Sign in to follow this  
Optical_Ilyushin

Did the requirements for vehicles to be added change?

So remember when we were told by Smin that what would be necessary for addition of a vehicle was some photographs for modelling and some evidence of identical performance?

 

23492ffa98172003b8d06c37cb540edf.jpg

 

Well to my knowledge, the Type 90B is in essence basically just a regular Type 90 with the following changes:

 

iz1993d9003b_012.gif

 

And there are various images of both it and other Type 90's online as well as a fully modeled (albeit not perfectly) Type 90 in the game, so why are we met all of a sudden with this response?

 

a7c3f5c4ebd7e2060a8d5603c82cda0b.png

 

 

 

  • Upvote 5
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Optical_Ilyushin said:

So remember when we were told by Smin that what would be necessary for addition of a vehicle was some photographs for modelling and some evidence of identical performance?

 

23492ffa98172003b8d06c37cb540edf.jpg

 

Well to my knowledge, the Type 90B is in essence basically just a regular Type 90 with the following changes:

 

iz1993d9003b_012.gif

 

And there are various images of both it and other Type 90's online as well as a fully modeled (albeit not perfectly) Type 90 in the game, so why are we met all of a sudden with this response?

 

a7c3f5c4ebd7e2060a8d5603c82cda0b.png

 

Sigh. Even if there are enough photos and blueprints out there to make 3D model, that doesn’t mean we’re going to implement every superfluous minor visual upgrade into the game. The players themselves will be the first ones crying “why it’s not a researchable module” etc. This particular case has nothing to do with lack of source material, it’s necessity of such addition to the tree that is very questionable. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 11
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The necessity for an additional vehicle is NOT questionable! We have 1 vehicle at top tier.

you see that >1< It’s all we’ve got. What are the differences between some Russian tanks? There are MANY with minor cosmetic differences.

  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, gromvoiny said:

it’s necessity of such addition to the tree that is very questionable. 

I do not think that the necessity of an addition to the top tier vehicles of Japan is questionable. Currently they possess only one 10.0 MBT, while other nations have multiple. The Type 74G/Kai will not change this.

 

The same logic could be applied to the IPM1 and Challenger Mk3. Their primary strength comes as an additional respawn, not their improvements over the previous models.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LordMustang said:

I do not think that the necessity of an addition to the top tier vehicles of Japan is questionable. Currently they possess only one 10.0 MBT, while other nations have multiple. The Type 74G/Kai will not change this.

 

The same logic could be applied to the IPM1 and Challenger Mk3. Their primary strength comes as an additional respawn, not their improvements over the previous models.

 

There are noticeable improvements nonetheless, especially with IPM. And this one is like just slapping the tracks on the turret of T-34. 

 

So the question is, are there enough people willing to grind another 390k RP pure clone? If this gets a positive momentum, we might consider it, but not because of a couple of posts on the forum. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 6
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, gromvoiny said:

So the question is, are there enough people willing to grind another 390k RP pure clone? If this gets a positive momentum, we might consider it, but not because of a couple of posts on the forum. 

There is no way to know except to ask/test this with the community. If a player does not want to grind an additional 390k RP then he/she can simply refuse to do so, while giving the players that do want it an option for a second respawn. A second Type-90 in the shape of a Type-90B or STC prototype has been a highly requested vehicle accross many players that play Japan in the top ranks.

 

12 minutes ago, gromvoiny said:

And this one is like just slapping the tracks on the turret of T-34. 

There are many other vehicles that are only slightly modified versions of the base models, while not offering significant improvements over it. I do not think this is a major problem as long as players want to see such a modification in the game.

 

When it comes to costs, such a vehicle is only a slight modification from the base model. The configs do not have to be changed much, and rigging, collision models and texturing from the base model can be used.

 

 

  • Like 6
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, gromvoiny said:

 

There are noticeable improvements nonetheless, especially with IPM. And this one is like just slapping the tracks on the turret of T-34. 

 

 

Or sheet metal on a Leopard 1

or 5 extra BHP on a Chieftain

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, *RAazzy91 said:

 

Or sheet metal on a Leopard 1

or 5 extra BHP on a Chieftain

 

on a side note the sheet metal on the turret to my knowledge is actually supposed to be rubber on the A1A1, and thus would practically serve no benefit against KE shells.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well you want some momentum, heres a bit from one top tier player. Japan needs a backup, japan and france are the only nations that dont even have a 9.0+ to fall back on after their primary MBT is dead. Bracket it behind the type 90 so that its not required for whatever comes after it. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, gromvoiny said:

So the question is, are there enough people willing to grind another 390k RP pure clone? If this gets a positive momentum, we might consider it, but not because of a couple of posts on the forum. 

 

I wouldn't be against polling the vehicle, I suspect however the answer will be a pretty resounding "yes". If it is permitted, would I be able to make a thread to poll player interest in this section of the forums? Because it's been pretty obvious to me that the biggest problem with top tier Japan, the one that basically stops me and most people I know from continuing to play it since 1.81 onwards, is a lack of sustained presence. It made me hold off even in 1.79, but as the SP costs got reworked, it's frankly become a small nightmare to try to keep up, the Type 89 does not replace an MBT at 10.0 in any way as top tier MBTs are both more durable, have better firepower, and equal or greater mobility (the steering bug critically hampers the Type 89's agility), not even considering how helicopters effectively make us helpless, but on the ground as soon as you lose the Type 90 you're basically done and dusted with. To remotely keep up as a Japanese player right now one must spend backups and still do more per life than what a US, German or Soviet lineup needs to achieve, simply to remain on equal footing.

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Optical_Ilyushin said:

 

I wouldn't be against polling the vehicle, I suspect however the answer will be a pretty resounding "yes". If it is permitted, would I be able to make a thread to poll player interest in this section of the forums? Because it's been pretty obvious to me that the biggest problem with top tier Japan, the one that basically stops me and most people I know from continuing to play it since 1.81 onwards, is a lack of sustained presence. It made me hold off even in 1.79, but as the SP costs got reworked, it's frankly become a small nightmare to try to keep up, the Type 89 does not replace an MBT at 10.0 in any way as top tier MBTs are both more durable, have better firepower, and equal or greater mobility (the steering bug critically hampers the Type 89's agility), not even considering how helicopters effectively make us helpless, but on the ground as soon as you lose the Type 90 you're basically done and dusted with. To remotely keep up as a Japanese player right now one must spend backups and still do more per life than what a US, German or Soviet lineup needs to achieve, simply to remain on equal footing.

But but you can buy a backup and Type is sooo OP.My hopes for something nice in this patch is on zero,

Edited by wulfalier
  • Sad 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, wulfalier said:

But but you can buy a backup and Type is sooo OP.My hopes for something nice in this patch is on zero,

 

It always hurts when I hear people say that in earnest, especially given most of the time it's from people who've never played more than 1 10.0 MBT if any at all, so discussing the actual strengths and weaknesses of each vehicle or why the Type 90 really isn't standing head and shoulders above the rest by any real means falls onto deaf ears.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Optical_Ilyushin said:

 

on a side note the sheet metal on the turret to my knowledge is actually supposed to be rubber on the A1A1, and thus would practically serve no benefit against KE shells.

 

It's RHA with Rubber spacers iirc. Back when the Leopard A1A1 was first introduced, it really made no difference and Stabilisers weren't introduced yet either, really it was to answer a complaint from the German playerbase since they only had 1 Leopard against USSRs 3 T-54s and Heavy tanks

 

Does this sound familiar at all @gromvoiny?

  • Thanks 2
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, *RAazzy91 said:

 

It's RHA with Rubber spacers iirc. Back when the Leopard A1A1 was first introduced, it really made no difference and Stabilisers weren't introduced yet either, really it was to answer a complaint from the German playerbase since they only had 1 Leopard against USSRs 3 T-54s and Heavy tanks

 

Does this sound familiar at all @gromvoiny?

 

This example is meaningless since we have stabilizers for a long time and they are world of difference. 

 

But to reiterate my point, no one is saying we won’t add this B version, period (if there’s indeed enough sources to implement it). But developers have a lot of doubt if it’s really needed. Be constructive, prove that positives outweigh the negatives, spread the word. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 5
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, gromvoiny said:

 

This example is meaningless since we have stabilizers for a long time and they are world of difference. 

 

But to reiterate my point, no one is saying we won’t add this B version, period (if there’s indeed enough sources to implement it). But developers have a lot of doubt if it’s really needed. Be constructive, prove that positives outweigh the negatives, spread the word. 

 

hasn't there already been sufficient sourcing provided, at least according to Smin's response back in September? I'm moreso asking what more needs to be given beyond what already has been, considering the nature of the change. If it is merely showcasing player demand, I could go create a poll in general and upcoming to get a gauge of how many players desire a second 10.0 MBT.

  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, gromvoiny said:

 

This example is meaningless since we have stabilizers for a long time and they are world of difference. 

 

But to reiterate my point, no one is saying we won’t add this B version, period (if there’s indeed enough sources to implement it). But developers have a lot of doubt if it’s really needed. Be constructive, prove that positives outweigh the negatives, spread the word. 

Lot of doubts?Wait do they have the same "doubt" when they adding another T serie?Or Abrams or Leopard?Please explain it to me somehow,because this looks more like we dont care,there are not enough money from Japan GF so why should we add another tank?

  • Upvote 6
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, gromvoiny said:

 

This example is meaningless since we have stabilizers for a long time and they are world of difference. 

 

But to reiterate my point, no one is saying we won’t add this B version, period (if there’s indeed enough sources to implement it). But developers have a lot of doubt if it’s really needed. Be constructive, prove that positives outweigh the negatives, spread the word. 

 

iirc stabilisers back then were just 90 degrees per second vertical elevation speed which didn't really work for firing on the move.

 

This isn't meant as a personal attack, just to show that nations have received tanks with very minor differences in the past when and where they were needed. In 1.87 Japan is going to really start to be behind USSR and UK (and US since we all can guess what's coming) with these nations having at least 3 Main Battle Tanks to spawn. The Type 90 is a great tank, but it's only 1 vehicle and I can't see Japan staying as popular in either Arcade or Realistic battles as War Thunder moves forward into Rank VII.

 

Unless the Dev Team throws a curve ball and a Type 10 dev blog appears on Monday.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, *RAazzy91 said:

 

iirc stabilisers back then were just 90 degrees per second vertical elevation speed which didn't really work for firing on the move.

 

This isn't meant as a personal attack, just to show that nations have received tanks with very minor differences in the past when and where they were needed. In 1.87 Japan is going to really start to be behind USSR and UK (and US since we all can guess what's coming) with these nations having at least 3 Main Battle Tanks to spawn. The Type 90 is a great tank, but it's only 1 vehicle and I can't see Japan staying as popular in either Arcade or Realistic battles as War Thunder moves forward into Rank VII.

 

Unless the Dev Team throws a curve ball and a Type 10 dev blog appears on Monday.

 

I highly doubt the Type 10, given Smin basically said it's too far from now.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Optical_Ilyushin said:

 

I highly doubt the Type 10, given Smin basically said it's too far from now.

 

I don't see it happening either. Next Modern MBT dev blog will either be M1A1, Leopard 2ASomething, C1 Ariete or AMX Leclerc.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Kikusaku said:

We are getting the 74G, Smin said the Type 90 was already adequate. 

 

Issue being the 74G will neither have the armour nor the mobility to compete at top tier, basically would be like asking Soviet players to make a lineup only using the T-80B, BMP-2, Shilka, and Object 120; Doable, but by no means optimal, and both the USSR and other nations can make lineups that do way more than that could ever offer.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, wulfalier said:

Lot of doubts?Wait do they have the same "doubt" when they adding another T serie?Or Abrams or Leopard?Please explain it to me somehow,because this looks more like we dont care,there are not enough money from Japan GF so why should we add another tank?

 

If you think that difference between T-72 and T-80 is similar to a few extra bolted plates, you are ignorant and not adding anything useful to discussion, really. 

 

47 minutes ago, Optical_Ilyushin said:

 

hasn't there already been sufficient sourcing provided, at least according to Smin's response back in September? I'm moreso asking what more needs to be given beyond what already has been, considering the nature of the change. If it is merely showcasing player demand, I could go create a poll in general and upcoming to get a gauge of how many players desire a second 10.0 MBT.

 

What Smin said was that there are other considerations for adding new tanks into the game besides having enough source material. So yes, it’s about player demand basically (provided they have clear understanding of what they’re asking for in case of identical machines like this B version). 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gromvoiny said:

But developers have a lot of doubt if it’s really needed. Be constructive, prove that positives outweigh the negatives, spread the word. 

Alright, let just take a quick look at lineups at top tier. Right now and in the future of 1.87, using the limit of 5 vehicles per lineup that one can get from regular Silver.

As of right now the US has a lineup of 1 jet, 1 helicopter and 2 10.0 vehicles of choice with either an SPAA or an additional 9.3 tank. This is ignoring the M1A1 thats most likely also inbound if we go by comments made on dev blogs. What in turn leaves America with 2 aircraft and 3 10.0+ tanks in 1.87. 

Next up is Germany, currently 1 jet, 1 helicopter, 1 10.0 vehicle, 1 9.7 vehicle and either an SPAA or additional 9.3. This is ignoring any addional tanks germany also will get in 1.87, What in turn leaves them with 2 aircraft and 3 9.7+ vehicles in 1.87.

Moving on to Russia, currently they have a lineup of 1 jet, 1 helicopter, 1 10.0 tank, 1 9.7 tank and either an SPAA or additional 9.3. This is ignoring the T-80U with Kontakt-5 which completely defeats JM-33 on the first shot while having the ability to one shot instantly. This leaves them with 2 aircraft and 3 9.7+ tanks in 1.87.

Next up is Great Britain, currently they have 2 jets, 2 9.7 vehicles (of which 1 was added for the precise purpose of allowing them to make proper lineups) and 1 9.3 vehicle. This is ignoring the Challenger 2 that will be added in 1.87. This leaves them with 2 aircraft and 3 9.7+ tanks in 1.87.

 

Now lets just take a look at Japan. Currently their best lineup is 2 jets, a Type 90 (10.0) a Type 74 (8.7) and either a Type 89 (8.3) or a Type 87 (8.0 SPAAG).

Considering that due to denials of the Type 90 (B) and Type 10 at best a Type 74 Mod G/Kai version will be added (Thanks DMM) Japan will end up with 2x jets, 1x 10.0 and 2x 8.7+ at best. Adding a Type 90 (B) would reduce the issues of having 1 proper tank and 2 vehicles that never in their entire game life would naturally meet entire lineups of vehicles that outclass them in every way shape and form.

All by copy pasting the current Type 90 model and adding a total of 12 plates made out of 10-20mm of structural steel in 3 different shapes total (Type of steel figured out by its purpose for being there.). Something that can be finished in about 1 day total.

 

Now, you can say "But they can make a lineup, just of lesser quality vehicles, we are not sure about copy pasting vehicles/vehicles with similar performance." in that case i would like to point you towards America's the M1 Abrams and M1IP Abrams. the T32 and T32E1. the M4 and M4A2. Or lets go for germany with its Panther G and F or ofcourse the Marder III's. We can also take a look at Russia with its T-28 and T-28E or even more fun, the T-34 (1941) and T-34 (1942) or even more fun, all 3 T-54's the T-54 (1947) T-54 (1949) and T-54 (1951) or we can just take a look at the additions of the multiple T serie MBT's. Or lets take a look at the British where we have the challenger Mk 2 and Mk 3. Tanks that had most of their changes done internally and only added gameplay feature being stock APFSDS (something that was developer decided) and some add-on armor on the lower plate and sides.

 

Lets keep on going with this, the differences between the Type 90 (B) and Type 90 are the same. Mainly internal differences with some changes externally that distinguish it from other versions, the precise same case that happens with the Challenger Mk 2 and Mk 3 as was even said in the dev blog for it.

XgDDi61.png

Britain got the Mk 3 to be able to have a proper top tier lineup in a way that was possible. If you would read anything i just said, what reason would there be for Japan not to get a Type 90 (B).

 

As a final note, a Type 90 (B) suggestion already recieved support from the playerbase to be forwarded for consideration. What in turn proves that this is infact a very easy to make vehicle is with as only downside that Japan would get the ability to make a proper lineup at top tier. I would say that this is a downside that is a worthy sacrifice.

Edited by leroyonly
T32 instead of T30 fix + minor rewrite of 1 sentence
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.