TAP Poll #2: Israeli Tree in WoT

You’ve probably heard of ideas for it, or stumbled upon an Israeli tech tree for WoT. Wargaming themselves mentioned the idea a while back, but have either put it on hold or dumped it completely. I would like to see which problem you guys think is the one stopping WG from making such a tree.

Thank you for voting.

88 thoughts on “TAP Poll #2: Israeli Tree in WoT

  1. “The only tank people want from an Israeli tree would be a Merkava and it is too modern for the game (made after 1970)”

    I voted this as it was the closest, but what I mean was “the only tank people want from that tree is the Merkava, and what comes before is boring copy pasta filler”

    Liked by 5 people

  2. I thought we were already over this one, but fine.
    Isreali tanks is a no go.
    Besides the Merkava, which is not fitting in the game anyway and would be a shitty tank with the current game parameters, they only have copies after copies.
    It’s like with the Chinese tree, except worse.

    So, no, screw that. I have only so much hate I can spare for a fake nation, adding yet another copy-paster one would certainly overload my systems.

    How about we create a tech tree of Hungarian tanks till tier 7 and [insert nation here] in tier 8-10?

    Oh wait, of course, that would not be ‘profitable’ so it won’t happen, naturally.

    Liked by 4 people

      1. Yes, that is exactly the thing I intentionally left out.
        I talked with Seb about this and I see no other way, especially because the Swedes got their own tech tree now.

        I just wish there was a way to work around this without making a controversy…

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Oh yes, Romania. Tell me again what year the TR-580 prototype is from, 1974 or so was it, same year as the Merkava 1 prototype? First saw service in 1977, around the same time as the Merkava 1 entered service too! Seriously, did you even read any of the laughable poll choices before making statements like this?

        Liked by 1 person

          1. Tell me again which blog we’re on and who exactly keeps pushing for Romanian tanks, something which you’re a part of? Perhaps you should talk to the blog author about how delusional this poll is before calling me delusional.

            Liked by 1 person

              1. Your fearless leader did with this poll. Seriously, if this is the only aspect of the poll you disagree with, I question your intelligence and ability to critically think.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. Seb merely propped up the most common reasons. Life_In_Black on the NA forum made it fairly clear that the Merkava I actually is fairly unarmored for how large and heavy it is.

                  AFAIK the Merkava I did not have modern fire controls, either, and they didn’t have composite armor until the Merkava III.

                  It’s decidedly low-tech.

                  Liked by 2 people

                    1. Is he? I don’t think the tree will work, for different reasons. Even if you disregard the ‘clones’, you still end up with a “greatest hits” album of tiers 1-10. Why play through the Churchill VIII or Medium’s when you could play the Israeli tree and get a similar heavy? Why play through the American Shermans instead of the Israeli, since the American mediums don’t go anywhere? It doesn’t make much sense to add it if it takes away from the older trees.


        1. Oh hey there LiB, heared you were shittalking the siwss tree because “it doesn’t have any well known tanks” Well i can proudly say: people rather want such a tree than a tree that consists of 90% imported tanks with minor modifications.
          I know that all you care about is the merkava and that you’d proudly screw with the tanks of multiple nations, soem of them not even israeli tanks just so you can get a hold of that rather underpowered tank, no armor and no speed, so it’d suck as a med or a heavy, all it’d have is a gun, and even that is only a 105mm gun.
          So do everyone a favor and either:
          -Try to get someone to go the the archives, like everyone else that has managed to make a tech tree. (just waiting for mine ot get approved which is very likely to happen)
          – forget about it, it’s not gonna happen with that current desaster of a tree that only consists of Shermans, Centurions and other imports with a top tier tank that’s underhwleming in every way possible.

          Also comparing the poll on RsR about the swiss tanks and this poll, i cna just say: the swiss roflstomped your tree.

          Liked by 3 people

          1. Yes, the Panzer 68 which is infamous for having numerous issues and causing a scandal among the Swiss government for how failure prone it is. I mean really, having the main gun go off when the heater is turned on? And the poll here is garbage, as is the one on Status Report. I mean, you worded the poll on Status Report deliberately because even you know people want Italy more than Switzerland, so why give them a choice of one or the other, lump them in together and claim how popular Switzerland is!!! Yeah, that indicates nothing and you know it. sp15 and others might badmouth me to you, but ask yourself this, what kid of marketing appeal does something like the Panzer 68 have over the Merkava 1? Answer is, almost none. There isn’t a large Swiss playerbase to draw from, there’s no huge Swiss fanbase to draw support and interest from, and the Panzer 68 isn’t different enough or iconic enough to warrant the kind of popularity people like you and sp15 seem to think it has. I never once said I don’t want Swiss tanks in-game, nor did I bash Switzerland’s ability to make a tech tree (although let’s be real, the Swiss low tiers are a complete mess too), like you seem to be claiming here. Oh, and saying people want the Panzer 68 and then badmouthing how mediocre the Merkava would be, is quite funny. Proudly screwing around with tanks of other nations to get a Merkava is also a pretty bold statement there, got any evidence to back it up other than your own misguided belief that I’m against Swiss tanks being implemented in WoT?

            Liked by 1 person

            1. wait you’re refering to my old and ouddated tech tree proposal which i did before i went to the archives? yes the old version of my tree is pure shit, it contained way to many copies, but the latest version uses only one, and that one tank is modified quite a lot.

              and Listen, i did not mean to bash the Merkava, and to be honest, i do want to see it in game. but the road to the Merkava is a bit to unstable.

              Btw. nice poll on the forums, ofc more people want the merkava as a tier 10, but if they’d knew the full tech tree the results may have been a lot different.


              1. Like if people had an actual option on your poll to chose Switzerland instead of Italy instead of having to take both, the results would have been a lot different?


  3. I don’t care about Israeli tanks, WG could even add Haitian or Cuban tanks if they find some because the more tanks can be RESEARCHED the better the game is, BUT how about adding trees for nations which have fought in WWII (for example: Italian, Hungarian, Romanian tanks) FIRST?

    Liked by 4 people

      1. The tank doesn’t have to to be completely different to not be considered copy paste… It has to at significant change in gameplay and aesthetics.

        Also, we found a replacement for the Jagdpanzer IV😛


        1. And most of the so-called Israeli “clones” would be different in terms of gameplay and aesthetics. You can’t seriously think this poll is good, I don’t know why you’re defending it.


            1. Yet you can’t respond to any of the other criticism. Why are you so afraid of pissing off that Romanian kid by calling out his poll for the absolute nonsense it is? And I love how you’re harping on about a few Shermans when most of the Romanian tree suffers the same problem. The tier 8 doesn’t count given how monumentally cocked-up the Revalorisé is and the fact it’s a premium, and the tier 4 Sherman can not only be replaced but doesn’t have an equivalent in any other tech tree, which you might know if you actually bothered to think right now instead of getting defensive for someone pointing out how damn hypocritical this entire poll is. But truly the Romanian ISU-152 is going to play so different to the Soviet one. Or the TACAM T-38 so different from the Marder 38T.


            2. I disagree about 6 and 8, with a bit of creativity (not much) 6+ clones are avoidable.
              Tier 1-5 are still essentially guranteed clones though, unless I’m missing a few odd designs.


                1. Depends how you see it, there’s already quite a few tanks in-game like that. Chi-ha – Chi-he, KV-1S – KV-85, T-54 – T-62A, Sherman III – Firefly, T-34/85 – T-43 (Not a gun upgrade, but meh), T1 Heavy – M6, etc.
                  The gun will always affect how it plays, it may not be obvious on paper, but it DOES work. Simply denying the idea on similar looks isnt really a fair point. T-34/85 – T-43 and Chi-ha – Chi-he are probably bad examples of mine, though.


  4. I don’t even know where to begin with this absolutely useless poll. Seriously, “either put it on hold or dumped it completely”? Because other things might be planned for the near future that means it’s not going to happen now? And the poll choices….”not marketable”? Right, because having a rabid fanbase that rivals that of German equipment means no money can be made off of it. Or “too politically sensitive or confrontational”?! Because that stopped Wargaming before with the whole Stalin inscription scandal. You’re either incredibly ignorant about Wargaming and history, incredibly biased given you created this absurd and quite frankly laughable poll since you had nothing better to post, or both.

    PS: Let’s whine about Israel while talking about how great Romania is at making a tech tree with 1970s and 1980s vehicles that are sort of maybe not entirely original designs and not totally heavily based on Soviet vehicles. Truly Romania will save us all. Yeah, give me a fucking break.


  5. Decided to run through all of your absurd poll choices:

    “Far too many copy paste tanks – More Shermans and Centurions to grind”

    Yeah, about that:

    Let’s not whine about clones here while making your own tech tree that is more than 90% clones.

    “The community-made Israeli trees look boring or made up – too much foreign equipment”

    Same argument as above. Don’t whine about community tech trees, especially when your Romanian tree makes their tech trees look like a goddamn masterpiece.

    “The only tank people want from an Israeli tree would be a Merkava and it is too modern for the game (made after 1970)”

    If you think the year 1970 stops Wargaming at all, you really don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. Especially given your precious Romanian TR-580 began development in 1974 and didn’t enter service until what, 1980? Your own bias and stupidity just excluded your potential tier 10 Romanian tank, congratulations on that one!

    “Too politically sensitive or confrontational”

    Addressed this one before, but Wargaming doesn’t give a rusty fuck about controversy or political sensitivity in regards to Israel. They brought back Stalin inscriptions despite a bunch of European countries’ playerbases protesting, including Romania, yet Wargaming didn’t care at all. And before anyone mentions Swastikas not being in the game, that’s because they couldn’t use those symbols for legal reasons, not because it would be insensitive. There’s nothing illegal or potentially legally damaging by including Israel.

    “Lack of heavy tanks”

    Yes, because that’s truly going to get a nation excluded from WoT. And if you bothered to read through the only comprehensive thread on the matter, you’d realize that the Merkavas could very easily be made heavies akin to the Chieftain Mk. 6, but who am I kidding, of course you haven’t read through the thread. Also, where are the Romanian heavy tanks? Oops, you just excluded your own nation again with this nonsense poll.

    “The idea of seeing Merkava fighting WW2 era tanks like the Maus or E100 is stupid”

    More absurd than seeing the TR-580 taking on the E 100 or Maus? More absurd than the Leopard 1 or STB-1, or AMX 30, or any of a multitude of Cold War era vehicles taking on the Maus? Yeah, not even War Thunder and Gaijin care about this line of reasoning.

    “Unprofitable for WG to bother with”

    Also addressed this before, but Israeli armor has a massive international popularity that is only beaten by Wehrabos with their Grman armor. If you think these Israeli armor fans and the chance to get the Merkava 1 wouldn’t make Wargaming money, you again don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. And if you think Israel isn’t marketable, Romania isn’t even anywhere in existence in terms of marketing.

    “The Merkava is too weakly armored, too large, too slow, and with a front mounted engine (yay engine fires!) to fit in with the game anywhere.”

    First it’s too modern, now its too weak. Make up your mind already. It’s of comparable size to an M60A1, has comparable armor to an M60A1, and has almost the same top speed as the M60A1. And a front mounted engine doesn’t mean anything given the frontal transmission most German tanks have in-game. Further proof your poll is complete bullshit.


          1. Delusional Israeli fanboy….so tell me where I’m wrong then in my criticism of the poll? Or what aspects you agree with for that matter.


              1. Yet you’re getting worked up and defensive, so you obviously care. Perhaps you should have a nice long talk about your fearless leader’s incompetence and stupidity.


                  1. And given the poll criticizing Israeli vehicles, why are you calling me delusional for defending Israeli vehicles and calling out the poll for the nonsense it is?


    1. For some reason, I am sensing an insatiable amount of hostility emanating from you. Perhaps you should take a step back from your keyboard and take a deep breath so that you can leave your say in a less confrontational manner?

      Liked by 2 people

      1. you’d need to know the behind the scenes. an israeli tree would consist os mostly copy cats. and the proposer of that questionable tree tends to hate on other, better researched trees and starts to insults when he’s out of arguments. so everyone i know hates him. and that’s why he, me and many others do not partricularly like the isreali tree

        Liked by 3 people

  6. I think saying that Israeli tanks would be ‘just’ copies is a little bit unfair, despite tier 1-4(5?), Can’t say anything for those tiers, but at tier 6 and up, I assume it would go…
    6. M50 Sherman (75mm from AMX-13, upgraded turret… 76mm stock)
    7. M51 Sherman (105mm, with 75mm from AMX-13 as stock.)
    Then either;
    8. Centurion Mk.3, Can’t really avoid it, IMO, without something silly like Sho’t at tier 8.
    9. Sho’t Kal, Centurion with a 105mm L7A1 and modified engine compartment to take an M60 engine. Nothing too special, but it had changes.
    8. Tiran-1/2. Roughly Type 59 in power, so not as OP as you’d assume, despite the whining I always hear about “P2W Type 59”
    9. Tiran-4/5SH. T-54 with thinner armor (100mm) and a 105mm L7A1. I’d prefer this
    And 10 would obviously be a Merkava Mk1 or prototype, Not sure.


    1. In other words, I think it’s not nearly as awful as some options. Like Italy, Poland, etc.
      As, despite having a foreign origin, they are modified in some way, except for 1-5 (which is probably a day or two of grinding, so meh), and tier 8, which could atleast get a non-premium Type 59, essentially.
      Really, the best solution would be an international tech tree, not ‘just’ EU, but any small country, as, for example, Poland and Italy both have a decent chunk of 1-5 material, but at 6+? Pretty much nothing.


    2. The M-51 would be tier 8, and the M-50 tier 7. The Israelis did not use the Centurion Mk. 3, the Israelis were given Mk. 5s and Mk. 8s. Also, there is no such thing as a Tiran 1 or Tiran 2, the tanks were always known by the Israelis as the Tiran 4 and Tiran 5. Plus the Merkava can have its own mini line from tier 8 through 10. There’s also a project to modernize the Tiran 4/5 that can work fine as a tier 10 medium.

      6. M-1 Super Sherman
      7. M-50
      8. M-51 Merkava Mule
      9. Tiran 4/5 Merkava Testbed
      10. Samovar Merkava Mk. 1


      1. Depends how you see it, really. I wont deny that my addition of the Mk 3 was lazy at best. I’m hilariously tired from moving to a new house, it’s been messing me up.
        With the M51 and M50 though, soft stats and HP are a thing, so saying they NEED to be at 7/8, isnt really something im fine with, at tier 6, the M50 would be competitive, being a slightly de-gunned, better armored, and faster Firefly with a worse gun.
        The M51 at tier 7 would probably be a less awful A-44, big gun, high pen / high dmg, probably balanced by about 4-5 RPM, and 0 armor.
        IIRC, Tiran-1/2 are simply the designation for an UNMODIFIED T-54 or T-55, depending which number. It’d atleast allow for module upgrades.

        Not much to say about the Merkava mini-line though, any source on the specifics there? Slightly curious. There would also be a possible Centurion line though, at 8 with the Mk 5, and 9 with the Sho’t Kal (Unless it was uparmored? Not sure off the top of my head), could easily branch to the other lines.


        1. No, there is no separate designation for unmodified T-54s and T-55s. They simply called the vehicles Tiran 4 and Tiran 5 respectively. I don’t know where the names Tiran 1 and 2 came from, but their fictional. It’s why I have the tier 9 as the Tiran 4/5.

          As for the M-50 and M-51, the M-51 has to be tier 8 given its better than the screwed up Revalorisé we have currently, which is also tier 8. And the M-50 with the 75mm could work fine as a tier 7 given the French developed other rounds for the 75mm, allowing for the current premium round on the cannon in-game to be the standard round, and an IIRC, APDS round be the premium one. So think 75mm L/100 in terms of performance.

          The Sho’t Kal could be a tier 9 just fine with the new engine and transmission, and it could also be given a 120mm L11, as Israel considered upgunning their Centurions with the 120mm L11 around 1964, but opted for the 105mm L7 instead.

          The Merkava at tier 8 is a proof of concept vehicle known as a Mule that saw a Centurion widened, and reversed, with the turret placed to the rear (what used to be the front of the Centurion) as a counterweight. Tier 9 is a testbed for the Merkava, featuring a more thorough Centurion chassis conversion into a Merkava chassis, and an M48 Patton turret. Tier 10 is the Merkava 1 itself, or maybe one of the final prototypes from 1974.


          1. Fair enough.
            Found that whole Tiran-1/2 thing on a site that “seemed” legitimate, but my attempts at trying to find a source is getting pretty pointless (None yet, probably fake), I can atleast see what you mean there. My carelessness got me again, lol.
            Still not sure on the M50 / M51 thing though, problem is, having them at 7-8 would cause tier 1-6 to be pure copies, which is what I’m trying to avoid, lol, atleast 1-5 is the faster tiers. Never knew the Revalorise(?) was actually released though, as console is quite a far bit behind. Again, I see your point, but there are reasons for and against. As WG seems pretty happy to have screwed up a “few” premiums in the past (Pz III K looks like the worst one, IMO.)
            Interesting idea on the Sho’t Kal though, any idea on a source? Not too familiar there. Only problem is, the 120 and 105mm are borderline identical in WoT, but ehh, never played the tanks that use it other than M103 and E5 (I know its technically a different 120, though)

            Didnt actually know that admittably hideous rear-turret Centurion was called that, though, and no knowledge of the testbed rear-turret M48/Centurion. I get the feeling that they could be better combined into one tier 9, though. Besides, it might be better for continuity to have M51 before a Merkava prototype, but that’s my opinion on it.

            Although, I have to say, your tech tree idea has one notable flaw (Opinion aside.), I think the Samovar is a pretty bad choice for a Tiran branch, I’m pretty sure it’s past the timeframe.


            1. At tier 6, the M-50 plays very similarly to the Firefly, just with a worse gun. At tier 7 with the current APCR as standard, it’s more akin to something like the Panther in how it plays, making it unique for a Sherman variant. With the M-51, the gun is tier 10 material and Wargaming nerfed it heavily to fit tier 8 on the Revalorisé (which is an M-51 testbed built by France at Israel’s request), so it should perform much better.

              As for the Merkava variants the names Mule and testbed are invented based on what the vehicles were called by the Israelis, this is the Centurion turreted one:

              And this is the Patton turreted one:

              As you can see, they are completely different vehicles and would play differently.

              In regards to a source for the 120mm L11 armed Centurion, Tank Battles of the Mid-East Wars of 1948-1973 by Steven Zaloga and the British National Archives.


              1. Fair enough, yeah, I get it now.
                Though, I still think having the M51 on a different line as the Merkava prototype is odd at best. Can certainly understand your point about the M50 though. I think the best solution there is a side-line from M51 to Merkava Mule (think 38t to JgPz38t)

                I did know about the Merkava Mule beforehand, I just had no idea thats what it was called, lol. I can certainly understand what you mean there, I WOULD say alternate hulls would be the solution, but I feel like that idea is simply dead nowadays.
                That M48 version is certainly funny looking though, not truly hideous, but just funny. Didnt realize it was a 105mm M48 turret though. That’s not nearly as bad as the 90mm I expected.
                Thanks for the source on the last part, I’ll have to look into it later.

                Still has the problem of tier 1-6, though, Kinda sad theres no good options there.


    3. So let’s see…
      Tier1-5 are surplus WWII sold off post war
      tier6 is a Sherman with a different turret and similar gun.
      tier7 is a Sherman with a big gun
      tier8 is a Cent mk3
      tier9 is a Cent mk10 with a different engine (wow much unique)


      tier8 is a captured T-55
      tier9 is a captured T-55 with the same gun as every non-russian tierX medium.

      The entire Isreali tree is just padding tier 1 to 9 with bland fluff just to get the Merkava in the game.
      And a early production, shit Merkava that you would complain about instantly.

      Now, Romania may have problems fielding tanks,especially mid/late tier, but the early stuff is unique and the mid tier stuff, while not spectacular, look new. Only the later tiers pose a noticeable problem in terms of copy pasting.
      That’s much better than an entire boring ass branch just so you can say : “Merkava ingame !!!11!!eleven!”

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Not going to defend tier 1-5 in the least, I did say (albiet in a 2nd comment) the best solution there is an international tech tree, but you appear to have missed that.
        And no, I can’t say I care too much about the Merkava prototype, not really a T10 player anymore, it’s nothing but TDs and E5s at T10. I’d just love to see the M50 to Tiran 4/5SH in the game, as they actually have some diversity to them. And there’s a reason I say I’d prefer the Tiran branch, as they would atleast bring something “new” to the game (Non-premium Type and L7A1 T-54/55)

        Saying that it’s just “bland fluff” is a bit much, to say the least, From 6-10 everything atleast has a reason to be added, same as the many nations without high tiers people want to force into WoT.


      1. Damn right, he’s pissed. Especially given how fucking ridiculous this poll actually is. Try having a poll with real, actually thought out choices instead of biased and ignorant nonsense and maybe he wouldn’t be as pissed off. Especially at how funny you find his anger and yet you keep defending Romanian tanks as if Romania is ina much better situation in regards to WoT than Israel. Big hint for you, it isn’t, and the chances of seeing Israel are quite high given the money Wargaming stands to make from it.


        1. That’s because the Romanian tree isn’t Stuarts and pawned off light tanks from tier1 to 4, then Shermans with guns taken from other branches from 5 to 7, with either the choice between Centurion copy pasta, or captured T-55 copy pasta.

          Seriously, the Isreali tree would need to start off with the Merkava to be interesting and not full of clones.

          How about you cut the self-victimizing act and see things from a non-patriotic point of view.
          If you can play almost every vehicle in the Isreali tech tree by playing a reskinned currently ingame vehicle, it’s not worth adding to the game.

          And that’s what the Romanian tree does right. All the low to mid tiers are completely unique, which excuses Soviet T-series variants at top tier.

          Liked by 2 people

    1. IMO having tanks with similar chassis+armament but with different armor arrangement (or vice versa) is acceptable by me. Maybe I’m just the only few wants to see more real tanks in-game regardless they are similar to existing tanks or not.


  7. Guna have to go with, it would be an intire fluff tree with the only unique tank being the Merkava.

    Tbh id rather see them make the Merkava a reward tank for personal missions or say if they brought in historical pve battles, something that will always be available so no one misses out. But is hard enough to get that, that it substitues the grind to a t10.

    Simply put , slapping a new engine or gun onto a tank does not make a new tank. So doing that to a bunch of shermans and cents would make a poor addition to the game.


    1. Israeli versions of the M4 Sherman, T54, T62, Centurion, and M48/60 Pattons were superior to the originals in every possible way.
      Simple really.
      Take a tank, have it deploy in combat. Have seasoned Tankers get debriefed after said combat, and determine what needs to be improved. Set out to improve what needed to be improved, get back into combat. (in the meantime, blow up arabs in droves) Then, after 3 wars, and the froggie de Gaulle’s embargo, as well as the brits reneging on the supply of the Cheiftain even after Israel assisted in it’s development, determine that euro-trash cannot be trusted to supply arms, sit down and develop one of the best tanks ever.
      Combat proven, no losses in tank vs tank combat, several tanks were knocked out by anti tank missiles, The Merkava Series.


  8. WAIT this is a world.war 2 tank game and.you want what. FFS were is Italy. You.know one of the major members of the Axis. BUT na why bother with a country that fought in the war


  9. As someone who is Israeli, and a massive WoT fan, I honestly do not care what nations come into the game.
    Bring in an Iranian Tech Tree!!! Bring a Hizbollah tech tree, Bring a Syrian Tech Tree, Bring a Romanian, Italian, Swiss, Polish, Swedish, Icelandic, Norwegian, Brazilian, Colombian, Mexican, Taiwanese, Australian, Austrian, Luxembourg, Dutch, Turkish, Kurdish, Swahili, or Israeli!!!!


    Liked by 3 people

      1. I also forgot Canadian, Egyptian, Somalian, Yemenite, and Indian, and Malta.

        QB touched on this point in a video recently, on how in the 1st 2 years, 15-16 tech trees (tank lines, regardless of nation) were added. And since then, most of the development work went to creating premium tanks, leaving “”free”” content like tech tree’s on the backburner. (like the cz line, jap HT line, and now the new French HT line being planned.)
        WoT needs to add every possible tank conceived or created within it’s time line.
        And I do believe that if they have brains, WoT 2.0 will be unlocked from 1.0. Thus creating more end game content, and not negating the time and money that many of us put into our 1.0 accounts.


  10. Youre missing the option of: Who cares about Israeli tanks?

    Work on the nations we already have. We dont need more chinese/czech lines.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. A game about tank warfare, from WW1 until mid cold war, that disregards the variants of tanks that killed the most tanks post WW2.
      Makes sense.
      I mean, Swedish tanks have a lot of combat behind them right?
      Czech tanks as well, Polish tanks, Italian tanks, Hungarian tanks, Romanian tanks. Chinese tanks,
      They all have extensive combat records, with hundreds of kills to show.

      Oh wait, they don’t. They only have practice rounds shot. With hundreds of practice round kills.

      I get it, you and many like you hate Jews and Israel. So you would be offended by having Israeli variants of tanks in WoT.
      No worries. But just be honest enough to admit that this is the reason.


      1. Ahem… Hungarian, Italian, and Romanian tanks have seen extensive combat in WWII… TACAM T-60, TACAM R-2,Vanatorul De Care R-35. Toldi, Turan, Lots of Italian tanks, Polish tanks, etc have seen large amounts of combat.


        1. “I get it, you and many like you hate Jews and Israel.”
          It’s pretty clear there is no point in arguing with this guy, because in every argument he’ll just use this magical sentence.

          Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s