Swedish Q&A


sp15, a nice lad who had written multiple articles for RSR and is fairly involved in the development of the Swedish Tech Tree which is coming later this year to WoT has agreed to make a Q&A.


If you have any questions about the Swedish Tech Tree or Swedish armoured vehicles please post them in the comment section bellow and as usual, take your time but also have in mind the quicker you are the higher chances you will have of your questions being picked.

Thank you.

Liked it? Take a second to support Rita Sobral on Patreon!
Swedish Q&A

68 thoughts on “Swedish Q&A

  1. Sejo says:

    Will there be anything else besides the one light/medium line and when will we see the tier 6 prem in the shop/tech trer

  2. Firstly, love your articles on Swedish tanks, sp15! My question: Do you think we can expect more than one line (i.e. a line of MTs and a line of TDs) with the initial release of the Swedish tree in World of Tanks? A lot of the tanks you posted for the LT, MT, and TD lines look pretty awesome, and I think they’d make a great set of vehicles for WoT, but seeing how WG usually only puts one line in for a new nation initially (unlike before, with the British & French trees) makes me a little concerned about that.

    1. Nya-chan Production says:

      I am not the author, but still – if you look at UK and FR vehicles, they both have to get replaced vehicles as a result of rushed development (Lorraine,FV4202, Caernarvon turret switch, etc), so I expect rather not. Especially with new chassis mechanism getting implemented.

      1. Seems to me like they’ve at least learned from their mistakes with that in making new trees, so I think it’d be possible this time around for them to introduce multiple lines without completely cocking it up. 😛 Plus, it seems like they’ve been doing a lot of behind-the-scenes work relating to the nation lately (with sp15’s assistance, I’d assume) so I think they’d probably have enough time to sort everything out before the final release.

      2. Oops, forgot more stuff in my original response… here we go.

        To be fair, the Caernarvon turret swap was only because of how badly they screwed up the armor on the Centurion turret it used to get as its top turret. In HD, they decided to go for historical accuracy over game balance, which made the turret (including the mantlet) almost completely useless, whereas that’d been the main selling point of the tank. All they have to do is put the armor back to how it was before, even if it’s not completely historical, to fix it, rather than giving it the AX turret like they did now (completely unhistorical, still very weak, AND incredibly ugly).

        As for the Lorr, I don’t personally think it was a matter of rushing the release of the French tree, as they couldn’t seem to find a replacement for it until VERY recently. While there is much more to be said on the topic of rushing the French tree’s development (cough, the plethora of tanks, both at low and high tiers, that were planned so long ago, plus the tier 2-7 heavy tank lines [yes, multiple: one line of superheavy, TOG-like tanks, and one more ‘normal’ line]) and a little more on the British tree (where is the scout line?! it’s perfectly plausible, with the FV301 and FV303 as very good tier 7-8 options, not to mention the FV101 90 and a few other projects discussed on FTR), that’s less of the idea here. 😛

        But yeah, I can agree that the tier 10 British MT being rushed wasn’t so great (and technically, the FV215b as well, considering how it isn’t exactly historical and is probably going to be swapped for the Super Conqueror). Still, I think they’ve learned – or at least, they should’ve by now – and could PROBABLY, at least in my eyes, put in more than one line for the initial Swedish tree’s release. Keeping my fingers crossed, as the vehicles shown in sp15’s numerous articles all look incredibly cool (those turreted TDs look particularly fun!).

      3. wheeledtank says:

        About the French mediums, the Lorraine 40t was originally going to be the top vehicle of the French mediums, with the Bat Chat at tier VIII (this was back when it only went up to tier IX), and this was because the Bat Chat was an update to the AMX-13 series, but the 2 were swapped, probably due to the Lorraine’s size. While I will admit the Lorraine is a odd vehicle in the AMX line, it is definitely a much better vehicle than the BC-25 AP, and considering that the AMX-13/90’s only flaws in comparison to the BC AP are its weapons (the updated 90mm and 100mm on the BC are both un-historic btw) and health (due to tier difference). If anything, they should have the Bat Chat 25t AP be a tier VIII premium with the 90mm F3 gun. It is a more historic vehicle (in terms of Progression), but the Bat Chat 25 AP doesn’t really prepare you for the tier X, while the Lorraine forces you to see just how important it is NOT to get hit, and its mobility and autoloader being its biggest strength(the AMX-13/90 too, but the Lorraine’s huge size makes this more exaggerated). The new BC removes/reduces the mobility and stealth from the AMX-13s greatly without adding anything to make up for it (other than the 100mm, but the Lorraine has that too). I would make the same argument with the WT E-100, but the WT E-100 neither fit in, was it decently balanced, nor even existed (the Lorraine is odd for its line, but it still fits in its line)

        Sorry for my Lorraine Rant.

  3. wheeledtank says:

    Are there any possibilities for a Heavy or SPG line? If not, are there any interesting Swedish projects with Heavy tanks or Self Propelled Artillery?

    1. wheeledtank says:

      Wait. There was that AMX-50-like Heavy tank series. Would it be possible for a line for it (preferably from tier IV or V) to be introduced?

      1. moltenmagma1 says:

        Stridsvagn Emil and that’s about it about heavy tanks from sweden though SPG there is BKAN 1 (Bandkanon 1)

    2. HaliBURD says:

      Sweden actually probably has the most complete tech tree out of all the recent nations. They had some really good projects and actual tanks/ Armored vehicles that could easily work in wot.

      I don`t know much about the EMIL heavy tanks but I`m pretty sure there`s atleast substance for tiers 5-10. As for spgs just search up the Bandkannon 1 (Bkan 1) and you can see that there`s easily enough for an Arty tech tree.

      Hopefully WG does expand on the Swedish tech tree, they got a lot of cool stuff that could be really cool in game.

  4. I would like to ask about the reality behind tanks. Were all of these vehicles produced, or there are some paper/partly made up vehicles.
    Another important question, what is the primary thing, that makes difference from the other nations? (like gun depression in Japanese, Autoloader on french, so on…) What is these tanks’ biggest advantage towards the other nation?

    1. HaliBURD says:

      Unlike a lot of the newer tech trees, a lot of the tanks you`re going to see actually existed. Of course there will be a fair share of experimental tanks and Blueprints/mockups but the majority of the tanks/ armored vehicles especially near the mid and top tiers were used and in service. I don`t know too much about the med/light line, a lot of that was experiments and design propositions but the TDs such as the STRV 103 and IKV tanks existed.

      If I had to guesstimate a speciality or quirk, i would say that the lower-mid tiers had immense gun depression while the tanks at higher tiers specialized in ROF with heavy emphasis on autoloading systems (Not clip loaded like a batchat or 57, more like the autoloading systems you see on modern tanks) I know the STRV 103, the UDES tanks that SP15 found for the med/turretted TD, and the Bandkannon for the artillery all used autoloading mechanisms in their construction. The bandkannon could fire 14 155mm shells in 45 seconds. I guess other quirks would be the reliance on Hydropneumatic suspension for gun depression (Similar to the Type 74/ STB-1) and on the thinner side of armor with more of an emphasis on angles, see STRV 103 in that case. This along with an uncanny resemblance to french tanks in some cases, see EMIL heavy tank and the UDES 15/16

      I guess my question is, What other differences are there between the UDES 15/16 and the UDES 15/16 TR other than Armament and chassis?

  5. Rame says:

    What is the most interesting things you have found while researching the line and what has been the most difficult.

  6. DoubleTakeDown says:

    Do you think hydraulic suspensions will be added if the Strv 103 was to become the Swedish top tier tank or do you think that WG will go the cheap route and give the Strv 103 some traverse and elevation?

  7. ApolloF117 says:

    only 1 question, what playstyle can we expect from the swedish tanks? if there is any heavy will be, more german heavy brawling, or more like a french mobility play?

      1. almightyfox says:

        Strv 81 was the first Centurion Sweden Aquired, the Atgm was simply an addon. so it would basicly just be a Centurion I.

      2. moltenmagma1 says:

        STRV 81 might be in one of the MT lines if they make a line with STRV 81/101/102/104.
        and STRV 81 is a Centurion MK.3
        STRV 101 = Centurion MK.10 with a 10.5 cm cannon
        STRV 102 = Remodelled STRV 81 with a 10.5 cm cannon and new radio
        STRV 104 = Remodelled STRV 102 with a new Diesel engine and new automatic gearbox

  8. MrTumnus says:

    How many crewmembers will be in the premium tank and will the first tech tree contain tanks with more/less crewmembers? (I have saved up for some hot swedish chicks but I need to know what to expect regarding numbers)

    1. Renarde Martel says:

      Well, I can answer half of your question already. If you look at this video at 2:50, you can see at the bottom that the premium has a Commander, Gunner and Driver: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rRLtvpdcHM

      Although I hope that with the removal of the autoloader, they’ll bump it up to 4 and include a Loader as it’s likely there will be a Loader on at least some of the tech tree vehicles. I mean, AFAIK anything with a medium-caliber gun and no magazine-loading gun has a Loader.

  9. Thomas says:

    Have WG found a way to impelment the special suspensions and do we know how? Will an S-tank just work like one big turret with tracks? 😀 Also how many of the tanks will be remodels from other trees maybe with different cannons but otherwise same tanks?

  10. Xavier says:

    To your knowledge, does WG have any plans of implementing the proper mechanics so the S-tank can see it’s way into the game?

  11. QuickyFarty says:

    How will the gun depression/elevation work with the suspension, and does this mean E-10 is possible now?

  12. Roy shein says:

    So, are we basically getting a hole tech tree full of Tank Destroyers? And are there gonna be lot of machines that weren’t even a prototypes (E50 for example) in the tech tree because of the lack of tanks in mid tiers?

  13. Tyrud says:

    What will be the flavor of the Swedish tanks? What will make them unique as compared to the other vehicles in the game?

  14. Terminus says:

    How do you think the Strv.103’s gun will be modeled? given that its an auto-loader but does not have a drum style magazine, do you think they will just make it fire super fast (basically a Tier X E-25) or is there a possibility its given a number of shots with an autoloader.

    Also do you think it will be given a special set of rules due to the lack of gun traverse, when it comes to turning the vehicle when the the tank is stationary (ie it doesn’t lose its camorating when traversing the tracks from left to right) same for the gun, Will it even have a proper Aim-time or will it have 0 dispersion on the move (being countered by it taking longer for the tank to be able to elevate and depress the hull and gun), Also do you feel like this tank should be able to reverse at a speed close to or as fast as it can go foward.

    I feel like the tanks strong points are going to be high DPM/Accuracy, Being extremely stealthy, having great view range. However it will suffer by having poor armor (If you are not being cheeky with auto-bounce angles), Only average speed and overall Low HP.

  15. Sushido71 says:

    The most common main battle tank post WW2 was the Centurion. It was in service 1953-2000 and was upgraded 4 times strv 81, 101, 102, 104 (and one experimental strv 105). I personally served on a 104. That version was far more superior due to some upgrades ie automatic transmission. No Centurion were autoloaded or had IR sights. The strv 103 was a tank made for defensive intentions. It had a low profile and was hard to spot. But we easily shot them with our strv 104 each battle exercise on the field. The ability to shoot while moving was far to superior!

  16. So the Swedish Tier 6 premium the Strv m/42-57 last time I saw it on Super Test, it had a 3 shell autoloader with a 15 second reload, when the Škoda T-25 and the Chi-Ri have an 8 second reload on pretty identical guns. Is that going to change? Will the reload be decreased to at least 9 seconds? Otherwise it won’t be as competitive I would certainly think.

    1. Renarde Martel says:

      Last we heard of the tank, Devs said it will have no autoloader at all (and will thus be terrible as the autoloader was it’s only good aspect, the mobility, armour and depression are all bad).

      1. Renarde Martel says:

        By the way, even with the autoloader, the m42/57 did more damage per shot than a Skoda and it’s a tier lower than a Chi-Ri, so you can’t really say it should get the same reload.

      2. Renarde Martel says:

        Okay, I hate myself now for not checking before posting and having to add another one, but the m42/57 has an alpha of 150, against 130 on the Chi-Ri and 110 on the Skoda… so DEFINITELY not identical guns.

    1. first of all, does everyone think that the swedish STRV 103 (S-tank) is a tank destroyer but in fact it was branded as a Main Battle Tank (MBT) so please, as a fellow swede don’t say it’s a TD

    2. moltenmagma1 says:

      STRV 103c is a Main Battle tank/ defense tank
      But I think PVKV M/43 would be atleast one of them or SAW M/43..

  17. baileyhun says:

    Will there be any of the Swedish tanks where the gun cant elevate and turn left or right so u have to use the tracks to aim the gun and a new movement for elevating the gun using the dozer

    1. HaliBURD says:

      Switzerland and Sweden are two different countries XD.
      Switzerland made the Panzer 58, 60 and 68 service tanks while Sweden had very different projects and service tanks.

  18. Bonesaw1o1 says:

    In terms of Ammunition development did the Swedes prefer Chemical penetrators(ie HEAT) or Kinetic penetrators(ie Sabot/HVAP for pre-sabot vehicles) and what sort of standard/premium ammunition are we likely to see in the tree? ie HEAT vs APCR, HE or HESH?

  19. Reno Stefan says:

    Pardon my ignorance sp15, but what will be the most unique and discernable points from the Swedish tech tree? What manner of playstyle will the Swedish tanks offer to make it stood out among its peers?

    Thanks in advance, have a jolly good day.. o7

  20. Captain helltheo says:

    How would you introduce the Strv. 103 to the game? as it has a very different gun depression mechanic as it uses hydralic supension to elevate and depress the gun, would it require special physics for that vehicle?

  21. ..only 1 question, can u pls write down the crew setup for the upcoming swedish techtree? Just wont to avoid another nasty surprise like those f* 2 radiomen in japanese HTs…

  22. Shrike58 says:

    What is going to be used for Swedish desert camo…particularly since WG is reluctant to use modern schemes in the game.

  23. Crazytony0 says:

    how big is the chance of the S tank making it in the initial batch? If not, how long do you think it will take to get implemented

  24. Anonymous says:

    How many Swedish vehicles could fit into WoT aprox.? Could they have the biggest tech tree if all of them would be added?

  25. Michael says:

    Sushido71 I did military service 1988/89 in a PBV 302 and interacted with both STRV Strv 102 and 104 (mod centurion) and 103C (S-tank), and my experience is that they are very different . In attack and fiering on the move the Strv 104 is better, but in defense battle, the Strv 103 C is far superior. With its dozer it could in seconds dig it self a fireposition with only the gun exposed. We had a situation when they have to move a single Strv 103C becuse it stopped a whole bn of centurions. Then I have to say that STRV 103 felt like it was clearly ahead of its time. The interiour felt more like a jet plane than a tank.

Leave a Reply