Jump to content


New Commonwealth techtree?

Commonwealth Canada Australia Ram II Sentinel Grizzly Leopard 1 Centurion M113 Tech tree

  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

MrPuretideful #1 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 12:36

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 7117 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    10-12-2014

Hello I've just spent the last coupe of days putting this thing together. The research was tough since i don't have access to classified tank documents and i can't secure interviews with anyone who knows about that kind of stuff. so after reading through a bunch of old topics about commonwealth tanks. (Canadian and Australian tank designs for that matter.) I threw this simple tech tree together. (pardon the MS paint job, I only have access to so few resources.) I thought it would be a good idea to gather our thoughts and ideas on what would a Commonwealth tech tree look like?

Commonwealthtechtree.jpg



yereverluvinunclebert #2 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 12:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 16641 battles
  • 3,198
  • Member since:
    12-19-2012

Yes of course we need a British Empire or Commonwealth Tech Tree, both names applicable over different time frames but we all know what it means. Ram and Churchill MkIII need to be in it. It needs to be a branch within the current British tank line as the tanks were designed and built to British specifications using local adaptations to British tech. and large amounts of indigenous design. Many of the designs were built and shipped to the British army (1,900 Rams), many used by Commonwealth armies that were an integral part of the British fighting forces.

 

In the desert, Normandy and the Far East, commonwealth forces fought hand in hand under the same command as part of the British army. Rommel would have referred to the collective enemy as the Verdammt Britisch or even die Englisch... He would not have drawn a distinction. Those tanks need to be available to the British line though I applaud your efforts in creating an Empire/commonwealth tree.

 

 


Edited by yereverluvinunclebert, Aug 12 2015 - 12:47.


MrPuretideful #3 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 12:58

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 7117 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    10-12-2014

View Postyereverluvinunclebert, on Aug 12 2015 - 05:42, said:

Yes of course we need a British Empire or Commonwealth Tech Tree, both names applicable over different time frames but we all know what it means. Ram and Churchill MkIII need to be in it. It needs to be a branch within the current British tank line as the tanks were designed and built to British specifications using local adaptations to British tech. and large amounts of indigenous design. Many of the designs were built and shipped to the British army (1,900 Rams), many used by Commonwealth armies that were an integral part of the British fighting forces.

 

In the desert, Normandy and the Far East, commonwealth forces fought hand in hand under the same command as part of the British army. Rommel would have referred to the collective enemy as the Verdammt Britisch or even die Englisch... He would not have drawn a distinction. Those tanks need to be available to the British line though I applaud your efforts in creating an Empire/commonwealth tree.

 

 

 

Yeah I know that the Commonwealth tech tree is a dream and it will most likely not come true. But there's so much space in the tech trees I don't think some of these vehicles won't make it to the end game.

But a man can dream..... a man can dream.



Colddawg #4 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 13:27

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 45846 battles
  • 3,917
  • [ICON-] ICON-
  • Member since:
    07-12-2010
Nice work.

NK_33 #5 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 13:57

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 19712 battles
  • 3,391
  • Member since:
    12-24-2014

What about the Bob Semple Tank?  It's perfect for Tier 1.



jediwannabe #6 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 15:17

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 16670 battles
  • 162
  • Member since:
    01-21-2013
Great idea. Makes more sense to me than a Czech. tree

Vanagandr #7 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 15:39

    Major

  • Players
  • 25407 battles
  • 3,622
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View Postjediwannabe, on Aug 12 2015 - 08:17, said:

Great idea. Makes more sense to me than a Czech. tree

 

How?

jediwannabe #8 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 16:46

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 16670 battles
  • 162
  • Member since:
    01-21-2013

View PostVanagandr, on Aug 12 2015 - 09:39, said:

 

How?

Historically speaking the tanks seem a little more relevant. 



Vanagandr #9 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 17:26

    Major

  • Players
  • 25407 battles
  • 3,622
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011

View Postjediwannabe, on Aug 12 2015 - 09:46, said:

Historically speaking the tanks seem a little more relevant. 

I'm getting this feeling that you don't know much about Czechoslovakian armored forces.



cashdash #10 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 17:46

    Major

  • Players
  • 5558 battles
  • 7,254
  • Member since:
    03-31-2013

View Postjediwannabe, on Aug 12 2015 - 10:46, said:

Historically speaking the tanks seem a little more relevant. 

 

Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha

 

...............

 

Get out



MrPuretideful #11 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 18:24

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 7117 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    10-12-2014

Alright I'm back from lunch for a little bit so here is something I wrote up last night, a summary a mechanics and abilities that would make Commonwealth tanks unique it's TL;DR but I night as well post it

 

Commonwealth Tanks and Vehicles overview

Commonwealth tanks contain Original paper, prototype, and manufactured designs such as the infamous RAM and Sentinel tanks as well as modifications
of already existing designs, such as the Sherman, the M113, The Centurion, and the Leopard 1. even though each minor nation that falls under
the Commonwealth don't have enough Designs to make their own tech trees, together though they're able to bring at total of (known) 23 Combat
Vehicles to form a tech tree with two Branches and two Sub-Branches, the Tank Destroyer line which starts from the tier III LP2A which ends
with The Tier X paper concept Chimera 2. (Also known as the Goliath.) On the LT/MT branch The Path separate into two branches, the Australian
designs such as the sentinel, and the Canadian designs such as the RAM and Grizzly tanks. then they rejoin At M113 MRV and ends with two tier
X modified Medium Tanks, The Leopard C1 and the Olifant mk1. the reason why these tanks should be together on one tech tree is because every
Nation that Falls under the common wealth have all ways been together, weather it be under the rule of British or in the freedom of independence.

 

Commonwealth Overall stats and performance

-Commonwealth vehicles are unique in that they use weapons and equipment from various nations that already exist in the game, mainly the British
and American vehicles, as well as post war equipment from the USSR and Germany.

 

-however though their guns will do less Alpha Damage than their counterparts. A 6-pdr gun in the UK tree will do an average DMG of 75,
While a Commonwealth 6-pdr gun will only do 50 DMG. this is true for all guns in the Commonwealth.

 

-But there is one good side to Commonwealth guns, they will have a higher Rate of fire and in some cases DPM than their counterparts.

 

-Commonwealth tanks will also have the best ground resistance in the game, this is to reflect the terrain and environment of their Countries of origin.
(Why design a tank that fails to function in the environments of their own country of origin)

 

-Commonwealth tanks also suffer from having the lowest HP values in the game, Unlike their UK, American, and German Counterparts they will
suffer more. Even with their top turrets, Commonwealth tanks will still fall under the competition.

 

-Commonwealth tanks also suffer from module damage especially to their guns. So it's not unethical to bring a small and large repair kit
to battle.

 

-Commonwealth tanks start off with an average Speed of 40km/h, but the later tanks in tree can reach up to 60 to 80 km/h and thanks to their
good ground resistance stats, swamp, desert, snow. It doesn't matter Commonwealth tanks will be able maintain their speed.

 

What do you guys think any suggestions on how Commonwealth tanks should play?



Donward #12 Posted Aug 12 2015 - 18:58

    Major

  • Players
  • 46957 battles
  • 7,083
  • [C-BOO] C-BOO
  • Member since:
    08-29-2011
I thought these sort of things got dumped in the Suggestions scrap heap. Has it overflowed and folks are resorting to dumping their tech trees here at HAV?

yereverluvinunclebert #13 Posted Aug 13 2015 - 13:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 16641 battles
  • 3,198
  • Member since:
    12-19-2012

Having a distinct and separate commonwealth tree makes no sense as the one connection that binds them all is the essential British Empire connection. Without this they are just disparate designs from around the globe.

 

It makes sense to add such a tree into the British line just as the US lend lease tanks have appeared in the British tree.

 

The commonwealth designed and built tanks would either slot in but preferably in my opinion would form a separate branch to the British tech tree.

 

Some of the later tanks (Vijayanta) are commonwealth-designed and operated but it does lead to some funny situations where Indian-used but Russian made tanks such as the T55 could be potentially available to a Commonwealth tech tree.

 

Because of this I think it needs to be solely Commonwealth tanks that are potentially available to the British through the integration of commonwealth forces/production facilities in the overall combined Imperial war effort. It makes more sense to orientate the tree in this fashion than to have a separate line entirely.



Life_In_Black #14 Posted Aug 13 2015 - 14:55

    Major

  • Players
  • 26288 battles
  • 11,490
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

View PostMrPuretideful, on Aug 12 2015 - 07:36, said:

Hello I've just spent the last coupe of days putting this thing together. The research was tough since i don't have access to classified tank documents and i can't secure interviews with anyone who knows about that kind of stuff. so after reading through a bunch of old topics about commonwealth tanks. (Canadian and Australian tank designs for that matter.) I threw this simple tech tree together. (pardon the MS paint job, I only have access to so few resources.) I thought it would be a good idea to gather our thoughts and ideas on what would a Commonwealth tech tree look like?

Commonwealthtechtree.jpg

 

While I applaud your effort, there are some issues with this.

 

First, as has been pointed out, the one unifying factor is Commonwealth aspect, which means these vehicle are only connected via Britain. As such, there's no reason to make a separate tech tree for them and they're better off being included in the British tech tree.

 

Second, the Australian Sentinel tanks were all mediums, and can stretch from about tier 4 through tier 7, as they not only planned a new suspension which was prototyped, but also better armor and engines, so there's more than enough material to stretch them across those tiers. The Canadian Rams can work at tier 4 and 5, with the Grizzly Firefly being tier 6 material. There is no such thing as a Ram III.

 

Third, the M113 FSV, MRV, and Lynx are out as they use aluminum armor, something Wargaming doesn't want to deal with at all since it behaves differently to Steel armor. The reason the M56 Scorpion gets a pass it because it doesn't actually have any armor, so there's nothing to worry about in terms of armor values.

 

Four, the TDs are a little off. The LP2A 2-pdr is at best a tier 2 TD, much akin to the already existing Canadian 2-pdr carrier we already have as a tier 2 TD. The Ram 3inch (what you have as the Ram Wolverine) is a tier 5, which is fine, but the Sexton AT with its 17pdr would also be a tier 5 vehicle, being similar in playstyle to the Archer and Pz.Sfl. IVc, and basically playing like the bigger cousin of the American T40. The Ram 3.7inch AT/AA vehicle is a solid tier 6 or possibly 7 given the gun is what was used as the basis for the 32-pdr, and should probably come after the Ram 3inch. The Centaur AVRE is already represented in game on the tier 6 Cromwell, so that's out. The COMRES isn't connected technologically to any of these vehicles, so it's not ideal for connecting any of them either. And lastly the Chimera was nothing more than some very rough ideas drawn up by the British on what to do with their old Chieftains once the Challenger had entered service. More information on it here: http://forums.eugensystems.com/viewtopic.php?f=91&t=38280 In any event, it would have used the latest armor at the time, which means Chobham armor, thus it's out in terms of WoT.

 

Five, the high tiers aren't ideal either. While the Vijayanta is at best a tier 9, so is the Olifant Mk. 1. However the Leopard C1 is basically a Leopard 1A3, which is a better version of the current tier 10 German Leopard 1 at tier 10. Plus by this point, India and South Africa were no longer part of the Commonwealth, so it's a tenuous link at best.

 

Ideally, the Sentinels can be an alternate medium line up to the Centurion in the British tech tree, perhaps branching sideways off of the Grant, or coming off of the M3 Stuart, which Australia also operated. Likewise the Rams can branch from the M3 Stuart, sideways off of the Grant, or perhaps sideways off of the Valentine, and link up with the current Firefly, while the Grizzly Firefly makes for a decent tier 6 premium medium. The Ram 3in can branch off of the tier 4 Ram I, and lead into the Achilles, while the Ram 3.7inch could be an alternate tier 7 TD for getting around the Challenger and/or possibly leading to the AT 15 given the technological link with the 3.7inch cannon and the 32-pdr. Meanwhile the Sexton with the 17-pdr would make for a decent tier 5 premium TD. The Vickers MBT Mk. 1 and Mk. 3 could be the tier 9 and 10 mediums respectively, of a potential British light tank line. So there's still plenty of room for the British tech tree to grow, and there's no need to remove the Commonwealth vehicles.



yereverluvinunclebert #15 Posted Aug 13 2015 - 23:05

    Major

  • Players
  • 16641 battles
  • 3,198
  • Member since:
    12-19-2012

By the way, I don't think it is a dream. It will be added, perhaps piecemeal, perhaps as a new "premium line". Give it time.

 

It could happen.



Sask_Outrider #16 Posted Aug 13 2015 - 23:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 32248 battles
  • 2,346
  • [-RH-] -RH-
  • Member since:
    08-20-2012
I have never understood why the RAM II did not get moved to the UK tree when the UK tree was introduced.  Last time I checked Canada is not the 51st state.  We share a Queen with the UK.

Life_In_Black #17 Posted Aug 14 2015 - 00:08

    Major

  • Players
  • 26288 battles
  • 11,490
  • [KGS] KGS
  • Member since:
    10-29-2011

View Postyereverluvinunclebert, on Aug 13 2015 - 18:05, said:

By the way, I don't think it is a dream. It will be added, perhaps piecemeal, perhaps as a new "premium line". Give it time.

 

It could happen.

 

Why on earth would it happen? There's no reason whatsoever to make a separate Commonwealth tech tree when those vehicles are perfectly fine and historical in the British tech tree.

 

View PostSask_Outrider, on Aug 13 2015 - 18:10, said:

I have never understood why the RAM II did not get moved to the UK tree when the UK tree was introduced.  Last time I checked Canada is not the 51st state.  We share a Queen with the UK.

 

Because Wargaming? IIRC, that particular Ram II is supposed to represent a Ram II that the US trialled, but I can only find mention of the very first prototype Ram Mk. 1 trialled by the US at Aberdeen, so I don't know. The US did have an order for  over 1300 Ram tanks, so it still is technically historical even if it doesn't make any sense anymore. In any event, now that it's removed, there's nothing in the way of the Ram Mk. I and Mk. II being added as regular vehicles to the British tech tree.

EnsignExpendable #18 Posted Aug 14 2015 - 04:23

    Major

  • Players
  • 23745 battles
  • 17,792
  • [SGLE] SGLE
  • Member since:
    04-22-2011
Imagine the amount of whining WG would have to deal with if they just moved the tank to the British tree when it came out. 

Vladamir_Inhaler #19 Posted Aug 14 2015 - 04:37

    Captain

  • Players
  • 53995 battles
  • 1,933
  • [AC_DC] AC_DC
  • Member since:
    08-06-2012

View Postyereverluvinunclebert, on Aug 12 2015 - 21:12, said:

In the desert, Normandy and the Far East, commonwealth forces fought hand in hand under the same command as part of the British army. Rommel would have referred to the collective enemy as the Verdammt Britisch or even die Englisch... He would not have drawn a distinction.

 

 

I believe he DID specifcally refer to Australian troops - I don't know the accuracy of all of these, but it certainly gives credence to him drawing a distinction:

 

  • On p. 48 of 'Krieg ohne Hass' Rommel wrote that the Australian prisoners he met were big, strong men who without question were an elite of the Empire.
  • apparently wrote to his wife to the effect that the Australian troops from 9th Div "their training is much superior to ours".
  • I also recall a quote something along the lines of "those damn Australians" during on particular siege.
  • Pretty sure he mentioned the Kiwis as well.

 

Either way though, I agree with most sentinments in this thread - as much as I would love to see Aussie tanks in the game, it'd be much better to simply expand the UK tree to be a British Commonwealth tree. Probably too much to ask to have Aussie/Canadian accents when driving particular tanks, but would be nice (or maybe even a Kiwi accent if they add the Bob Semple ;))

 



 



yereverluvinunclebert #20 Posted Aug 14 2015 - 14:21

    Major

  • Players
  • 16641 battles
  • 3,198
  • Member since:
    12-19-2012

View PostLife_In_Black, on Aug 13 2015 - 23:08, said:

 

Why on earth would it happen? There's no reason whatsoever to make a separate Commonwealth tech tree when those vehicles are perfectly fine and historical in the British tech tree.

 

I said the opposite.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users