That wasn’t built was it?
No idea
F-15 STOL/MTD should come as DCT
Wasn’t armed. It’s impossible to come lmao. Plus it would be too high for a dreams come true
Still hoping for a Uboat can be a good dreams come true event so thay can test one sub at first before the rest is coming.
think it also because of last week meme with the f100 chasing a Uboat made by warthunder.
But i think it can be the SU-47 everyone is talking about it for years now
Some more special vehicles for the Chinese TT.
Based on some of the alternatives presented here thus far, as well as some further thought on my part, I’m not sure I hold the opinion that it’s the most likely by far any longer. I do, however, hold that it is still the most likely option by a decent margin if Japan is getting the DCT vehicle, based on the fact that there are no suitable alternatives that satisfy both the popularity and uniqueness requirements while still qualifying for implementation.
There’s the Mansyū Ki-98, a twin-boom pusher interceptor (a layout shared by the Swedish Saab J21 series in game, but definitely unique to Japan) that may satisfy the uniqueness requirement, and maybe even the popularity requirement (though still less than the Ki-64, I’m pretty sure). However, while a prototype was being built, there are no surviving photographs or proof of its existence, so it may struggle to be implemented.
A few other options only existed as mockups. However, given that the J6K1 was implemented, and it only existed as a mockup as well, these other options may be on the table for implementation, unless Gaijin has changed their standards for implementation since then. While they may satisfy the popularity requirement in terms of how long they’ve been requested for, they fall very far behind the Ki-64 in terms of how much they’ve been requested.
- Aichi S1A1 Denko, twin-engined interceptor. Most unique thing about it is a 360 degree rotating remote-controlled turret on the fuselage behind the cockpit with 2x20mm cannon. Not unique enough IMHO.
- Kawasaki Ki-88, single-engined fighter with engine behind the cockpit and 37mm cannon firing through the propeller hub, similar to the P-39/63. Slightly less unique than the Ki-64, by my reckoning.
- Tachikawa Ki-94-I, twin-boom pusher-puller interceptor with very heavy armament (2x37mm and 2x30mm, I believe), engine layout similar to Fokker D.XXIII, but much bigger and more powerful. Really the only one of these that satisfies the uniqueness requirement really well, and seems like the kind of thing discussed on the old forum years ago. Really the only possible alternative.
I am not aware of any Japanese tanks meeting the requirements for a DCT vehicle (except the O-I, which was denied).
As none of these come anywhere close to the Ki-64 in popularity, and because the Ki-64 was actually built and flown, I hold it to be the most likely choice among Japanese vehicles by far.
There are possibilities among other nations, however. The best one I’ve seen posted here so far is the Ca.183bis for Italy, which passes the uniqueness requirement with flying colors and has been requested since ~10 years ago, I believe. However, it may struggle to be added for similar reasons as the Ki-98, in that while an incomplete prototype existed, no photographs survive to verify its existence.
Concerning your guess:
The 44M Tas does satisfy the uniqueness requirement and maybe the popularity requirement too. However, I do not expect it for DCT since, as a Hungarian vehicle, it belongs to a subtree nation, and hence it has to compete for the DCT slot with viable candidates from the main nation (Italy). Vehicles from the main nation are likely far more desirable than those from subtree nations for something like DCT, and so I believe there is a very low chance of it showing up for DCT.
I’m hoping they’ll treat DCT differently because of its special status compared to other additions and events. Given that, it seems reasonable to assume they’ll avoid repeating nations until they can no longer.
True, in that some DCT vehicles (mostly the Sturmtiger and TOG II) have been both highly requested and requested for a long time. However, I’m pointing out the KV-7 is an example where only one is true. Of course, the uniqueness requirement applies universally.
The purpose of the comparison was to demonstrate that the Ki-64 is indeed very highly requested, which I believe it does well. While there were fewer subreddit posts about it, the XF5U was indeed requested for a long time, and that with its extremely unique design made it the ideal choice for USA’s DCT vehicle.
I suppose these are fair points, but the TOG II being able to work with its gimmick extremely well is not necessarily the reason it was added as a DCT vehicle. Rather, its uniqueness and popularity did that.
Thinking about this some more, I question whether the presence of a gimmick is a necessary criterion for a DCT vehicle. Rather, it may be that such gimmicky vehicles just end up being the ones that are not only highly requested, but requested “for the memes” or “because it would be stupid/funny.” The TOG II’s gimmick, which you say is its ability to use the “reverse into battle” strategy to great effect, is not obvious until you play it and experiment with different strategies. The gimmicks of the other three, on the other hand, are plainly apparent from just looking at them. Therefore, I would argue that this gameplay quirk present with the TOG II was likely not a factor when considering it for DCT. Rather, the primary factors for its implementation were its unique design and its sheer popularity, though mostly its popularity.
In the cases of DCT vehicles for nations like USA, USSR, and Germany, because there are so many vehicles and designs, especially prototypes, available for implementation, the clear choices for something like DCT are the really gimmicky options that wouldn’t “fit” elsewhere, so that the more conventional vehicles can be left for other events or as tech tree/premiums. In Britain’s case, the TOG II was the clear option, not necessarily because of a fully unique gameplay gimmick that it would excel at, but rather because of its unique design and extreme popularity; it was practically legendary among and beyond the community by that point. In the case of Japan specifically, there are no really gimmicky options at all (except the O-I, which was denied), and the Ki-64’s two quirks would not introduce any special playstyles (even if such a playstyle would likely be quite unique to Japan). Nevertheless, I argue its (relative) uniqueness and immense popularity make it a strong candidate for DCT.
Concerning the potentially unique (to Japan) playstyle of the Ki-64, while the evaporative cooling system wouldn’t appear to have any gameplay effects, it does actually have indirect effects by way of the aircraft’s design. The use of the wings as radiators eliminated the need for drag-inducing dedicated radiator structures elsewhere on the airframe. Combined with the dual-engine layout, this makes for a decently fast and likely quickly-accelerating aircraft, much more so than the related Ki-61. In game, it would likely be a much better energy fighter than other options at its level, and would be quite fast at higher altitudes, all the while retaining the good turnrate of the Ki-61, or close to it.
I suppose this is true. In actuality, the Churchill AVRE was not a DCT vehicle likely because, when it came time to decide what Britain’s DCT vehicle would be, the clear choice was the TOG II, as it was both more unique and more popular. And, really, I stated elsewhere that regunned variants of existing tanks would likely not be DCT vehicles, so I’m not sure what I was thinking when I mentioned the Churchill AVRE example.
EDIT: Forgot to address this:
Firstly, you’re comparing the TOG II (an event vehicle) with tech tree vehicles, which many more people have. Many of the owners of the vehicle may have simply moved on from the BR. Secondly, the Sturmtiger’s greater usage rate makes sense as the main armament is more “meme-y”, which motivates not only more usage in its own bracket (and motivating owners to play its bracket more often) but also some usage in higher BRs (since the big rocket can still get funny kills).
Too high br plus su47 among other planes are fully denied for being unarmed tech demos.
A perfect option for DCT this year (for me anyway)
Charles Carpenter’s L-4H Grasshopper “Rosie the Rocketer”.
Fits what seems to be the criteria for DCT:
- Unique
- Low tier
- Limited capability
- Interesting design/story
- Cool
Would be perfect.
6 Likes
As much as I like the flying saucer and the KV-7 something for China or Sweden could be really neat. I would prefer a ground vehicle personally.
Strv KRV maybe
1 Like
Honestly might be too low tier, and likely wouldn’t meet the popularity requirement.
The Kranvagn will likely struggle to be added due to the fact that the turret was never built.
I mean, yeah, but we gotta bend the rules a bit for these nations that physically can’t get a vehicle of that class. Also stuff like HMS Lion, Soyuz, and the Yak-141 exist lol
anyways it’s nothing more than brainstorming. I’d rather see the Kranvagn in the TT anyhoo
it did exist and flew normally, it was just never armed
Look, even so, there are still many examples of faker vehicles than the Kramvagn ingame.
Ships have Different criteria. And 141 was built
Not really.
Dreams Come True has much looser standards.
Although they aren’t in the game currently we have had what are IMO opinion faker vehicles in the game. Think of how long the Ho-ri, R2Y2 kai… Etc were in the game. As a limited special event we may see some things that were only partially completed with “planned” finishing touches/upgrades.
Because there wasn’t a equivalent but I think it should of been removed with tiger 2 105 and panther 2 🤷♀️
None has said otherwise. We just don’t have faker vehicles lmao as of current 🤷♀️
Not to be that guy, but:
Now, does that mean anything? Not really, but it still was approved to be posted on the forums, unlike the EAP and it even got forwarded to the devs.