Hungarian Tech Tree Proposal: Medium Line

Written by Krisztián Bíbor for TAP.

Greetings, Tankers!

Last time I wrote about how a potential tech tree of Hungarian vehicles should look like. I have devoted my time in the past weeks working on the medium line. This time I will be talking about that, from the Straussler V-4 to post-war autoloading plans.

The full proposal: https://thearmoredpatrol.com/2020/09/08/hungarian-tech-tree-proposal/

Branch Overview

  • Tier I: Straussler V-4
  • Tier II: 38M Toldi I
  • Tier III: 42M Toldi II
  • Tier IV: 40M Turán I
  • Tier V: 41M Turán II
  • Tier VI: 43M Turán III
  • Tier VII: 44M Tas Prototípus
  • Tier VIII: 44M Tas Korbuly-variáció
  • Tier IX: Projekt 88
  • Tier X: Projekt 100

From tankettes to autoloaders

I will include a section of development history and historical statistics for each vehicle, and how could their characteristics be represented in the game. I’d also like to mention how much Karika helped me with his remarkably comprehensive and trustworthy writings on Tank Encyclopedia, For the Record, or Wotinfo, but you can find everything in the sources. I highly recommend checking it out.

Tier I: Straussler V-4 (Light Tank V4)

In the interwar period, Hungarian engineer Miklós Straussler (Nicholas Straussler) was working on a tank design, which meets the requirements of the Ministry of Defence to be amphibious, well-protected, and have an excellent armament. As the vehicle would have had poor maneuverability, Straussler’s idea was to make the vehicle able to travel both on wheels and tracks.

His development led to the construction of a prototype in 1933, simply called Vontató-3 (Wrecker-3) for a pseudonym. His second, much-improved model, named Vontató-4, was completed by 1936. The V-4 was protected by a 26 mm strong armor and was armed with a 37 mm anti-tank gun and two machine guns.
The trials started in the same year and the vehicle was tested by the UK and Italy. The V-4 seemed to be relatively fast, but the tank could tip over easily, and the driving performance was quite bumpy.
A year later, the prototype’s weapon was changed to the 37M 40 mm L/46 (Bofors licensed) gun, and it was returned to Hungary for army trials. The V-4 went into service in 1937, but later, when it was compared with the Panzerkampfwagen I and the Landsverk L-60, the latter one won the trials. A small number of vehicles were built.
The first version of the V-4
The V-4 in the wheel mode, Italy
The second version of the V-4
The V-4 during trials
Tier II: 38M Toldi I (Toldi A20/A40)

By the end of the year 1937, the Italian CV tankettes, and the V-4 tanks were unreliable and fairly obsolete as fighting vehicles. For this reason, the Hungarians tried to find a more modern type of tank, as developing a completely new design would have taken too much time.
They managed to buy a single Swedish L-60 light tank in the same year. After a series of test trials, in 1938, the Magyar Állami Vas, Acél, és Gépgyárak (MÁVAG, Hungarian State Iron, Steel, and Machine Factory) started developing and mass-producing their variant. Later, due to production problems, the Ganz factory was also included in the Toldi’s production.
Initially, it was armed with a 20 mm Solothurn anti-tank gun and a 34/37M machine gun, but 37 or 40 mm caliber were considered as well, and later mounted (Toldi A40). The armor was 23 mm thick and riveted, instead of the original 13 mm thick welded construction of the L-60, and was sloped to increase its effectivity. The suspension however was the most significant improvement, as it used torsion bars, not the old leaf spring systems. A total number of 190 38M Toldi’s were produced.
The Landsverk L-60 on Hungarian trials
The Toldi A20
38M Toldi’s at a military parade in Budapest
Tier III: 42M Toldi II (Toldi B20/B40)

In 1941, another production order for 110 more vehicles marked as Toldi B20 was placed. These were completed from May 1941 to December 1942. 68 of which were made by Ganz and 42 by MÁVAG.
As the 20 mm main weapon was toothless by this time of war, it was replaced with the 36M 40 mm L/60 (Bofors licensed) gun, with a redesigned turret (Toldi B40). Its shell could penetrate 64-74 mm of 30° sloped armor at 100 m, and 30 mm in 1000 m (same slope).
The armor was increased to 35 mm at the thickest part, but the engine remained the same, resulting in a maximum speed of only 47 km/h. After the war was over, the Soviets captured the few remaining Toldi’s and took them to Kubinka for testing. One of them remains there to this day.

A Toldi II in Russia

Captured Toldi B40

Late-war Toldi II with spaced armor

The last surviving Toldi in the Kubinka Tank Museum

Sources: Tank Encyclopedia, Wotinfo, For the Record, Pinterest, Armed Conflicts

Tier IV: 40M Turán I (Turán 40)

In 1937, Škoda began work on a new medium tank loosely based on the LT vzor 35. This led to the assembly of two prototypes, designated as the Š-II-c. After the German occupation, work was resumed, and a new prototype referred to as T-21, was given to Hungary in 1940. The new design was yet unfinished, nonetheless, the Hungarian delegation decided to buy the license of the medium tank.
Engineers started developing a new variant with a re-arranged 3-man turret on German recommendation. The armor was revised and new plates were bolted-on, giving a total thickness of 50 mm instead of the T-21’s original 30 mm, equivalent to the latest upgraded versions of the Panzerkapfwagen III and IV. While the weight rose to 18,2 tons, the original Škoda engine was replaced with a more powerful WM V-8H gasoline motor.
The 47 mm Škoda A9 vzor 38 was replaced with although a little smaller 40 mm Škoda A17 gun, but it had much higher shell velocity and was way faster to reload. Later it was locally produced as the 41M 40 mm L/51. The mass-production started in October 1940, and over 230 vehicles were produced.
The T-21 during tests in Hungary
The 40M Turán 40
Late Turán I equipped with side skirts
Tier V: 41M Turán II (Turán 75 Rövid/Short)

Over time, the standard 40 mm L/51 gun was completely inefficient against the most advanced Soviet tanks like the T-34 and the KV-1. Thanks to this, the Hungarian Military Leaderboard changed the order of the second series of Turáns.
55 Turán I with the old 40 mm gun and another 205 Turán II with a new 75 mm anti-tank gun were ordered, capable of penetrating 75 mm armor at 100 m. The turret was enlarged to house the massive breech-loading system and a special armored recoil piston was adapted to the gun.
The driver’s hatch was replaced with a simple door instead of the double door, and the armor reached 60 mm at the front. Although the engine remained the same, and the new Turán became less maneuverable. Until the end of the war, over 222 41M Turán’s saw combat.

Turán II crossing a river

41M Turán’s in the depot

Turán II’s with additional armor

The last existing Turán in Kubinka

Sources: Tank EncyclopediaWotinfo, For the Record, Wikimedia Commons, Pinterest

Tier VI: 43M Turán III (Turán 75 Hosszú/Long)

The Turán III was the last version, equipped with a 43M 75 mm L/43 gun, similar to the German 7,5 cm KwK 40/42 used on the Panzer IV, and a revised turret for the new gun. It integrated large side covers around the elevated commander cupola, so the commander could command the vehicle while he’s standing.
It was designed to receive side skirts from the start, and the armor was increased to 80 mm (some sources mention 95 mm). It was required to increase the engine performance, but it wasn’t possible as there were no other alternatives for the WM V-8H.
The first prototype turret was finished in 1943, and a second variant was ready in February 1944, with the only ever built complete hull. Development was ended with the Soviet occupation of Hungary.
The first version of the turret dismounted
The same turret mounted on a Turán II chassis
The only ever built finished 43M Turán
The same Turán III on trials
Tier VII: 44M Tas Prototípus (44M Tas)

By 1943, the leaders of the Royal Hungarian Army realized, that the Hungarian armor had become seriously outdated. As Hungary’s attempts to acquire Panthers and Tigers failed, the Ministry of Defence commissioned the Weiss Manfréd Acél, és Fémművek (WM Steel and Metalworks) to design a replacement for the obsolete Turán’s.
In April, Hungarian engineers had been allowed to inspect and study the Panzerkapfwagen V and VI in Kummersdorf. The preliminary blueprints of the Tas prototypes were ready in record time, by the end of August.
The design of the Tas closely resembled the technology-based solutions featured in the Panzer V and the T-34. It had the thickest armor out of the tree, as the T-34/76 would be incapable of penetrating it frontally.
The Tas’s armament was originally planned to be the same 7.5 cm KwK 42 L/70 as the Panther, however, it was later changed to the 29/44M 80 mm L/58 gun. The prototype of the latter one was finished in October, but the trials showed some serious flaws, so it had to be replaced temporarily with the 43M 75 mm L/43 gun used in the Turán III.
Although the biggest problem was the engine. By the time, there were no engines available for such a heavy (37 ton) construction. The delegation wanted to buy the licence of the Maybach HL230 used in the Panther, but the Germans rejected it. Later, at the start of the development, engineers from the WM wanted to create a new V12 engine, but as they didn’t have enough time, simply two connected V-8H engines were put in the vehicle.
After the baseline of the Tas was accepted, the Ministry of Defence ordered a prototype for further experiments and a service-ready vehicle. The assembling started in May 1944, and the vehicles were finished in July. Just before the turrets could be fitted, an American bomber raided the factory and destroyed both along with other combat vehicles.

The Tas compared to the T-34 and the Panther

The original factory mockup of the Tas from different angles

The 1:10 model of the 44M Tas compared to the 41M Turán

Sources: Tank Encyclopedia, For the Record, Wotinfo, MEK, Quora, Rc Tank

Tier VIII: 44M Tas K (Korbuly-variant)

In the post-war communist era, it wasn’t really allowed to publicly talk about any military developments from the condemned interwar period. Hence, the engineers who were working on the Tas had to choose to be speechless, and its history soon faded away. Nobody bothered to research the Hungarian tank development until the ’70s, however, by this time, the key people involved in it had already passed away.
It was in the late ’70s when the son of János Korbuly (former chief engineer of the WM), Pál Korbuly started collecting information about the completely forgotten 44M Tas. He recreated a mockup of the Tas based on oral sources, the memories of the workers who were involved in the development.
His reconstruction featured an expanded turret for the originally planned 80 mm gun, but as the 41M 8.8 cm L/71 gun (KwK 36/43, PaK version) was available for Hungary, it could be fitted into the enlarged turret.
Unfortunately, Korbuly’s variant can be deemed outdated by now as we have pictures of the original factory mockup of the Tas. On the other hand, that mockup only represents the model mounted with the 75 mm gun, and reliable sources mention that extra hatches were added to the sides of the turret after the dummy model was already completed. This suggests, that the turret was extended, as originally there would have been no space for a full manhole.
The first post-war Tas reconstruction by Pál Korbuly in the ’70s
The same mockup from the rear
The 44M Tas from István Poór’s book, published in 1980
Tier IX: Projekt 88 (88 mm Mad’arský Projekt Středního Tanku)

My knowledge about this project is strongly incomplete. What I can currently declare for sure is the blueprint above isn’t an original engineering drawing, but probably just a recreation from most likely one of Martin Dubánek’s books (it is unknown yet), for illustrative purposes only.
According to the descriptions, it was a post-war medium tank project from around 1948. It also mentions that perhaps a model was built, but it was likely a non-functioning wooden mockup. No pictures have been found yet.
Two guns were planned to be mounted, an 85 or 88 mm, and 100 mm, both autoloaders. The problem with that is Hungary didn’t even have any autoloaders by that time, and it is unlikely that the Czechs would have sold any blueprints.
There was a larger scan found as well, illustrating detailed drawings of the turret by D. Kozár. It shows that the thickness of the armor was at least 200 mm, and how the shells could have been stored. Note that Kozár’s name is only mentioned on the bottom sketch. The turret shape had to be entirely round (something like the T-55), as the rotating system is at the very rear of the turret ring, so it wouldn’t be able to traverse if it had an oval shape like on the illustration at the top.
So most likely D. Kozár’s turret drawings are original, but the upper illustration just not representing it correctly, and it probably isn’t by Kozár. Anyway, there are way more fictional vehicles in the game, so this design is just as fine as the T 51, or the E-50. Work on the project stopped as the USSR forced the Ministry of Defence to halt any further developments.

The turret of the first variant mounting the 85/88 mm gun, with the rotating system at the rear

This is how the turret had to look like if it was meant to be rotatable

Sources: Wotinfo, LivejournalWikimedia Commons

Tier X: Projekt 100 (100 mm Mad’arský Projekt Středního Tanku)

Information about this design is lacking as well, as the vehicle didn’t pass the designing phase. It is the same post-war autoloading project mentioned previously that was found in the Czech archives.
Improvements were made to the development, as the turret was redesigned and enlarged. The armor was thickened a bit too, as the armor scheme illustrates, although the hull remained identical. The unknown 85 or 88 mm gun was replaced with a 100 mm one, with presumably higher ammo-capacity in the drum, and a touch better vertical gun depression. As for the autoloader mechanics, it isn’t going to be something ordinary like the regular ones (Czech or French tanks), or the autoreloaders (Italians), but more on that later.
Overall, that would be the top configuration of the tank. Unfortunately, not much known about it, but I believe I discussed everything. To be fair, still a way better choice than something fictional, or another Soviet clone (as the T-55AMH was the most probable candidate for top-tier), and at least it gives some kind of uniqueness to the branch.
The full scan illustrating the design
Researchable Modules
There are one or two components that weren’t actually planned to be mounted, or we have no information about them being used in the specific vehicle, but almost the entire configuration of modules is factual.
str v4.pngtoldi i.pngtoldi ii.pngturán i.pngturán ii.pngturán iii.pngtas prot.pngtas k.pngp88.pngp100.png

Possible In-game Characteristicsstr v4.pngtoldi i.pngtoldi ii.pngturán i.pngturán ii.pngturán iii.pngtas prot.pngtas k.pngp88.pngp100.png

The new autoloading mechanics

Not official gameplay

The brand-new loading system would be available exclusively for Hungarian tanks, such as the autoreloading for Italian mediums. The footage above demonstrates how the mechanics would work with the characteristics of the Projekt 88.

In the example, the vehicle has a 4 round magazine with 5-second autoreload on each, but it won’t start reloading until the full drum is empty. Shooting during reload won’t break it, as it would happen in the Progetto. To start loading a new magazine, you have to wait 5 seconds of lock time.

The whole point of the system is the rate of fire, in the example, it was 9.6/minute, resulting in a DMP of 2688/minute, third-best in tier/class. To prevent too aggressive playstyle, the intra-clip reload is increased to 4 seconds, the worst in any kind of autoloader.

Note, that the models may have been inaccurate, as they are only for exemplifying.

Thank you for reading!

28 thoughts on “Hungarian Tech Tree Proposal: Medium Line

  1. good work 🙂 I really hope it will be considered. By the way could there be a way to upvote an article without logging in?

  2. Gets a no from me…

    Italian with their unique autoreloaders are already in the game and the fact there will soon be a total of 8 autoreloaders is plenty enough when you consider the upcoming heavies. Having more of them is arguably worse for the game in the long run. Also you didn’t suggest a premium tank as far as I can tell which is possibly the biggest negative when suggesting a tank line. WG always wants a premium tank especially ifs a new nation or a new tank line for that nation which doesn’t have that specific vehicle class.

    As for me I generally hate lines that just use more clone tanks…it brings nothing interesting to the table and this honestly might as well be made into a minibranch or have some of the vehicles made into reward tanks for Germany or Czechoslovakia.

    1. These vehicles will have completely new mechanics, not sure if you read through the article. I even included footage demonstrating the system and compared it to both autoloaders and autoreloaders. The loading itself represents how the autoloaders work in reality, by loading the shells one by one.
      What the Italian vehicles have in the game is rather an “infinite” loader, as usually the magazine never gets empty, except when you want to use all of your ammunition immediately. This is a spare shell storing method. What I illustrated is quite different from that with a very distinct playstyle. And considering what autoloaders look like now in the game, this would be a very new and unique thing to try.

      Also, I suggested a premium vehicle, although I didn’t mention anything about that, so fair enough. The Tier VIII Premium Medium that you can see at the Premium Vehicles menu (at the bottom of the tree) is the P. 85, with an 85 mm autoloader and the Martin Dubánek-variant turret scheme. And I don’t think the biggest problem is the lack of a T8 premium vehicle, just for example the Czech tree was released without any.

      And about the clone tanks… Excuse me, but I never ever used any clone or fake vehicles in my writings, and I will never do. I’m disappointed to hear that you said no, but I hope that now maybe you’ll consider saying a yes instead.

      1. True that the CZ tree was released without a tier 8 Prem, but you forget that the Skoda T27 was in the works (and delayed for a loooong time) at the same time as the regular ones.

        And about the clone tanks – pretty sure the other commenter was refering to all the Toldis and Turans; half of your entire tree is made out of two platforms with essentially the same stats except for the gun (and other minor differences); same for the t7+8 and t9+10 pairs.

        1. “half of your entire tree is made out of two platforms”

          I mean that’s how tank development works. Before the tech tree simplifying patch the German medium branch was Pz IV variants and Panther variants from tier III to tier X. Same with the current Swedish medium branch, from tier IV to tier VII it’s based on the same platform.

          This branch has no more “clone” tanks than any other branch that is in the game already.

          1. I beg to differ. Before all the Pz4 variants were even added into the game, the German medium lines were a lot more varied.

            …of course, newer players wouldn’t know about that, but still. Check the older versions. You’ll be surprised

            Also, I was saying the Hungarian tree “clones” (as you called them) are built very similarly to each other, except for the main armament and some other minor differences. The Pz4 variants differed significantly from each other in many aspects aside from the gun

            1. Bold of you to assume I’m a new player. I’ve been playing WoT for almost 10 years, since the open beta before the final account wipe.

              “The Pz4 variants differed significantly from each other in many aspects aside from the gun”

              What differences?

              Better gun? Same on the Turáns.
              Better armour thickness? Same on Turáns.
              Schürzen on the last Pz IV? Same on the Turán III.
              Even the different engines can be buffed for the Turáns to give them better mobility if WG deems it necessary.

              Also piss off with your condescending tone. You and the OP came here telling us that these are clone tanks.

              1. Just want to make it clear.

                Both the Toldi and the Turán differed greatly from their original versions, if that makes sense.

                Here’s a blueprint of the Swedish L-60, the Toldi was more or less based on it.
                https://imgur.com/a/Ao0wzVr
                Plenty of things were changed, such as the chassis, hull armor scheme, armament, and turret design to mention a few. By the way, the latter one was developed in a similar way as the Stridsvagn m/39.
                To prove my point, the T-34 was based on the Christie type chassis. Does it mean that it is an American clone tank?

                And that’s true for the Turán as well, but I mentioned everything in the article. The final version of the 40M Turán barely resembled the T-21.

  3. Look at the madlad, he did it again!
    Thank you so much for bringing us more, Krisz! Very well done!

  4. i like the mechanic, but my big question would be would you still have the chance for a full reload or would you have to dump your shells by firing them? I think 330 apcr is a little much i would think maybe 320 at the most but probably around 310, vr of 410 is really high and wargamming is seeming to have newer tanks coming out with vr under 400 which isnt a horrible thing for how small the maps are for how much vr there is already. i would probably say make the dmg 320 cause 100 mm and make the shell reload 6 instead of 5 and it might peak wargammings interest. But other than those things its a great job you did awesome work

    1. Thanks!
      What do you mean by a full reload? By pressing C or switching ammo type, you can reload the magazine in any kind of autoloader.
      I’ll consider adjusting the penetration and view range values to your suggestion. On the other hand, I wouldn’t change the damage-reload rate if you don’t mind. The real purpose of this mechanic is the unusually high rate of fire resulting in outstanding damage per minute.
      With the 300 damage and 5.1 sec reload time, the average DPM of the vehicle is 3033.7. If you increase the alpha damage even by a little, let’s say 20, but the reload time as well to 6 seconds, the DPM drops to 2809.7, which is still a great value, but not nearly as impressive.
      Also, we are talking about an autoloader, even though it has a 4-sec intra-clip load, and it can keep shooting at you with the higher alpha every 4 seconds if it is loaded.
      So all in all, I’d like to keep the current characteristics with quick reload but rather low alpha.

      1. yes by pressing c cause lets say you have to shoot that 1 or 2 shells to get a kill are you then stuck with a 2 round clip or can you press c to start at the 1st shell again. and i get what you are saying with the dpm but the big thing i notice in tanks, is yes dpm is huge but alpha can be a huge factor in tanks thats have good turrets and gun depression, and your line seems to have decent armor and depression.

  5. I’m conflicted because the Tas K is the same as the Japanese super heavies where we know most of them resulted from descriptions of people involved in the project that no longer could remember the right order of the events they described

    problem is the Japanese super heavies were added before we got to know that while the Tas K would be added despite we knowing it is not a real thing

    then again we already have a good number of obvious fakes in the game that it does not matter weather or not they add one more

    you got my vote but I have one suggestion, we already have the Turan III Prototipus in the game and we know it is based on a photo of the tank with the mockup turret, WG really should remodel it to resemble the vehicle as it was with the actual prototype turret before the spaced armour was added, or change the name for a “Concept” or something, so let us not copy WG bad example and simply call the 44M Tas as 44M Tas, that is the real Tas so calling it “Prototípus” makes no sense

    NOTE as a tank fan: if Hungary had already successfully produced the Toldi in a all-weld construction, why did they not make the Turan welded as well? it would’ve saved them a fair bit of weight

    1. The Korbuly-variant Tas can’t be assumed that it didn’t exist for sure. As I stated, we have a few pictures of the factory mockup of the Tas, but it is noted, that after that mockup was already completed, they changed a few things on the turret, and extra hatches were added. Originally, there was no space for a manhole or door on the side of the turret, so this can only be achieved by somewhat expanding the turret.
      The situation is similar to the E-50, as we only have a description of its turret, but nothing else, and most of the time it is illustrated with the Schmalturm. Perhaps Wargamings recreation of the Ausf. M’s turret is the most probable and realistic.

      And thanks for the correction, I’ll change the name of the Tas. Although that’s the smallest thing, the game has uncountable naming errors.

      Postscript: If I’m not wrong, the Toldi was produced with riveted armor, but correct me if not. By the way, if they did, it was possible because the L-60 was welded as well.
      But in the Turán’s case, it wasn’t based on anything, maybe the closest thing was the T-21, but because of the thickened armor of the Turán, the hull scheme barely resembled the Skoda variant, and even if so, both were riveted, so I guess that’s the reason.

      1. we actually learned it was wrong as soon as the photos of the real mockup/model were found

        the shape of the Tas K model made by Korbuly has no connection to the modifications required for the Tas, Karika wrote 2 prototypes were ordered with the first being built with mild-steel precisely for testing/evaluation and modification, such modification would be added to the 2nd prototype that was to be built with proper hardened steel/armour plate

        the turret design of the real mockup is actually quite resembling the original Panther turret (Ausf D and A for example), a tank which the Hungarian Army used during WWII

        but it is okay, we can look at the Tas K as a what-if/”concept” version of the Tas

        as for the Toldi it is indeed welded, maybe you have the wrong impression since at the very front the plate that acts as access to the transmission is bolted on to the hull, as for the Turan design means nothing, what allows a nation to move from riveted to welded construction is simply the know-how and Hungary had received the training in order to produce the L-60 under license as the Toldi
        having that knowledge they could have easily reworked the project of the Turan to feature welded construction instead of riveted, but it does not matter, I was only wondering why they would revert back to a worse method

  6. Bonsoir,
    I am french and use google trad to speak

    Well it’s not sot catastrophic than I had imagined with the Tech Tree presentation last month.
    but there are still comments to make and questions to ask

    1- the Toldi II
    Why does he have 35mm of armor?
    armor does not match Toldi II
    Toldi I
    Hull 13/13/6
    Turret 13/13/6
    Toldi II
    Hull 13/13/6
    Turret 13/13/6
    Toldi IIA
    Hull 13/13/6
    Turret 13/13/6
    Toldi III
    Hull 35/20/10
    Turret 35/25/6

    Even if there is a margin of error of a few millimeters,
    none of the armor match what you gave it,
    Or did you get the armor value you gave him?
    it invented? Do you have information that most people don’t?
    In this case it would be good to clarify.

    2-Why so much damage to the 40 mm gun?
    70 damage per shot? for a 40 mm? it’s almost the damage of a 57 mm,
    If you need to boost the barrel so much so that it can go to Tier IV,
    it may be that it’s just not in the right place in Tier IV …

    3- why the Turan II has 60 mm of armor?
    its shielding is known and noted at 50 mm, not 60 mm
    it invented? Do you have information that most people don’t?
    In this case it would be good to clarify.

    4- The turan III, why is it in tier VI?
    but you buffed it more so that it goes to tier VI, it is useless.
    if the tank was designed to be an equivalent of the Pz IV, it is pointless to place it in a higher tier than the Pz IV without good reasons apart from, “we boost it to go to tier VI”,
    it clearly has the 75mm guns from the Pz IV, the 7.5cm L / 48 as the final gun, but you gave it the stats for the 7.5cm L / 70 from the panther, that’s just absurd.
    If you need to boost the barrel so much so that it can go to Tier VI,
    it may be that it’s just not in the right place in Tier VI …

    5-the Tas Korbuly
    I forget the questionable historical relevance of this tank …
    but on the other hand, it has an automatic charger? since when?
    it invented? Do you have information that most people don’t?
    In this case it would be good to clarify.

    6- Projekt 88 and Projekt 100
    it is specified in the text of the image that the tank is called “47M”
    we can therefore call them “Projekt 47M 88” and “Projekt 47M 100”

    7-the “exclusive” Hungarian automatic loader
    Hmm … no.
    This autoloader is not exclusive, there are other tanks from other countries that can use this type of autoloader.
    it’s just that on WOT, autoloaders are not shown.
    the italian autoloader is a total inventions corresponding to nothing that actually exists and so is the WOT automatic loading system,
    it’s actually just designed to be super easy to code in-game and has never been updated since it was added to the game.

    there are more than a dozen different types of automatic chargers, each with obvious advantages and shortcomings, this would bring much more diversity than a system made exclusive to a nation to make it more salable.
    For examples, we can cite the Chi-Ri and the IS-7 which use a similar system.

    In short, overall, it’s pretty damn good, and the animation to explain the autoloading is really well done and relevant, hungary is really valid for WOT.

    on the other hand, forget the 2 other branches that you have spoiled with this
    https://i.imgur.com/w7GagjK.png
    I saw which tank it is,
    and it smells of shipwreck and low tide at full nose.

      1. I dunno, he made a few really good points. But yeah, let’s blindly support the author instead of listening to historical facts, sure

    1. I already answered some of your questions, so I’m not going to reply to the answered ones again.
      What were your Toldi armor sources? Here are mines.
      Maximum frontal armor:
      Toldi I: 13-23 mm (0.79 in)
      Toldi II: 30-35 mm (1.18 in)
      Toldi III: 35-40 mm (1.57 in)
      Sources: https://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/hungary/Toldi_Tank.php, https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?%2Ftopic%2F252288-magyar-harckocsik-a-ii-vil%C3%A1gh%C3%A1bor%C3%BAban%2F&ct=1567879395,
      Bonhard Attila, Sárhidai Gyula, Winkler László: A Magyar Királyi Honvédség Fegyverzete, Budapest, Zrínyi Katonai Kiadó, 1992., ISBN 963-327-182-7

      The characteristics of the vehicles weren’t updated yet, so it shows the old values, e.g. when the 40M Turán was equipped with the short-barreled 75 mm gun. If it annoys you, I can fix it.
      However, I’d like to mention that usually, the Supertest characteristics are showing the values of the top configuration.
      And here is a spreadsheet comparing the variants of the Turán, including the armor values.
      https://imgur.com/a/4tQlk0x
      Sources: Bonhardt Attila–Sárhidai Gyula–Winkler László: A Magyar Királyi Honvédség fegyverzete, Bp., Zrínyi Kiadó, pp. 86–87
      A 40.M Turán–40 közepes harckocsi kialakítása – III. rész: A mintapéldánytól a sorozatgyártásig, in: Haditechnika, 1995/2
      I. P. Shmelev: Magyarország páncélozott járművei (1940-1945)

      The Tas, even the Korbuly variant, never had an autoloader as the technology wasn’t available for Hungary by that time. And it is true to the so-called Projekt 88/100 as well. Also, if a branch has some kind of mechanics, like autoloading, it usually starts from Tier 8.
      And the “47M” marking was never used on anything. Furthermore, it refers to the gun itself, but not to the project.

      And the autoloading system I mentioned and demonstrated was created by me, so obviously there are no other tanks in the game using it.

      1. Oh I see I had taken it as reference article by For the record,
        but if in the meantime it is improved, so much the better.

        on the other hand I invite you to reread your sources,
        the tank encyclopedia article is too light on information about armor values,
        and the article, excellent by the way, from War Thunder forum indicates maximum armor values ​​different from what you said,
        13 mm max for the Toldi I,35 mm max for the Toldi IIA and Toldi III and 50 mm max for the Turan I and Turan II.
        and the tank characteristics comparison table you showed shows that the Turan III has only 11.3 hp / t engine power,
        therefore 260 hp divided by 11.3 hp / t = 23 tonnes,
        yes, going from 50mm armor to 75-80mm armor + the new turret + heavier 75mm gun does not add 1 tonne to the tank weight, but 4 tonnes.
        which confirms what I said last month,
        leave the Turan III at tier V alongside the Pz IVG,
        since it was designed to be an equivalent to the Pz IV,
        that it uses the same 75 mm guns as the Pz IV G
        and that it has an armor value very similar to the Pz IV G
        it doesn’t need to be upgraded in firepower to push it into tier VI, it needs to be upgraded in mobility to make it competent in tier V.
        especially since, even with the stats of the Panther’s 7.5 cm L / 70 gun on its 75 mm Panzer IV, it would be bad in Tier VI,
        its mobility at 11.3 hp / t makes it bad for tier V and even worse for tier VI since its shielding will be much less effective than tier V.
        Really, it is useless to force to place it in tier VI,
        while it must already be improved to make it correct in tier V.
        Leave the Tas Prototipus in tier VI,
        75-100mm frontal armor, 100mm turret armor, 36-37 tons for 500 hp, Panther’s 75mm L / 70 gun,
        it integrates itself in tier VI without having to retouch it and it is much stronger than your boosted Turan III,
        a little too powerful? well, that will give one more reason to want to play the Hungarian tree.

        then,
        if the Tas has never had an autoloader, then it doesn’t have an autoloader, it’s not because Wargaming makes fake stats that you have to do the same, otherwise it ends up like the Italian tree, The “historian” of the Italian tree had learned to put the Italian heavy tanks in medium tanks (P26 / 40, P.43, P43bis) even if it meant completely replacing their armament selections,
        result: the italian tree is about to place number 2 in the number of fakes tanks in game, just behind china.
        especially since the CS-53 proves the opposite since it is the only one to have a skill since it is the only one to any.
        So having a skill that starts appearing at Tier IX isn’t a problem.

        “And the“ 47M ”marking was never used on anything. Furthermore, it refers to the gun itself, but not to the project.”
        Ah? because the name “Projekt 88/100” does not refer to the canon?
        Otherwise, the turret pictures name them “First variant” and “Second variant”, so you can name these tanks with these names.
        it gives:
        “47M First variant” at tier IX, “47M I” for short
        “47M First variant 85 mm” at tier VIII, “47M I 85” for short, (premium tier VIII)
        “47M Second variant” at tier X, “47M II” for short
        So yes it’s quibbling but there is a certain interest behind it.
        since we no longer use the 88 and 100 caliber numbers to differentiate them, we can then put their 100 mm gun on the Tier IX and the Tier X, which can then help the Tier IX, an 88 mm gun for a tank of its size is a little light in tier IX.

        “And the autoloading system I mentioned and demonstrated was created by me, so obviously there are no other tanks in the game using it.”
        Ah yes, indeed, it almost corresponds to an already existing system but this one is totally invented.
        Which is not logical, try to base yourself on an already existing type of autoloader, you will inevitably gain credibility for your tech tree. Even more so when real autoloaders offer better capacity than what you invented.
        Basically, the automatic loader system that I confused yours with, the one used on the IS-7, behaves almost the same as yours but it does not wait until the loader is empty to start reloading, the crew continuously recharges the autoloader until it is complete, even if there is fire with the tank, this does not stop its reloading.
        The idea is that the crew’s autoloader reloading is slower than the autoloader’s rate of fire, so if it fires continuously it will eventually empty its magazine even if it is constantly being reloaded by the crew.

        1. It is totally normal that different sources are mentioning different values. You asked for sources with the armor values I specified, and I shared the references.
          The main thing is that the armor layout has multiple plates. In the case of the 38M Toldi’s frontal armor, it has a lower-plate (13 mm), upper-plate (13 mm), upper-upper-plate (13 mm), and a “driver-plate” (23 mm) at the very top, in line with the driver’s hatch.
          https://i.imgur.com/lnmOC7J.png (marked with red)
          Most of the sources usually don’t mention it because it isn’t that significant, although it is a rather crucial thing, especially because it is the thickest part but some people like to ignore that fact.
          On the other hand, the Turán has a different reason. The last assembled Turán I is proven to be better at armor protection than the first service-ready vehicle from the exact same model, due to additional plates (side-skirts) and presumably a little bit increased armor thickness, although the latter one isn’t confirmed, but clearly noted by various sources including the one I showed.

          About the 43M Turán, I already stated why it isn’t possible to drop it one tier lower. Then you need to drop the Tas as well, resulting in the lack of a Tier VIII candidate. The Turán III was not meant to be an equivalent to the Panzer IV, it is just your opinion (quick note: the Turán III was better in basically any direction than the Pz. IV ausf. G, but I already explained it to you earlier). It was designed simultaneously with the 44M Tas, however, none of them were successfully finished because of the lack of industrial capacity and the end of the war. To prove my point, here are a few researchable same-tier mediums with similar characteristics: Škoda T 25, Type 4 Chi-To, Stridsvagn 74, M4A3E8 Sherman, or A-43. A Tier 6 medium doesn’t need to be super dominant.
          The Korbuly-variant Tas is reconstructed anyway, so it doesn’t make it less-historical whatsoever.

          Again, I do not recommend using the abbreviation “47. M”, it is not only unhistorical but even misleading. “M” (minta) like any year’s “sample” classification was only given to things which entered service. Even the Tas is referred to as “44. M” only in post-war writings, under WW2 it never had this type of designation.
          Furthermore, an 8.8 cm autoloader for a T9 medium isn’t small, more than a third of all same-tier/class cannons have a caliber of 90 mm or lower.

          And excuse me, but what I illustrated isn’t based on any already existing mechanics at all, and barely has resemblances with the in-game loading systems.
          Real-life autoloaders are better in every way than anything in the game, I wouldn’t argue with that. But then I don’t get it what is your point, regardless.
          And what you described is fundamentally what the Italian autoreloaders have. The IS-7 will never get that in the game, I’m totally positive about that.

  7. Damn that’s good. If only the Canadians had some thing like that, All we have is duel barrel TD’s and big gun mediums.

    Looking forward to those high tiers too since I love my autoloaders and rear turreted autoloaders have the potential to be good side scrapers and supporters to the heavies on the team if they have about 60mm of side armor and kept that 200mm front turret armor..

    The only thing I’m concerned about is the autoloading system. it looks way to good, almost no draw backs. the only way I could see it being balance is this way. “If you keep shooting, the gun loading process will take longer.”

    For example, let’s say the shells load every 7 seconds into a 4 round magazine no mater the number of rounds already in the magazine and is unaffected by firing the gun. A total loading time of 28 seconds and has a shell loading time of 2 seconds. But only up to a certain degree.

    if you shoot and you only had 3 rounds loaded at the time. If you fire the gun again the 4th time after firing the 3rd round. the gun loading cycle will now take longer based on how many shells had been loaded during the shooting and loading process.

    The 4th and 5th shell loading into the gun will now suffer a penalty of 3.5 seconds to load into the gun, the 6th shell and 7th will suffer a 5 second penalty to load into the gun, and the 8th shell and onward will have a 6.5 second gun loading time. Even if you’re loading one shell at a time into the magazine the gun loading time will still suffer based on how many shells the gun fired in succession. This time will stack on top of the 7 second reloading time to load one shell even if your magazine is empty.

    The player will be shown a counter on the side of their reticle atop the magazine. This counter symbolizes how many times they can load shells into the gun before suffering a penalty, in this case the counter will be at 3 and if brought to zero or lower the shells will load slower into the gun.

    The counter can be reset by one, by reloading the shell that is before the shell that is already loaded into the magazine, and not pull the trigger to fire the gun and let that 2nd shell load properly into the magazine. The penalty to reloading the gun will be removed or lightened based on what penalty the gun is suffering from at the time. The counter can also be reset by fully reloading an empty magazine.

    (NOTE the counter will not stop at zero but will turn red and continue to count up to 4. this means you’ll have to load 8 shells to reset the counter to full since 0 counts too!)

    As an example, you’re going to shoot off all of your rounds into the enemy tank. The 2nd, and 3rd round loads normally, but because your dumping your rounds in quick succession. The 4th round loads 3.5 seconds instead and any round after the 5th round loads into the gun at 5 seconds and gets worse. Unless you let the 6th shell load fully into the magazine, you’ll have 1.5 second gun reloading time again. All because you let the gun “cool down.” back to 1 and chose to load the 6th shell normally. So you now have 3 rounds out of 4, after having shot 3 rounds before.

    so you have to count your shots when using these tanks as well when your against them to catch them in an awful reload.

    So these tanks are opportunists that are capable of dispatching tanks but can suffer horribly if they don’t manage their shells properly.

    Still, good article maybe I’ll make a follow up comment with images of what I mean later.

    1. Thanks!
      You have some outstandingly good ideas, but currently, I’m not planning to change anything as I’m still testing how it would work. I hope you don’t mind.
      Just a quick thought: 4 second intra-clip reload is really slow, try out the Char Futur 4. What you described is rather looks similar to the Progetto, but I wanted to turn out something different, that isn’t like if you keep shooting, your DPM drops significantly.

Leave a Reply