0 - 2S3 Akatsiya
7.0 - ShKH vz.77 Dana
7.3 - ShKH vz. 2000 Zuzana (if we find info on the APFSDS maybe higher BR)
7.7/8.0 - 2S1M "Goździk" (depending on the yet unknown HEAT-FS penetration)
(Here thinking of 7.7/8.0 - AHS Krab(s))
9.0 - M120G
9.3 - M120K
9.3 - ZRN-01 Daisy
+ premiums 7.0 - ShKH Ondava
and 7.3 - ShKH A 40 Himalaya (if we find info on the APFSDS maybe higher BR)

Should I and if yes how should I modify the line?

Edited July 13, 2021 by Miltaccfd

[AkIvonDemolka 352]

The suggestion at the end of the tank tree of 250 Abrams tanks in the SEPv3 version will go to the Polish Army. The first batch is to join the armed forces as early as next year. The contract value is 23 billion 300 million.

[Miltaccfd 240]

4 minutes ago, AkIvonDemolka said:

The suggestion at the end of the tank tree of 250 Abrams tanks in the SEPv3 version will go to the Polish Army. The first batch is to join the armed forces as early as next year. The contract value is 23 billion 300 million.

Depends. We will see, if the SEPv3 will be better, or the Leopard 2A7+HU. But right now, the SEPv3 is better than anything ingame, so I wont include it yet in this suggestion. Also right now there is info missing (like will those have DU in their armor or it will be replaced by other composites as USA is still not export DU armor, which modification adds some hundred kilos to the weight, and which ammo will be imported)
Also if Poland import DU ammunition, they will use them in Leopards, too?

[eleks12 1,079]

24 minutes ago, AkIvonDemolka said:

The suggestion at the end of the tank tree of 250 Abrams tanks in the SEPv3 version will go to the Polish Army. The first batch is to join the armed forces as early as next year. The contract value is 23 billion 300 million.

 

English Article from Defence Blog.

https://defence-blog.com/poland-confirms-buying-250-abrams-tanks-in-sepv3-configuration/

 

 

Edited July 14, 2021 by eleks12

[HufnagelPista 135]

Weeeeeell, I start to think, something went wrong in Poland...
They upgraded their T-72-s a few years ago (if my informations are correct) so if they retire them early, thats a big loss of money
They still have Leo 2, A4-s A5-s and there is the Leo PL modification, (so I tought they upgrade all of the A4-s for a nearly A5 standard)
Now, they buy the Abrooooms 
So, 3 tank, with 3 different technology, 3 diferent engine, 3 diferent gun system.  
If they retire the T-72-s (I understand that decision, that platform is around that age, where it starts to be more and more expensive to upgrade, and keep relevant) but keep them in reseve, they still need to have the maintenance crew to be able to repair it if its needed. Then, there is the german, and there is the different american technology... the maintenance is different... What I wanted to say, its cheaper to keep 1 platform in service, than 2 or 3.
Then, there is the question of the gun... The Leo can't fire the MURRICAN DU rounds, because the Rh L44 operates with much lower chamber pressure... The american 120mm can fire the wolfram/tungsten Rh 120 rounds, but it would be able to penetrate far less, than a DU round. And there is the other question, the new tanks would get any DU round, and the Abrams armor would contain any uranium, or they would get the standard weaker export armor? 
I dont understand this decision, (most likely its a part of a political game) I would buy another Leos, because of the easier maintenance, and already familiar technology.

But if its a political decision, and I must buy something from grandaddy Biden, I rather buy a few more F-35 than the Abrams 

Edited July 20, 2021 by HufnagelPista

[AftiksPL 197]

8 hours ago, HufnagelPista said:

They upgraded their T-72-s a few years ago (if my informations are correct) so if they retire them early, thats a big loss of money

So far, there are only 19 modified and overhauled T-72s

8 hours ago, HufnagelPista said:

They still have Leo 2, A4-s A5-s and there is the Leo PL modification, (so I tought they upgrade all of the A4-s for a nearly A5 standard)

2A4 upgrades to the 2PL standard are also going very slowly, so far only 16 units have been made. 

 

8 hours ago, HufnagelPista said:

I would buy another Leos, because of the easier maintenance, and already familiar technology.

For now, there are no Leopards available, and the Leo2A7V differs significantly from the 2A5 and 2PL in terms of design that you would have to build new logistic lines again, and besides, the M1A2 is a much better tank than the Leopard 2.

 

[GrumpyStranger 723]

It's purely a political decision. It shouldn't really be discussed on merits, because even though there might be some, it's not what this is about.

'Somebody' bet on the wrong horse last year and now, with the anti-eu **** hitting the fan needs to bribe himself back into grace again...

EDIT: In before somebody asks, how do I know it's political, compare the likely offset package and technology integration of a M1A2 SEP3 (an entirely US package) to that offered by Airbus for their HM225M, and check why the latter was killed off...

Edited July 20, 2021 by GrumpyStranger

[HufnagelPista 135]

13 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

M1A2 is a much better tank than the Leopard 2.

I doubt it... It should be around the same protection and firepower level, but from the export tanks, the US usually spares out the uranium. Thats a fact, the question is, they would spare with the ammo 2?

 

13 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

2A4 upgrades to the 2PL

And thats should be around of an A5

 

13 hours ago, AftiksPL said:

Leo2A7V differs significantly from the 2A5 and 2PL in terms of design that you would have to build new logistic lines again

I dont think thats true... (Same gun caliber (I mean, same diameter, not the length x diameter one) and for exercises, it will use the same practice rounds with less propellant, to minimalize the wear of the gun. The engine unit is almost the same, they can use the same tools to swap it out for an other unit. the electronics should be more complex on the A7... That shouldnt require different logistics)

But hey, Im just talking, because You and me have a different oppinion...  I cant prove that, what u said is wrong, neither that I was right. Im not a Leo 2 commander or mechanic, to leak classified documents to back up my statements

[AftiksPL 197]

On 20/07/2021 at 11:30, HufnagelPista said:

Then, there is the question of the gun... The Leo can't fire the MURRICAN DU rounds, because the Rh L44 operates with much lower chamber pressure... The american 120mm can fire the wolfram/tungsten Rh 120 rounds, but it would be able to penetrate far less, than a DU round

Leopards can fire American rounds.

 

https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2008/gun_missile/6526Huls.pdf

 

On 20/07/2021 at 11:30, HufnagelPista said:

And there is the other question, the new tanks would get any DU round, and the Abrams armor would contain any uranium, or they would get the standard weaker export armor? 

The tanks are purchased in a package along with ammunition, engineering vehicles and technical facilities, but it is not yet known which type of ammunition will be purchased. And from the current information it appears that the purchased Abrams will be identical to those used by the US Army and Australians, so with armor containing uranium.

[RazNaRok 616]

Well ... someone did play, but a bad horse was staked.
Of course at the moment, everything will be better than PGZ fecaloplasty with T-72.
But as a result, a real logistics nightmare is preparing for us:
T-72M
PT-91
Leopard 2PL
Leopard 2A5
M1A2
Each of them requires its own accompanying units, supplies, fuel, and ammunition. Both logistics and operating costs as well as missing road infrastructure for M1A2 tanks will finish us.

Along with the vehicles, we will not receive a license to produce ammunition for them, So We have to purchase ammunition in the USA all the time. Although it is essentially the same ammunition and gun as used in the Leopard 2, well maybe it is a good side of the case as a matter of fact that the results of domestic production of 120mm ammunition has so far been rather mediocre. Even if ammunition was assembled of high quality components from reputable suppliers.

But who will forbid the rich ... although in fact, we haven't bought anything yet, we did only sent a request to the US Congress for permission for this. As we know, the majority of votes in US Government are now held by the Democrats, who will rather not consent to the barter of the latest technology. So, as long as these new tanks will not be parked in their newly built garages in Wesoła, we can not be sure of anything yet, although on the other hand the topic seems so politically dense that it is not only about satisfying the ambitions of several politicians and soldiers.

 

P.S.

Soon... Somewhere in Poland near Wędrzyn proving grounds:

Edited July 21, 2021 by RazNaRok

[AftiksPL 197]

Tatra 82 with VKPL vz. 36 gun, and with ZB-60 machine gun. Probably good vehicles for the rank 1 SPAA.

[Miltaccfd 240]

On 07/08/2021 at 19:23, AftiksPL said:

Tatra 82 with VKPL vz. 36 gun, and with ZB-60 machine gun. Probably good vehicles for the rank 1 SPAA.

Thank you! I might have seen these pictures long ago and had been forgotten, I dont think I would have found them again.
I like the 20 mm one, and I added it to the visual tree.
About the 15 mm one, there is a quite big problem with that vehicle. As you can see, the mount is on the truck but the ammo is not. That would mean, according to this picture it cannot carry any ammo. In that form its not a game material. I wont add that as a third SPAA in rank 1. The gun is unique tho, better we have than not (just like the 39.M Gebauer that would have been changed to this), but in my opinion the Š-I-SPO is enough (hardly, 15 mm armour, 41 km/h speed, 12,7 hp/t, 41 mm penetration, 2 crew) to represent it ingame. Compareable to the T-60, which has better armor and slightly better mobility, but only 32 mm of pen. Getting that gun ingame is solved it seems so no need of force this vehicle ingame in my opinion.

Edited August 10, 2021 by Miltaccfd

[Yontzee 1,673]

I'm surprised this hasn't made it to the "devs" yet. This is a solid idea for a tech tree. 

[AftiksPL 197]

In the next update, Japan will get the Type 87 ARV, armed only with an autocannon. So now it has become possible to add OT-62 Vydra-II to the tree on BR 5.7-6.0. Also a Pbv 301 will be added, so maybe the OT-62 Vydra-I could work as a Tier II SPAA, but I don't think it's needed.

[WayOfTheWolk 1,573]

On 10/08/2021 at 14:51, Miltaccfd said:

Thank you! I might have seen these pictures long ago and had been forgotten, I dont think I would have found them again.
I like the 20 mm one, and I added it to the visual tree.
About the 15 mm one, there is a quite big problem with that vehicle. As you can see, the mount is on the truck but the ammo is not. That would mean, according to this picture it cannot carry any ammo. In that form its not a game material. I wont add that as a third SPAA in rank 1. The gun is unique tho, better we have than not (just like the 39.M Gebauer that would have been changed to this), but in my opinion the Š-I-SPO is enough (hardly, 15 mm armour, 41 km/h speed, 12,7 hp/t, 41 mm penetration, 2 crew) to represent it ingame. Compareable to the T-60, which has better armor and slightly better mobility, but only 32 mm of pen. Getting that gun ingame is solved it seems so no need of force this vehicle ingame in my opinion.

Correction, the ZB-60 armed truck appears to have two ammo boxes laid up against the backwall of the truck. You can see them visibly next to the gunner's right leg. This would also arguably mean that the gunner cannot make a complete 360 with the gun as the boxes partially block his path.

[Miltaccfd 240]

On 28/08/2021 at 11:37, AftiksPL said:

In the next update, Japan will get the Type 87 ARV, armed only with an autocannon. So now it has become possible to add OT-62 Vydra-II to the tree on BR 5.7-6.0. Also a Pbv 301 will be added, so maybe the OT-62 Vydra-I could work as a Tier II SPAA, but I don't think it's needed.

Ive never said that they are not possible to add. My issue was that I dont mix the post war stuff with WW2 equipment if it does not makes sense. Then we didnt know that where these autocannon vehicles will or can be. Type 87 RCV was 7.3 on the dev server, so this issue is seems to be solved. Or is it?
                                   Type 87 RCV                      OT-62 Vydra-II
ammo    default       80 mm pen APDS               84 mm pen AP-I                                             no big difference
              modif.        92 mm pen APFSDS          90 mm pen HEAT                                           HEAT is slightly worse in pen, also by air gap problems and cannot go through objects
stabilisation                      yes                                  probably no                                                If the Vydra (from 1976, before BMP-2!!) does not have, it might be the biggest weakness
crew                                   5                                           3                                                         Type 87 is more likely to survive a hit
speed                      100 km/h wheeled               60 km/h tracked, 10 km/h on water               Type 87 is better for the most common urban maps, Vydra is kinda fast but does not do anything special
                                     around equal HP/ton ratio (both 15 t, 300 hp)                                      with same ratio the wheeled vehicle has advantage due less drag
armor                            up to 8 mm                        up to 17 mm                                               no big difference

What I see is if Vydra does something better than the RCV, just slightly, or it wont make a big difference (like swimming), but RCV is much more mobile and has gun stab, which probably Vydra lacks, so Type 87 seems a much more understandable choice to get ingame for me. Its in 7.3, so we can say okay, if its better than it should be over the Vydra also, so put the Vydra down. Sadly, it wont not help as WW2 heavies are worse opponents for them than early post war MBTs, TDs and IFVs. So Vydra is the same type of vehicle, which should work like the Type, but with worse overall characteristics. And we dont even know that the Type will be good or bad in the hands of the average player. I will still keep the Vydra in my head, but not yet add it to the tree.

Edited August 31, 2021 by Miltaccfd
Bad default ammo for VK-30

[Miltaccfd 240]

If you want to represent the unigue gun (ammunition) in the tree there are two vehicles already:

PLDvK vz. 53/59

Known as Jesterka also. It shoots the same 30x210mmCZ (sometimes 30x211) ammunition as the VK-30 gun on the Vydra-II. It has two OBR. ZK 453 1953 guns, so it can fire two times as much rounds per minute compared to a single VK-30.
As an SPAA its compareable to the Kugelblitz. Its slower than the OT-62 (10,3 t and only 110 hp), but at least has the same max speed. Its possible battle rating is 6.7 (same as Kugel).

BVP-1 Strop I
Remote controlled double 30 mm gunned turret on a modified BVP-1(BMP-1) chassis, with roughly the same speed as a OT-62 (same engine power for higher weight, but also higher top speed). Its turret rotation speed is very fast. Same guns as the Jesterka has.
It has TV guidenance for the guns against air targets, so its battle rating cant be less than 8.0.

So we can add the Vydra-II to 7.0-7.3-ish, which has half the firepower of a 6.7 SPAA, the only reason to add it is its fast like a light tank. But we already have that type of vehicle in 8.0 with double firepower again, and with decent anti-aircraft capabilities. I see why we should add it, but it is not that big deal to do it before we see how the Type 87 RCV works ingame.

I also want to point out that we already have several fast firing autocannons in these BRs, like BWP-95 (BR7.3, 23 mm + 82 mm recoilless gun), OT-64 Cobra (BR7.7, 30 mm + ATGMs), AMB-1 DE-82 (BR6.7, 82 mm rapid fire - 100-120 rpm - mortar with HEAT rounds) and the Jesterka. Also we have a lot of other light tanks to scout, like BPzV, SKOT-2AM or BRDM-2B M-97, so Vydra-II is far from filling an unfilled role in this tree, unlike the Type 87 RCV for Japan.

[AkIvonDemolka 352]

Suggestion: Polish Rak-G based on LPG chassis. The newest Polish technical wonder with a new turret, a new vehicle chassis adapted to the Borsuk standard.

[Yontzee 1,673]

I'm not sure if anyone said it yet, there is a lot of comments but the Rosomak (M1M) IFV.

 

Rosomak IFV

30mm equipped Rosomak IFV, could be added due to the new addition of the Type 87 ARV. BR ~8.0.

 

Source:

• http://www.military-today.com/apc/rosomak.htm
• http://www.military-today.com/artillery/wilk.htm
• http://fighting-vehicles.com/kto-rosomak/
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KTO_Rosomak
• https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/pl-wilk.htm
• https://www.armyrecognition.com/mspo_2012_show_daily_news_pictures_video_uk/amz_and_cmi_defense_unveil_the_new_fsv_fire_support_armoured_vehicle_wilk_at_mspo_2012_0309121.html

Edited September 4, 2021 by Yontzee

[Miltaccfd 240]

19 hours ago, AkIvonDemolka said:

Suggestion: Polish Rak-G based on LPG chassis. The newest Polish technical wonder with a new turret, a new vehicle chassis adapted to the Borsuk standard.

I might be wrong, but... Isnt the LPG chassis is the base of the M120G, the BWP-2000 and others? Or is it just means lightweight tracked chassis or something?
This is good, but we alerady have the M120G, which is more acceptable at these BRs (players will complain about its a 2021 vehicle and its just 8.3 or somewhere around it), have the same armament, similar mobility and armor. Not much better tho, its from 2010...
As much as I know now, this vehicle does not offer anything over the M120G, has the same characteristics, so its unnecessary.

 

22 hours ago, Yontzee said:

I'm not sure if anyone said it yet, there is a lot of comments but the Rosomak (M1M) IFV.

 

Rosomak IFV

30mm equipped Rosomak IFV, could be added due to the new addition of the Type 87 ARV. BR ~8.0.

 

Source:

• http://www.military-today.com/apc/rosomak.htm
• http://www.military-today.com/artillery/wilk.htm
• http://fighting-vehicles.com/kto-rosomak/
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KTO_Rosomak
• https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/pl-wilk.htm
• https://www.armyrecognition.com/mspo_2012_show_daily_news_pictures_video_uk/amz_and_cmi_defense_unveil_the_new_fsv_fire_support_armoured_vehicle_wilk_at_mspo_2012_0309121.html

It can be added, yeah. But Japan has a lack of fast vehicles, scout vehicles and overall, vehicles in that rank, so Japan needed the Type 87 ARV. Here its not the case, we have several vehicles with scout ability, fast ones, a lot with autocannons (maybe not high pen APFSDS, just AP(-I) or APDS, but with AT armament like missiles).
I feel like Japan got that vehicle to fill the role of it, and this is why Gaijin appoved to be added even tho its amament is only a 25 mm gun. They even added an APFSDS ammo, unhistorically as I know, to get enough pen to be in such a high BR.
I dont think that the addition of the Type 87 ARV would give a reason to add such vehicles for other nations simply because they are just trying to save Japan there. V4 doesnt need that type of care, you can go and hunt with the OT-64 Cobra for example. Same BR, 8x8, quite fast, 30 mm autocannon, APDS, but 4(?) ATGM, too. No thermal tho.