Israeli Q&A Answers

69

Alright, here are the answers to the Israeli Q&A. I grouped similar/same questions together so I didn’t answer the same question over and over again. So if you see some of your questions moved around, that’s why.

Q: If you were to obtain information on the 110mm gun (and it was rifled) would you propose for not only your Merkava/M48, but also the Merkava I? Literally, almost every tech tree has the same 105mm L7/M68

A: The British 110mm was only ever planned for use in the Magach 3 as an alternative to producing the Merkava. It wasn’t considered for the Merkava at any point, as you keep insisting. And the 110mm is definitely a rifled cannon, not one of the smoothbore projects the British were working on around that time.

 

Q: what would you expect the national traits of Israel to be? and if you had to guess what would their playstyle be like?

Q: How would Israeli tanks fit in the current game meta, what kind of playstyle could be applied efficiently for Israeli tech tree..?

A: I suspect that the Israeli tanks would play like a cross between the British and Americans. I don’t really plan on assigning a national flavor to the tanks themselves, though, not after Wargaming shoehorning the Swedish heavy tanks into something else so as to not be similar to the French heavies.

 

Q: if a merkava prototype comes to the game will it be like a 105mm armed (iirc its a 105mm armed tank) fv215b? but with overall much stronger front armour (but prone to engine damage if shots do some how pen) but weaker sides?

A: The armor will be quite good in places, like the turret, while also being rather mediocre overall. Let me put it another way, the Merkava is a tank you want to fight hull down in, as the only thing its hull armor has going for it is the amount of spaced armor it has, which will be great against HEAT in-game.

 

Q: what potential lines can the Israeli tree have? will they just have a heavy line or medium line or light line or TD line or a bunch of lines?

Q: Currently, what line could Israeli tech tree builds up from tier 1 to 10?

A: The potential is there for several lines, namely a heavy line with the Merkava and a medium line with the Samovar. There could also be another mini line at tiers 9 and 10 with the Sho’t Kal and Magach 3 110mm. Israel also has no trouble creating an SPG line. And if Wargaming so chooses, an Arab TD line is completely possible too.

 

Q: we know about the super Shermans which could possibly occupy from I think tier 6 to 8? (could be wrong on that) if you had to guess how will they be differentiated from the french m4 revolver? (i could be wrong but I think that is essentially a super Sherman not sure though)

Q: I’ve always thought the M51 “Super Sherman” was an Israeli vehicle. Why did WG add it to the French tech tree as the Revalorisé?

Q: It was made by the French and then sell to Israel

A: Wargaming really screwed the M4A1 Revalorisé over. It has the wrong engine, using a Cummins VT8-460 engine that only Israel used instead of the historical Continental R-975 radial. To shed some light on this, the Revalorisé was a French testbed for the Israeli M-51, and the M4A1 chassis used for the testing was a standard one that was also used by France to test an FL-10 turret. Wargaming didn’t do any research on it and instead slapped it together to make a quick buck. In fact, the Israeli M-51 project was started by Israel in 1961, and France was asked for help, so the vehicle really shouldn’t be in the French tree either. Now to get to your question, The M-50 will be a tier 7, most likely getting APCR as its standard rounds and APDS as premium, so expect it to play a lot like a Panther. The M-51 will get the HVSS and a historical Cummins engine (side note, the first M-51s still used the Continental engine), and so should have better soft stats since premiums are supposed to be worse than regular vehicles. (glares at Skorpion)

 

Q: are there any unique innovative technologies which could be added to the game with a potential Israeli line? like the Swedish TDs getting the adjustable suspension.

A: Not that I’m aware of, no. Although Israel Tal, inventor of the Merkava regretted the suspension choice made for the Merkava, and would have chosen a pneumatic suspension if he could change anything.

 

Q: what will be the most potentially unique vehicle that would come with their introduction? and what do you think will be the most interesting vehicle to play?

Q: In your opinion, what is the most unique Israeli tank that could fit in WoT’s timeline?

A: I’d have to say the Merkava itself. It’s a vehicle that can hull down really well, but shouldn’t be caught in the open, because while the armor is mediocre, it has enough spaced armor to shrug off HEAT spam.

 

Q: What is the time frame for their introduction. Both in terms of years and in terms of other nations, for example, after Italian tanks, but before Polish tanks

A: I have no idea, that would be something for Wargaming to answer. I can say that they haven’t begun work on an Israeli tree yet, so most likely not for a while yet.

 

Q: There seem to be a number of modifications to the M4 Sherman to improve its effectiveness, such as the “Super Sherman” and some SPG conversions, the. Are there any more unique modifications to the M4 we haven’t heard about yet? Also, would the FL-10 turreted version that was captured from Egypt be a suitable premium for the line?

Q: Discounting Arab-Israeli controversy, do you think it’s feasible to add some unique tanks made by Arab Nations, like Egyptian T-34/100 or Sherman w/AMX-13 turret as the premium for this tree?

A: Israel enjoyed a close cooperation with Finland in terms of arms, with the Soltam company being the prime example. To that end, a Finnish 122mm cannon was tested on an M4A3E8 chassis as an artillery piece. This cannon would later evolve into the Finnish 155mm that Israel would adopt as the Soltam M-68. As for the Sherman/FL-10, it could be used in several ways. As a premium, it isn’t very suitable since the crew configuration isn’t good enough to train anything. So it could be used as a tier 7 TD in a potential Arab TD line (they were dug in and used in this fashion in 1956), or it could be used as a tier 7 medium leading to the Tiran 4/5 line, with the tier 8 being the Egyptian T-34/100, which would not be needed for the TD line if the TD line doesn’t happen.

 

Q: do a Vietnamese tech tree next since there’s a ton of players from there

A: I don’t think a Vietnamese tech tree is possible, not by any means. That said, the Vietnamese T-55s were modified with Israeli help IIRC….

 

Q: I read an article on a potential Isreali tech tree on FTR. It appeared to me it had absolutely nothing new to add to the game. Other than the high tiers, it is basically another Chinese tech tree with a lot of borrowed tanks with ‘improvements’. Do you think the Israeli tree could add something new to the game? If so, what?

A: It brings a playstyle reminiscent of many different nations already implemented, without playing clearly like any of them. Plus, it brings in more tanks to the game, which is something this game needs if it hopes to survive.

 

Q: What? Not interested in having a T-62 with the British 105?

Q: Bojan: Israelis never converted T-62 to 105mm, since they considered 115mm 2A20 to be better then L7/M68. Only T-54/55 were converted.

A: Actually, while Israel never actually rearmed the T-62s they captured, they did consider doing so with the 105mm Sharir (L7/M68) in 1973 after the Yom Kippur War. However, the Israelis had a strong dislike of the T-62 due to how uncomfortable it was even in relation to the T-54/55 series, and so they ditched using the T-62s (known as the Tiran 6 in service) as quickly as possible.

A Tiran 6 with its proud new owner:

Tiran 6 SK

 

Q: For the M51 upgrades / conversions, were there more Sherman types used than just the M4A1? (Yet to see any others)
And what were the exact changes to the M51 and M4A1? From a modeler’s perspective, that is.
Nothing really WoT related, but meh.

A: Yes, several M-51s were based on the M4A3 chassis instead of the M4A1. Although whether this was because the previous chassis became damaged or was due to some kind of shortage of M4A1 hulls, nobody seems to know. As for exact changes, the M4A1 was chosen specifically because it had greater internal room than the welded hull Shermans. The M-51s themselves also went through several cosmetic changes, before some engine deck changes with Chile. I highly recommend Thomas Gannon’s Israeli Sherman book, as well as Dr. Robert Manasherob’s Lioness & Lion of the Line series, as both provide excellent documentation on Israeli Shermans for modeling.

Some welded hull M-51s:

m51-sherman-welded-hull

m51-welded-hull

m51m4a3_2-jpgoriginal

 

Q: What makes you think that Israeli tree needs be adapted into the game, asides of Merkava?

A: Several things, it’s a potential money maker for Wargaming, it’s been talked about and certain tanks requested almost since WoT began, and few nations have quite the association with armor and tanks that Israel does.

 

Q: Israel upgraded their Pattons like no others. and they had plans to upgrade Chaffees

Q: How much paper tanks can we expect to be in there? I can make shit up right now… a Chaffee with a long 76mm gun… and will there be more than 1 tier 10 tanks? The Merkava mk 1 and maybe a Megach can be good

A: Israel never used or even considered using or upgrading the Chaffee, and in terms of the Middle East, I’m not aware of Iraq ever modifying or upgrading their Chaffees either. As for paper tanks, there are a grand total of two in my tree, the first being the Magach 110mm, which was a planned alternative to the Merkava project from around 1970-1971, and the second is the M-72, which was an artillery turret mounting a 155mm Soltam M-68, that was planned to be mounted on any chassis. It was only ever mounted (complete with autoloader) on a heavily modified Centurion chassis as a sort of proof of concept for the Sholef project in the early 1970s, so the tier 9 “M-72” is historical, but the chassis choice is up to Wargaming, and would be “paper”. Expect this to be similar to the French tier 9 and 10 SPGs.

 

Q: Will wot milk players for gold by selling them goats and other exotic animals like the Israeli prime minister as tank crew members?

A: Uh, I highly doubt it.

 

Q: Will, if any Israeli tech tree arrives before or after the introduction of a new french heavy line or Chinese/Japanese TD line that have been rumored?

A: Depends on what Wargaming wants to do. I highly doubt this would come before the introduction of the second French heavy line as that’s already being worked on, but before the Japanese and Chinese TDs is a possibility if Wargaming feels it would be more lucrative. I suspect we’ll see Poland first, though, as that’s already being worked on currently.

 

Q: Will the Israeli line look like the line to the T57 Heavy with lights, mediums, and heavies all mashed together?

A: Not really, no. Think of it more like the main upcoming Swedish branch, with lights for low tiers, moving into mediums through the mid tiers, and then heavies for high tiers. In Israel’s case, there could either be mediums and heavies, lots of mediums, or just heavies, depending on how Wargaming wants to do things.

 

Q: Will there be a new map to accompany the Israeli tech tree? If so, what land marks might you consider and are there any map mechanics you’d like to try like implementing sandstorms to occasionally limit view range in areas of the map instead of bush spam?

Q: Will the introduction of Israeli tanks implement a smoke mechanic similar to the world of warship’s destroyer class? Perhaps the new mechanic can be tested out in a similar fashion to the Swedish line and later mixed with other nations as well.

A: I doubt we’ll see new mechanics, either sandstorms or smoke, as WoT PC doesn’t even get night maps or weather effects. As for new maps, Another desert map is possible, perhaps something in the Sinai, or maybe the Valley of Tears.

 

Q: You’re running out of colors to paint the tanks of nations, what palette might be given to an Israeli tree?

A: A dark greyish-tan color. Think of it as a cross between the German gray and British tan we have now.

 

Q: Would it be more appropriate to work on an Italian tech tree before the Israeli line? would it make sense that any lack luster vehicles be tested with an Italian line to kind of contribute to historical accuracy?

A: Work began on an Italian tree long before the Czechoslovakian tech tree even. However, work was shelved as the complete lack of a tier 8 medium, as well as the fact that tiers 9 and 10 would be modified foreign vehicles, not to mention the small playerbase, made Czechoslovakia a more viable option. I have no doubt we will see Italy with their own tech tree at some point, but I couldn’t say if it would be before Israel or not. Although ironically, if both tech trees were combined, they would complement each other quite well.

 

Q: Will the reception of the Swedish line will influence the creation of an Israeli tree? Such as if people really dislike Swedish vehicles, World of tanks might focus on map mechanics or some other field of content other than new nations?

A: New nations are what keep people interested in WoT as without new nations and tanks to play, people will eventually get tired of the game as new and different games come out, or other games release new content. So I don’t think a potentially disappointing Swedish tree would cause Wargaming to scrap working on more tanks in favor of other improvements, but instead, I would think it would cause them to try harder at not making disappointing tech trees.

 

Q: Making an Israeli tech tree would make a lot of political noise and fighting within the community. Would this drama be good for advertisement?

Q: Hard to believe a civil war in the game would break out but I don’t know if the toxicity would turn new players away from the game. Would this toxicity fear stop an Israeli line until political tensions have quieted?

A: I don’t foresee much if any drama over Israeli tanks being added, as while some people will complain and whine about it, nobody seems to have any trouble playing the tanks of Nazi Germany, or the Soviet Union, or Communist China, etc. Not to mention Britain and France’s uh, record with their territories and colonies even through the 1960s. Plus, Wargaming doesn’t really care about politics that much given the whole Stalin inscription thing several years ago. So I don’t see Wargaming hesitating to implement Israel because of any potential toxicity either. If anything, Israel’s popularity among armor and modeling enthusiasts means that it has the potential to bring more new players to the game, not turn them away.

 

Q: What will their premium consumable be? Hopefully Matzoh bread or something.

Q: Will the Israeli tanks be able to have a “Falafel” Customable? i would be more than happy to have Falafel instead of a fire extinguisher

A: I was thinking Rugelach or Hamantaschen for a consumable, although given Wargaming seems to like coffee, Café Afuch (upside down coffee) would be cool, and fun to say too! Ultimately though, the consumable is Wargaming’s choice, so we’ll have to see what they choose.

 

Q: LiB why are you such a fukken SCRUB :^))))?

A: Cyka Blyat

 

Q: How many vehicles could there be in the Israeli tech tree? (Including non-modified foreign vehicles)

Q: How many Israeli tanks are going to be in this tech tree ?

A: 22 vehicles without the Arab TD line, 25 with, not including any premiums.

 

Q: How many modified foreign vehicles are out there?

A: 14 without the Arab TD line, 17 with, and not including premiums.

 

Q: How many complete original vehicles are there (Not including the Merkava)

A: Not including the Merkava 1, there are 4. The Merkava Mule at tier 8, the Merkava prototype at tier 9, and the L-33 Ro’em and Sholef Prototype (what people know as the M-72), are all completely original designs. Both the Sherman chassis in the L-33 and the Centurion chassis in the Sholef Prototype were heavily modified and turned into something else.

 

Q: Are there any unknown-to-the-public paper projects in the archives?

A: It’s entirely possible there are unknown projects that would fit WoT. However, being that I’m neither Israeli nor do I live in Israel, getting anyone to actually help in this regard has proved damn near impossible. If anyone is Israeli and would be willing to help out with visiting Israeli archives (if that’s even possible, I would be greatly appreciative.

 

Q: Are you going to create a full Israeli tech tree ? If so, when are you planning to release it ?

A: I’ve already released a thread on the North American WoT forums, which contains the latest version of my tech tree, along with some alternative configurations. http://forum.worldoftanks.com/index.php?/topic/426870-an-israeli-tech-tree-in-world-of-tanks/

 

Q: Are there any Israeli tanks from before 1948 ?

Q: How can there be tier 1-4 tanks when they only became a country in something like 1948?

A: In the sense that Israel was formed officially in 1948, no, Israel by themselves did not have or operate any tanks before 1948 as it didn’t technically exist. However, Jewish military history goes back much further than that, with the British Army specifically creating an official Jewish Brigade during WWII. There was also Jewish volunteer battalions in the British army during WWI known as the “Jewish Legion” who fought against the Ottoman Empire. Also, I should point out that WoT has never been focused solely on WWII, nor should it be.

 

Q: Are there going to be any new maps ?

A: That’s up to Wargaming, if they want to create Israeli or Middle Eastern maps, there are possibilities, like something from the Sinai or possibly the Valley of Tears, as I mentioned to somebody above. But that depends on the map department. WoT could use another desert map though.

 

Q: What will be the special feature of Israeli tanks ?

A: If you mean some new technology or feature like the Strv 103’s suspension, there really isn’t any. If you’re talking about playstyle however, I answered that above.

 

Q: IDF used IS-3 with T-54 engines. It would be fun to play a faster, and already op, IS-3

A: Do you have a source for this? The T-54 engine is weaker than the standard engine in an IS-3, and I’m not aware of the Israelis replacing the engines in the IS-3Ms they captured from Egypt in 1967, as the Israelis used them as indirect-fire artillery in the Sinai and to that end modified the engine decks to store ammunition.

An IS-3 being used as artillery in the Sinai:

is3-canal-1

 

Q: Do you think that WG can make a Middle-East tech tree with Israeli,Arabic,Turkish tanks?

A: Yes, they can, however, I’m not aware of any unique Turkish vehicles that could be added, any links or sources for Turkish tanks and armor?

 

Q: What was the ground resistance of possible WoT-qualified Merkava?Was it good (because you know -Deserts-)

A: Ground resistance in WoT is a balancing soft stat, not something you see in real life. That being said, the Horstmann suspension from the Centurion was chosen for the Merkava because of its performance in the desert environment, and near as I can tell it’s ground pressure is only slightly worse than that of an M60A1.

 

Q: I’m a Turkish guy,you know we purchased 200+ Sabra tanks,do you think that Sabras are still good for the middle-east environment or is it outdated?

A: This sort of question is beyond my area of expertise, but I would imagine that what they’re being used against would have a big part of it. As far as tanks go, there are worse tanks to be using in this day and age, and even Jordan has turned their M60s into a still relevant looking vehicle in the M60 Phoenix. Sorry I can’t give a better answer here.

 

Q: What’s the mentality behind Israeli tank creations?

A: The mentality behind the M-50 was to make the Shermans they had relevant still in the 1950s. For the M-51 project in 1961, the goal was specifically to get a 105mm tank cannon into service as soon as possible to counter the then recent shipments of T-54/55s to Syria and Egypt. For the Merkava, it started out as a way for Israel to not be dependent on foreign built tanks after the British burned them when it came to the Chieftain. This evolved after the horrendous casualties during the Yom Kippur War to crew survivability being the main priority.

 

Q: Israel tried various tank chassis like Amx-13,M4 Sherman etc. What was the plan? Because you know they now use Merkavas for almost everything.

A: M4 Shermans were acquired because they were cheap and plentiful, and Israel needed armor. The AMX-13s were acquired because, in 1953, Israel needed something more powerful and only France was willing to break the arms embargo to the Middle East (put in place by the British, French, and Americans) by selling the then relatively modern AMX-13 to Israel, most likely at a huge profit for France. So the AMX-13 was more of a stopgap measure than anything else. The Sherman was the first tank that they really used as a universal chassis for everything, after that it became the Centurion, and now the Merkava. Outside of that, the Patton chassis was used for the Pereh missile launcher, while the T-54/55 chassis was used for the Achzarit APC. Only the Centurion has really stood the test of time in terms of modifications, though after the Sherman modifications were phased out of service.

 

Q: Rheinmetall announced their 130mm gun for tanks. Do you think of using it in upcoming Merkavas? Or can we see new Sabras developed for Turkey with better protection and 130mm gun?

A: Again, this is outside of my area of expertise. While a 130mm cannon in a Merkava IV sounds nice, I don’t have any idea as to whether Israel would consider such a thing, nor if it would fit without redesigning either just the turret if not the entire tank. Sorry, I couldn’t give a better answer here.

 

Q: New tank lines mean less balanced tanks as WG makes a new line op to get peeps to play.They just crap ion balance so just fix the friggen game before introducing more unbalance.

A: I have no control over balance issues already in the game, but I don’t think an Israeli tree would add to these balance issues as the vehicles are quite balanceable already and do have direct comparisons already in-game.

 

Q: I’d like to see someone solve the ammunition problems for an Israeli tech tree. Having actually looked into the matter the documentation is horrible. Documenting how bad the Merkava I is, is a lot easier.

A: I would like to see this too, believe me. It was a major find just discovering the M-51’s 105mm cannon had HESH ammunition too, and not just HEAT and HE.

 

Q: How to aim for the strv103?

A: Uh, you want Sven Berge, not Israel Tal.

 

Q: Will it be possible to see the Merkava Mk.1 or the Prototype Merkava in its place at tier 10 if an Israeli tech tree is considered? The aforementioned armored vehicles do fit within the timeframe, although the Merkava Mk.1 is stretching it.

A: Yes, it’s more than possible. In addition to the Merkava 1 fitting technology wise, it entered production around 1975, which is the same age as the Type 64 we already have in-game. The final Merkava prototypes (one of which sits at Yad Lashiryon in Latrun in place of a Merkava 1) which is not much different from the production Merkava 1, were completed in 1974. So they are all well within WoT’s timeframe.

 

Q: Because Israel used their AMX-13s as combat tanks, and apparently never used them in any type of scout or recon role, do you think that there’s any chance that we’ll see an AMX-13 for Israel that is classified in WoT as a medium tank? Perhaps as a mid-tier premium?

A: I doubt it. Unless Wargaming plans on constructing some sort of light tank line for Israel (which would only be possible using the Nimda export modifications, including the 60mm HVMS), it’s best left as just a premium or reward tank. Plus crew wise, it doesn’t fit any other Israeli tank, so as a premium medium, it isn’t necessary.

An advertisement from Nimda on the AMX-13:

amx13-nimda-specs-tnd-1

 

Q: …this is kinda weird, I remember that a few days ago WG ppl said in some Q&A that Israel won’t be implemented – cos there would be too much copy&paste tanks..they also said that Israeli tech tree would be the 1st one to be filled completely with premium tanks But who nows, maybe in 2 years they will change opinion…

A: I wouldn’t pay that close attention to what they said about Israel, as Israel has been in consideration for a long time now, and it’s one of the few nations that makes sense in terms of bringing in more money and potential players to WoT, something other tech trees really don’t offer as they don’t have the popularity of Israeli tanks. Plus, the answers in those Wargaming Q&As often contradict each other, meaning they’re not that reliable as to what’s going on, or what could happen in the future. Keep in mind those same answers used to tell us that Wargaming would never add tier 10 light tanks, and yet they plan on doing exactly that.

 

Q: There has been plenty previously written about many tracks that could be used in an Israeli tech tree, but much is of high tiers. Do you think there is a viable tier 1 to tier 3 options for all classes without too many clones?

A: Sadly, no. Either the vehicles are clones of existing tanks, or clones of tanks not yet in the game (like the M.13/40), so this is unavoidable. There are however unique modifications, such as an R-35 with a 2-pdr, the M.13/40 with a 2-pdr, and possibly a Lorraine chassis with a 75mm artillery piece as a tier 2 SPG.

 

Q: WoT is a game built around pre WW2 tanks ending with tank development at the end of the 50th. So basically Israeli tanks would start at tier 8.

A: Uh, no. WoT is a tank game encompassing tanks all the way from WWI (Renault FT), up through the 1970s. The Type 64 is from 1974, the upcoming tier 8 Swedish tank destroyer, the UDES 03 is from the early 1970s, the Japanese STB-1 (Type 74 prototype) is from 1969, and the Chieftain Mk. 6 variant (whenever we get it on PC) is also from the mid to late 1970s. I do not understand at all where this delusion comes from that WoT is a WWII game only.

Liked it? Take a second to support Life_In_Black on Patreon!

69 comments on “Israeli Q&A Answers

  1. Anonymous says:

    If you clump in a full line of Arabic vehicles into the Israeli line I will personally see to it that you suffer untold punishment. How dare you consider placing vehicles from those goat fucking swine anywhere near the Israeli tech tree.




    0



    0
    • Life_In_Black says:

      Uh, you need to chill out. It’s a game. Hell, we have a Taiwanese vehicle in the PRC tech tree, a Polish vehicle in the Soviet tech tree, a Swiss vehicle in the German tech tree, two Hungarian vehicles in the German tech tree, and an Israeli vehicle in the French tech tree. This is a tank game, not real life.




      0



      0
  2. Mochii says:

    That was an interesting insight on the Israeli vehicles. More tanks is always a nice thing for people like me, a tank enthusiast’s point of view, but maybe not as healthy for balancing aspect. But who knows? maybe they’ll implement it alongside the WoT 2.0 with tier 10 lights, which would definitely require a global rebalancing anyways. The only thing bugging me is how technically all the other tech trees so far developed some of their mid-tier tanks before or during the WWII and though nowhere is it specifically stated that it is a WWII tank game, a lot of the maps and features do make it seem that way. All in all, though I might not be that hyped for it, if it does come out, it’s definitely worth a try.




    0



    0
    • Life_In_Black says:

      I don’t think tier 10 light tanks and WoT 2.0 are in any way connected. Tier 10 light tanks are part of the global rebalance planned for WoT currently, not some far-future distant project. As for balancing, I don’t foresee balancing Israeli vehicles as a problem.




      0



      0
  3. Muhamad Adhi says:

    Thanks for your answer.
    And since i come from ASIA, i only aware about your Israeli Tree proposal thread now; its interesting read.

    Btw, i am now doing some research on Arabs armored vehicle for personal purpose (just say i writing some fanfic), do you know where to find quite detailed data on that? Thanks




    0



    0
  4. The only reason I asked about the 110mm because you mentioned it as a possible upgrade for the M48/Merkava. If they did actually buy the gun and like the performance, I would expect it to be proposed for the Merkava if not built.

    This is why I mentioned the “what if” type of deal and the IS-3 with the BL-9. The BL-9 was mounted on the ISU and intended for the KV (doesn’t specify which one).

    Also, do you really think the Merkava Mule can mount the the 20pdr and especially the 105mm L7/M68? The turret was only ever intended to be a weight afaik.




    0



    0
    • Life_In_Black says:

      I have never said at any point that the 110mm was considered for the Merkava. Perhaps if you were more interested in actually learning instead of using that kingofall43587 alt account of yours to try trolling me and crapping up my thread on the forum with your nonsense, you might know that. Speaking of which, I removed your tech tree above, as it’s doesn’t belong here at all.




      0



      0
  5. wolvenworks says:

    i find it funny that ppl keep asking for an Italian tree when the only legit tanks they have (other than the post-WW2 Pattons) are basically either lowtier (lots of light tanks), or just straight out of the WG Zone. ppl who play AW might be familiar with the OF-40, and the C1 Ariete.

    Obviously, we can’t put the Ariete in WG, but I dunno abt the OF-40 since it’s designed to compete with Leo 1…..so maybe it’s a tier X med candidate.

    regardless, the Italians don’t have any tanks to fill in the mid-top tier segment, so it’s best if you just stick to wishing for just a mini-tree ending at around tier 5 (prolly with the Carro Armato P 40)




    0



    0
    • Tim Tracy says:

      While i agree that there wouldn’t be a complete tree I can’t help but hope that their tanks make it into the game sometime. I personally love the look of their little tankettes and some of their later (in the war that is) SPGs such as Semovente 105/25 but i don’t see it happening in their own tech tree. As for the OF-40 despite it being out of the WG zone i think it would be close enough for it to be able to be put into the game as it does have a rifled gun and like you said it is very similar to the leo 1. Hell the turret looks like the welded turret from the leo1a3 and a4 variants. Who knows maybe there is a bunch of bs/paper tanks that would fill in the atleast 2 tech trees and get it into the game.




      0



      0
      • wolvenworks says:

        you DO realize that those cute tankettes only have MGs and no turrets, right? they’re like tier zero material




        0



        0
  6. jakub_czyli_ja says:

    Moar lines for the game with broken RNG and matchmaker.




    0



    0
  7. Lelle67 says:

    During the Six Day War in June 1967 Egyptian forces lost a total of 73 JS-3 and JS-3M. The Soviet heavy tanks were poorly suited for mobile mechanized warfare, and besides, they were not built to be used in desert climates. The Israeli army used captured JS-3M until the early 1970s, mainly as fixed pieces along the so-called Bar-Leva line on the Sinai Peninsula. They were not used in the war in 1973, and was recaptured later by Egypt.
    The IDF went as far as upgrading the IS-3s with better engines taken from T54 tanks to help improve performance and modernized the aged system.
    My source http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail-page-2.asp?armor_id=191




    0



    0
    • Life_In_Black says:

      Yeah, that’s not really a valid source though, as it doesn’t list any sources itself. Which makes it worse than Wikipedia. I want some sort of actual source on the matter.




      0



      0
      • lelle67 says:

        Ok. I understand but read page 93 in Soviet Heavy Tanks: World War 2 by Ray Merriam.
        And http://tankarchives.blogspot.se/2016/06/is-3-in-combat.html?m=1




        0



        0
      • Life_In_Black says:

        Near as I can tell, part of the IS-3M modification itself was giving it a version of the T-54’s engine. So the Israeli captured IS-3Ms were already using the V-54.




        0



        0
      • Lelle67 says:

        The engine was in changed from the V-2-1S diesel V12 to a B-54K-IC giving 520 hp,




        0



        0
      • Lelle67 says:

        The T-54 had the Model V-55(V-54) V-12 water-cooled. 38.88-l diesel
        500 hp




        0



        0
      • Life_In_Black says:

        The B-54K and the V-54 are the exact same engine with the same horsepower, 520. The V-55 was an improved version of that same engine used in T-55s generating 580hp. So again, the IS-3M’s Israel captured from Egypt were already using the T-54 engine.




        0



        0
      • Lelle67 says:

        Most Soviet tank’s engines are developed from the V-2/6/12, of course, the B-54F and the V-54 is very similar but not exactly the same.
        Best source on the Web is probably http://www.kampfpanzer.de/propulsion/v-2




        0



        0
      • Life_In_Black says:

        As far as any source has been able to tell me, the IS-3M modifications specifically involved giving it the T-54’s V-54 engine. I doubt there are any real differences between the В-54К-ИС used in the IS-3M and the regular В-54 used in T-54s, which is more than enough justification to claim that either Israel giving captured IS-3M’s tT-54 engines is a myth, or they were simply replacing a burnt out engine with the exact same make of engine it was already using. I don’t get this, if it is in fact true, is made out to be some radical thing, putting in a new engine when it was pretty much already using that same model of engine.




        0



        0
  8. Uziel Cohen says:

    Hi,
    I’m from israel and i sure would like to see an Israeli TT.
    So, a couple of months ago i contacted the Yad-Lashirion museum regarding the idea of implementing the Israeli TT to the game and a possible meeting between wot and the museum.
    At first, i received a message from one of the museum’s representatives that was a little vague; it was like he really wants it to happen but…
    later on, i recieved a message from the head of the museum himself , no less, in which he firmly stated that no such meetings could occur.
    Well, i can see the reasoning. The museum locations is inside a military base and the head of the museum is an IDF veteran, so letting someone dig up archives inside a military base will probably not be his To-Do list

    Anyway, I’ll be more than happy to help with translating stuff or to try to find specific things.
    3 of my brothers were in the armor corp. All in the Magach 6b.




    0



    0
    • Life_In_Black says:

      Yeah, I don’t think the museum is going to help out at all, it would have to be done privately and quietly. If you could try digging for archives and such, I would greatly appreciate it. Even the publicly available stuff would be a good start, perhaps try and find documents on the M-51’s 105mm cannon and its ammunition if possible.




      0



      0
      • Uzie says:

        Hi.
        I thought to take on the matter from another angle. I looked for M51 veterans war docu.
        The name of the author is Mikha Tamir, A platoon commander of M5. The battle he writes about took place at the Golan Hights, 7 of October 1973. Very interesting story by itself but you asked for ammo specs…
        He wrote that against the t62 and t55 they initially used squash ammo to initially aim the cannon; The explosion caused by the squash shell helped the TC and the gunner reach the right angle because it was much more visible than the AP or Heat on impact. After the first squash shell landed on the target they would change ammo to heat to finish it.

        So, A true story: AP, Heat, Squash.




        0



        0
      • Life_In_Black says:

        Interesting. Is there anything in English on this? Not that I don’t believe you, as I don’t doubt that Israel might have developed an AP shell for it, it’s just that I wouldn’t mind having a source to use. An AP shell for the M-51’s cannon would be quite something to say the least, as I know the gun was really designed to fire HEAT. Anything else you can find would be much appreciated.




        0



        0
      • Uziel Cohen says:

        Hi.
        Well, i double checked the strory to look for evidance of AP usage with the M51.
        It seems that you were right; They only used HESH and HEAT. No AP.

        I’m trying to find a real life veterans of that period to have more knoledge aboput that subject.




        0



        0
      • Life_In_Black says:

        Once again, thank you. I truly appreciate the help. Would you be alright with me sending you an email?




        0



        0
  9. Brighteyez says:

    So is it confirmed that there will be a Israeli tech tree? In that case I do not think they ever should implement the Merkava, it’s to modern. Basically it would be like implementing Leopard 2 as a tier 10 German tank.




    0



    0
    • Mark Bevis says:

      Afraid not, the Leopard 2 has Chobham type armour, plus the 120mm smoothbore, it is vastly superior to the Merkava 1. Leopard 2 is more like a tier 11 tank.
      Merkava III, yes, that would be on a par with Leopard 2 series.




      0



      0
      • Brighteyez says:

        Well they where both introduced during 1979 and thats about 10 years after the introduction of the modest tank yet in the game, the STB-1 (Type 74)




        0



        0
      • Mark Bevis says:

        Brighteyez says:

        “Well they where both introduced during 1979 and thats about 10 years after the introduction of the modest tank yet in the game, the STB-1 (Type 74)”

        This is true, at the end the 1970s to early 1980s there were really two levels of tank design, the M1-Leopard2-Challenger-T-80B-T-64B types, with advanced armours, laser rangefinders and computerised fire controls, high power-to-weight ratios, etc – Tier 11 if you like; and then all the rest.

        So your Type 74s, Leopard 1A4, OF-40, Merkava 1, T-72 basic models, were all of the rest design. Fine tanks, if your opponent is in T-55s, Centurions, M60s, M48s, T-62s and the like, or as was usually the case, some local ragtag militia with an RPG-7, but not invulnerable. But very outclassed if frontally up against the best. (Tank crew training aside).
        By the mid to late 1980s the game changed somewhat, eg the Merkava III slipped into the top category, with an advanced western style industrial base and licenses to build US/West German weapons, that was possible. In addition upgrades became available across the wordl to improve the rest a bit, eg ERA, composite armour panels and modular computerised fire controls, FSAPDS ammunition.

        There isn’t really a 1979 cut off in WoT, it’s just about where the conventional tank technologies end.




        0



        0
    • Life_In_Black says:

      Uh, you seem to be under the delusion that the Merkava 1 (remember, it entered production in 1975, of which we already have a vehicle from 1975 in the game) is some modern tank that isn’t suited for WoT. This couldn’t be further from the truth as the Israelis literally pieced the Merkava 1 together from existing tanks they had just like Frankenstein’s Monster. It is completely low-tech, and not comparable at all to tanks like the Leopard 2 or Abrams. It is directly comparable to the Chieftain and M60 Patton however, and fits in the game just fine. Don’t believe me?

      Tracks and the Horstmann suspension are from the Centurion
      AVDS-1790 Engine and Allison transmission are from the M60/Magach/Sho’t Kal
      Gun is the 105mm L7/M68
      Fire control is an M13 Ballistic Computer (used on M48s)
      Radio is the AN/VRC-12

      And the armor is entirely made out of steel. They didn’t introduce composite materials into the armor until the Merkava 3, while the Merkava 2 was simply correcting all of the faults with the Merkava 1.




      0



      0
      • Brighteyez says:

        Source on that one plz




        0



        0
      • Life_In_Black says:

        War Data No. 10 by David Eshel, which also mentions that stabilization in the Merkava 1 was an after thought, and it uses a Cadillac Gage stabilization system, which was the same stabilization system used by a lot of western tanks during the 1960s into the 1970s.




        0



        0
  10. Anonymous says:

    Introducing Israeli tanks along with Arabic line? Holy shit, this is gonna be a gold mine. Whoever came up with this idea, is a marketing genius.




    0



    0
  11. Mark Bevis says:

    Can you provide evidence or link to the 105mm on the M51 firing HESH please. Never heard of that in 35 years of studying tanks.

    Off topic I know, but for the Italians, a TD line would be possible with all the Semoventes they had, and they look kinda cool. They would have the advantage of having HEAT ammunition (EP as they called it) presumably as premium ammo, although, penetration performance was uninspiring. I suspect it would be difficult to make the Semoventes inspiring in any capacity if using real world stats. Only the 90/53 and 105/25 would have a chance in WoT without some unrealistic buffs to soft stats.




    0



    0
  12. phdrvrba says:

    WoT scope goes beyond WW2 because nations need tier 10 vehicles/something balanceable against Maus. That’s really the main if not the only reason why we are getting the 1950s and later tanks.




    0



    0
  13. Jack Jordan says:

    Actually the M4A1 Rev under French development used the Cummins V-8 460 engine.




    0



    0
    • Life_In_Black says:

      No, it didn’t. The French never used the Cummins engine at all. Israel signed the contract with Cummins directly in 1959, and began converting Shermans over in 1960. The M-51 is from 1961, and Israeli engineers worked with the French to draw up a list of requirements, one of which was to keep the Continental R-975 radial in order to ensure the tank could enter service as soon as possible. So at no point was France ever involved with the Cummins engine. I already stated that the M4A1 hull used for what Wargaming decided to name the Revalorisé (Wargaming picked the name, it’s not historical) was a standard M4A1 chassis that France used to test other vehicles as well, and was last spotted at the Suamur bone yard in France during the 1980s, still with the Continental engine, only with an FL-10 turret instead of the M-51 turret it was testing back in 1961-1962.

      I should also point out that France converted all of its Shermans over to the Continental R-975 radial engine, so this is quite easy to figure out.




      0



      0
  14. known.rebel says:

    Some people need to accept the fact that their countries are not and never have been influential and revolutionary tank manufacturers. It would be an outrage for WG to accept or even propose this. Merkava and Magach ?! You have Armoured Warfare for that. My country had a bunch of French, American and Russian tanks, as well as some unique designs and upgrades. You don’t see me babbling on about it. Get of your high horse and accept the truth.




    0



    0
    • Life_In_Black says:

      An outrage for Wargaming to accept an Israeli tech tree? Prepare to be outraged then, as Wargaming has been considering it for years now.




      0



      0
  15. AvEzi says:

    Hello and thank you for answering my questions.As for Turkish tanks,I meant the first modernizations of M47,M48,Leopard1 or M60. Every middle-east scenario needs Turkey,right? 😛




    0



    0
  16. eidoss843 says:

    But why do we need Isralei tanks?




    0



    0
    • xxxtommygunxxx says:

      The thing is that we dont. However WG needs it. Isralei tech tree = more money and players for WG.
      Even if 90% of those tank will be copies of existing vehicles, with diferent names.
      Just like chinese and japanese tech tree was made only to conquer the asian market.

      reason = money




      0



      0
  17. Anonymous says:

    Wow, lots of Q&A, thanks for answering my questions and many more that I hadn’t have thought about! Looking forward to more steel colored tanks, kind of overdosed on the poo brown ones haha




    0



    0
  18. Or says:

    Hello I’m the commander of C-Y-A an Israeli-international clan and I want to try to help you or people in my clan that are or been in IDF can help you.
    Cheers Or.




    0



    0
    • Life_In_Black says:

      I would greatly appreciate it. I’m specifically looking for information on ammunition for the M-51, blueprints for the Merkava 1 and it’s testbeds/prototypes, and any and all concepts and projects (tanks, SPGs, anything there is) that might still be unknown.




      0



      0
  19. Vermilion says:

    hi! I was in the IDF, in the artillery corps, will try to help if i can.




    0



    0
  20. Uziel Cohen says:

    Hi.
    Regarding consumables, i believe that the most iconic food that is being used in the IDF is Loof, which is basically canned meat.
    I thing it’s being retired or already has been.
    Over the years, the content of the war ration was sometimes changed but good-old-Loof was holding on tight. Until some guys thought it should be replaced. What a shame.




    0



    0
    • Life_In_Black says:

      Thank you for the information! You’ve just allowed me to figure out several things, notably that Israeli Shermans did in fact have five-man crews still (which explains why the hull machine guns were usually kept), as well as the fact that Manot Krav seems like it would probably be the best bet for a consumable in WoT. Of course it would be called “Battle Food” in WoT rather than Manot Krav, but it fits WoT perfectly.




      0



      0
      • Anonymous says:

        Manot Krav is great, but the essence of it is Loof 😛 though the Loof is retired for around 6 years now
        and Manot Krav is basically like Battle Rations and we already have that consumable 🙁




        0



        0
      • Uziel Cohen says:

        Gladly.
        You are doing a hell of a job. It’s a crime not to aid. 🙂
        I tryed today to reach the museum over the phone. No luck yet. I’ll get a hold on them eventually.
        If this thread will go cold,how can i reach you if i’ll get through to them?




        0



        0
  21. Jagd says:

    Probably too late to get a response, but thanks for the answer on M51 hulls + references. Going to look into those books in the morning.
    And now I’ve got the tough choice of keeping my M51 as an A1, or trying to convert an A3 hull. Should be fun either way!
    Never knew the ‘A1 had more internal space though, I always wondered why it was chosen over the other variants.
    Thanks!




    0



    0
    • Life_In_Black says:

      No problem, glad to have helped! As for the model. M-50s were based on any and all hulls then in service, so if you convert the M-51 over to an A3 hull, you could make an M4A1 based M-50 at some point in the future. I know Chile started mixing and matching hulls as well, so you have plenty of options.




      0



      0
      • Jagd says:

        Fair enough, I might try that, sounds like a cool idea.
        Only problem is that the only M50 I could find is a rather old kit, thus a bit hard to get. We’ll see though, as it certainly sounds a bit more unique than the standard version, and it gives me an excuse to pick up an M50 ‘soon’.




        0



        0
      • Life_In_Black says:

        You could scratch build an M-50 turret from a Firefly kit, but that might be a bit of a hassle.




        0



        0
      • Jagd says:

        Yeah, that might be a bit much. I’ll just have to do a search online and see if I can pick up one cheap-ish (Cheaper than any Firefly I could get easily, atleast!)




        0



        0

Leave a Reply