Jump to content


An Israeli Tech Tree in World of Tanks

Israeli Israel Merkava Magach Tiran Sherman Centurion

  • Please log in to reply
686 replies to this topic

Samurai_TwoSeven #301 Posted Nov 13 2015 - 18:47

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9097 battles
  • 378
  • Member since:
    01-16-2015
Can we get the Rascal (artillery) :P

Life_In_Black #302 Posted Nov 13 2015 - 19:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

View PostSamurai_TwoSeven, on Nov 13 2015 - 13:47, said:

Can we get the Rascal (artillery) :P

 

Sadly, I think that might be too new for the game. Same thing with the M113 armed with the 60mm HVMS.

Strv74 #303 Posted Nov 15 2015 - 06:00

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15925 battles
  • 1,520
  • [REALM] REALM
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

Tanknet user considers the short 105mm on the M-51 to have the designation D1504. Is that right, or is it CN-105D1?

http://www.tank-net....ic=40957&page=2

 

Also: Interesting 75mm HEAT for AMX 13, as well as APFSDS, mentioned. Good for use on the M-50. 



Life_In_Black #304 Posted Nov 15 2015 - 06:18

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

View PostStrv74, on Nov 15 2015 - 01:00, said:

Tanknet user considers the short 105mm on the M-51 to have the designation D1504. Is that right, or is it CN-105D1?

http://www.tank-net....ic=40957&page=2

 

Also: Interesting 75mm HEAT for AMX 13, as well as APFSDS, mentioned. Good for use on the M-50. 

 

I haven't a clue to be honest. Unless someone can actually measure the length of an M-51's barrel to see if it's actually L/44 in length, we may not know. The D.1504/CN 105-57 predates the F1 model cannon, and the M-51 project started in 1961 and its cannon is supposedly based on the F1, so that would make the M-51's 105mm a new cannon entirely, not the older CN 105-57. But like I said, the M-51's cannon really needs to be measured so that we can make sure it is or isn't L/44 in length.

 

And it's possible, although there doesn't seem to be much if any data on a 75mm HEAT round other than that it might exist. As it stands currently, I've put the M-60 in at tier 7 and bumped the M-50 itself down to tier 6, which isn't ideal, but expanding the Israeli tree to include Chile isn't a bad idea all things considered, as it gives a new engine to the M-60 and M-51, adds some new camo patterns, emblems, and possible premiums for the tree, and Chile is pretty redundant for a South American tech tree anyway given Brazil alone could make a branch from about tier 5 through tier 10.



Strv74 #305 Posted Nov 15 2015 - 17:52

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15925 battles
  • 1,520
  • [REALM] REALM
  • Member since:
    03-16-2014

View PostLife_In_Black, on Nov 15 2015 - 06:18, said:

 

I haven't a clue to be honest. Unless someone can actually measure the length of an M-51's barrel to see if it's actually L/44 in length, we may not know. The D.1504/CN 105-57 predates the F1 model cannon, and the M-51 project started in 1961 and its cannon is supposedly based on the F1, so that would make the M-51's 105mm a new cannon entirely, not the older CN 105-57. But like I said, the M-51's cannon really needs to be measured so that we can make sure it is or isn't L/44 in length.

 

And it's possible, although there doesn't seem to be much if any data on a 75mm HEAT round other than that it might exist. As it stands currently, I've put the M-60 in at tier 7 and bumped the M-50 itself down to tier 6, which isn't ideal, but expanding the Israeli tree to include Chile isn't a bad idea all things considered, as it gives a new engine to the M-60 and M-51, adds some new camo patterns, emblems, and possible premiums for the tree, and Chile is pretty redundant for a South American tech tree anyway given Brazil alone could make a branch from about tier 5 through tier 10.

 

Sounds good. Is there any way that the M4 FL-10 can be made the tier 7 instead? The M-60 is probably best served at tier 8, with, you know, 260+ pen. 

Life_In_Black #306 Posted Nov 15 2015 - 18:38

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

View PostStrv74, on Nov 15 2015 - 12:52, said:

 

Sounds good. Is there any way that the M4 FL-10 can be made the tier 7 instead? The M-60 is probably best served at tier 8, with, you know, 260+ pen. 

 

Actually, I'm thinking the Sherman/FL-10 might work better as a TD, especially if the cannon is only given the penetration of the current 75mm SA 50. Basically, my main concern right now is Wargaming not putting in two versions of the 75mm CN 75-50, one with the current AP/APCR, and a second with APCR/APDS. If that's the case (and let's face it, this is Wargaming so the chances of Wargaming not putting in the second version of the cannon with APCR/APDS is pretty damn high), the M-50, and possibly even the Sherman FL-10, won't work at tier 7. With that in mind, the penetration for the M-60's 60mm HVMS could be limited to say 200 - 220mm of penetration, which is low, but would be quite balanced for a tier 7 cannon with low alpha damage.

 

As for the TD line, the M-50 Achilles could be a tier 6 and the Sherman/FL-10 the tier 7, or if we throw caution to the wind, the Koksan can be added to the TD line as a tier 10, giving us a little bit more wiggle room in terms of using what and where. In any event, the best part about adding Chile to the Israeli tech tree gets us a Stuart for the tree. :playing:



Life_In_Black #307 Posted Nov 16 2015 - 06:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011
Why on earth are Chilean tanks so hard to find information on? Seriously here, I know the Chilean M-51s and M-50s got new  engines, most sites claiming Detroit Diesel 8V-71Ts, yet Thomas Gannon's Israeli Sherman book, as well as a few other things I've seen claim they were Continental diesel engines. I'm also fairly certain the Chilean M-51s and M-50s had redesigned engine decks too, so it shouldn't be that hard to find information on them. Yet it is.

Life_In_Black #308 Posted Nov 16 2015 - 16:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

Here's an interesting video on the Chilean M-51, although it's in Spanish, and the close up of the running M-51 isn't until almost half way through. There are some great shots of the Chilean army's emblem on the tank, that of the red and blue shield with the white star in the middle:

 

Side note, the amount of times it's referred to as a Super Sherman drives me up a wall.

 

EDIT: Leaving this hear for future reference: http://faroportales.blogspot.com/2009/01/medios-blindado-del-ejercito-de-chile.html


Edited by Life_In_Black, Nov 16 2015 - 16:40.


Marl3y00 #309 Posted Nov 23 2015 - 22:10

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 1552 battles
  • 8
  • Member since:
    07-02-2014
This is a bit of a crazy question, but is the L7 on the merkava an autoloader? Historicaly the Israeli L7 isnt, but the m68e1a4 (American version) was. Just thot it would be an interesting idea, and sounded fun to play. Eitherway, it would be awesome to drive a merkava. gl and thanks for the work ;)

Life_In_Black #310 Posted Nov 23 2015 - 23:34

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

View PostMarl3y00, on Nov 23 2015 - 17:10, said:

This is a bit of a crazy question, but is the L7 on the merkava an autoloader? Historicaly the Israeli L7 isnt, but the m68e1a4 (American version) was. Just thot it would be an interesting idea, and sounded fun to play. Eitherway, it would be awesome to drive a merkava. gl and thanks for the work ;)

 

No, it's not an autoloader. IIRC, I believe later marks (possibly the Mk. 1 and 2 as well, not sure) had some sort of loading assist, but there was still a loader present to feed it shells.

anonym_LtBZGIvVNypw #311 Posted Nov 27 2015 - 22:54

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 0 battles
  • 22
  • Member since:
    09-27-2018
How about a Spanish Tech Tree, Swiss, and Canadian? Hey, I'm bored, so don't judge me.

Life_In_Black #312 Posted Nov 27 2015 - 22:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

View Posteweng21, on Nov 27 2015 - 17:54, said:

How about a Spanish Tech Tree, Swiss, and Canadian? Hey, I'm bored, so don't judge me.

 

Assuming you're serious, Switzerland and Spain have several unique tanks that would be best served fleshing out another tech tree or branch that needs them. Canada has the Ram I and Ram II, which could easily be slotted into the British tech tree.

HitMe_2015 #313 Posted Dec 01 2015 - 14:20

    First lieutenant

  • -Players-
  • 10196 battles
  • 538
  • [BIBLE] BIBLE
  • Member since:
    04-03-2015
So Chile has made its way into the Israeli line now? Sounds fun and interesting.

Life_In_Black #314 Posted Dec 01 2015 - 15:32

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

View PostHitMe_2015, on Dec 01 2015 - 08:20, said:

So Chile has made its way into the Israeli line now? Sounds fun and interesting.

 

Yeah. Given Wargaming went and erroneously used the 460hp Cummins engine in the M4A1 Revalorisé, the only difference between an actual M-51 and that is the suspension, which is meaningless in-game given the M4A3E8 and Firefly, despite the two different suspensions, have the same hull traverse. So while soft stats themselves could be used to make the M-51 better, that's about all there is unless we consider the Chilean variant with the new engine. The engines in the Chilean M-50s (which were given the 60mm HVMS) and the M-51s were near as I can tell, the Detroit Diesel 8V71TA, of which a 609hp version was planned to be mounted in the Samovar project, and a 650hp version was mounted in the Achzarit APC. Given the engine change for Chile was done in Israel (at least initially), around this same time, it's not unreasonable to assume that this same ~609-650hp engine (most likely the different horsepower values comes from net vs. gross horsepower) was used in the Chilean M-50s and M-51s. Which would give the M-51 an absolutely stunning power to weight ratio of 17, if my math is correct, keeping in mind the M-51 modifications added 7 tonnes to the Sherman's weight.

 

Plus, it allows us to put the M-50 itself at tier 6, as well as slot in the Chilean M-60 at tier 7, which would have a slightly better power to weight ratio than the M-51, and would have the 60mm HVMS with much nerfed penetration. A further benefit of this, is it eliminates the need for having a second version of the French 75mm with APCR/APDS as it's ammo types, while at the same time still allowing for such to happen if Wargaming chooses.

 

As it stands, Brazil can more or less complete an entire light/medium branch on its own, and could be added to the US tech tree, so Chile is entirely redundant for a South American branch anyway. Other benefits for Israel include the M24 Chaffee with the 60mm HVMS and a new engine, an M41 Walker Bulldog with a new engine (same engine as on the M-50 and M-51, the 8V71TA), and a Chilean M3A1 Stuart as a premium. So in theory, if Wargaming wanted to, an Israeli/Chilean light tank line would be entirely possible.



Samurai_TwoSeven #315 Posted Dec 11 2015 - 22:33

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9097 battles
  • 378
  • Member since:
    01-16-2015

With this thread being nearly a year old and full of QUALITY INFORMATION and IMAGES, I think that War Gaming would be foolish not to take this into consideration.

 

Also, LIB could you possibly consolidate all of this information into one file or document so I can read it without having to read through 16 pages of information/troll posts/arguing/etc?



Legiondude #316 Posted Dec 11 2015 - 23:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 20522 battles
  • 23,192
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    08-22-2011

View PostSamurai_TwoSeven, on Dec 11 2015 - 16:33, said:

With this thread being nearly a year old and full of QUALITY INFORMATION and IMAGES, I think that War Gaming would be foolish not to take this into consideration.

The concept of an Israeli tree has been taken into consideration long before LiB brought it up

 

Do bear in mind, I'm not trying to put down LiB's work, just that you have to keep into perspective that while what he has gathered is great, with what Silentstalker has shown us with researching the Czech tree is that what data is here is far from a victory lap

 

Though it does help that many of the vehicles have preexisting references from their base designs



Life_In_Black #317 Posted Dec 11 2015 - 23:47

    Major

  • Players
  • 26231 battles
  • 11,478
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

View PostSamurai_TwoSeven, on Dec 11 2015 - 16:33, said:

With this thread being nearly a year old and full of QUALITY INFORMATION and IMAGES, I think that War Gaming would be foolish not to take this into consideration.

 

Also, LIB could you possibly consolidate all of this information into one file or document so I can read it without having to read through 16 pages of information/troll posts/arguing/etc?

 

I've been slowly working on some sort of consolidated proposal including a module list for the vehicles as well, but I haven't been able to really work on it with the semester still going on. I should be much more active at this after finals next week.

 

View PostLegiondude, on Dec 11 2015 - 17:01, said:

The concept of an Israeli tree has been taken into consideration long before LiB brought it up

 

Do bear in mind, I'm not trying to put down LiB's work, just that you have to keep into perspective that while what he has gathered is great, with what Silentstalker has shown us with researching the Czech tree is that what data is here is far from a victory lap

 

Though it does help that many of the vehicles have preexisting references from their base designs

 

Eh, I'd say it's almost on par with what Silentstalker came up with and researched for the Czechoslovakian tech tree. Aside from the Merkava and its prototypes, everything else is pretty much known or would have to be invented anyway, such as the British 110mm cannon. The only real hangup here is that the low tiers are complete clones and any modifications wouldn't really be historical (much like the Chinese low tiers), so Wargaming isn't sure how to implement them yet. About the only unknown thing for some of these vehicles would be gun depression, which is pretty much a Wargaming invention anyway.

Brock7142 #318 Posted Dec 12 2015 - 02:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 6414 battles
  • 5,967
  • Member since:
    03-05-2011
You can't put an Israeli tech tree in this game, it would be too offensive to certain people. Outside of that, where is the Sherman with the 105?mm gun?

Samurai_TwoSeven #319 Posted Dec 12 2015 - 02:31

    Staff sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 9097 battles
  • 378
  • Member since:
    01-16-2015

View PostBrock7142, on Dec 12 2015 - 02:20, said:

You can't put an Israeli tech tree in this game, it would be too offensive to certain people. Outside of that, where is the Sherman with the 105?mm gun?

 

Exactly how would it be offensive? It would like saying the German tech tree is offensive or the Japanese tech tree is offensive. If implementing a tech tree of tanks into a game is ooffensive, then those people need to get a life and accept reality.

 

And what do you mean Sherman with the 105 mm? You any of the Sherman's with the 105mm howitzer or you have the french tier 8 prem, the M4A1 Revs.



WulfeHound #320 Posted Dec 12 2015 - 02:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 12916 battles
  • 26,179
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    04-03-2011

View PostBrock7142, on Dec 11 2015 - 20:20, said:

You can't put an Israeli tech tree in this game, it would be too offensive to certain people. Outside of that, where is the Sherman with the 105?mm gun?

 

Oh great, now you're here.





Also tagged with Israeli, Israel, Merkava, Magach, Tiran, Sherman, Centurion

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users