It really doesn’t. Developer laziness aside, there are plenty of vehicles that sit at the same BR performing identical roles. They can add other SPAAs at 5.3 or around it. Foldering exists for a reason.
Using your logic why don’t we just give the US the Sherman Firefly, M4A1 (FL10), M4A4 (SA50), M-51, etc? The only major difference there is the turrets. You’re completely ignoring the part that makes the Skink unique. Design, history, production, and service all going out the window here.
2 Likes
They do state in the main post:
So, no, not really.
1 Like
Israel should have been a US sub-tree to begin with. Aside from that, sure, the US played a key role in the production of those tanks if we were going solely based on production.
I have openly acknowledged that history and service would be the best way to argue that the grizzly shouldnt go to the US. However, that is not determinative. The F-16AJ got added to Japan even though it was never used by the japanese and nothing about the vehicle is Japanese. It was merely considered by the Japanese, just like the skink was by the US, except that the US actually played a significant role in producing half of the vehicle.
I want that car
would defiantly be a fun one to show up at a car show with.
1 Like
Real life Fallout car, i hope it has aircon otherwise it’ll be like driving a greenhouse lol
Currently those CAS planes are enjoying that exact advantage over many 10-11 BR SPAA units, so it’s not really much of an argument against those weapons that the playing field gets leveled
Still don’t agree with Skink addition.
Here’s another 2 US SPAA’s.
Different Elco turret with 6x .50 cals and 2x 20mm on the back of a truck.
Possibly the same truck, or at least same type of truck. This time with 4x 20mm’s.
That makes 3 Elco turreted SPAA’s alone. Pretty sure I shared the half-track with 4x 20mm’s and 2x .50 cals above.
3 Likes