Pretty sure the interior is also modified for radio equipment. It’s modified.
Common boy, you know what I mean
Add some more radio equipment, makes it not a new tank
Kinda does. They took a prototype added more armor to it, modified its interior for radio equipment and sent it out to the eastern front to serve as a command tank in an Anti-Tank Battalion. It’s not a prototype, it’s an experimental design built off of a prototype.
Lol
2 Likes
You totally mixed up definitions. An experimental tank is for testing and evaluation new technology or stuff, and later comes prototypes for testing the hole design…so the command tank is no experimental tank design, it was put in regular service into the Wehrmacht
That’s what prototypes are for. Experimental designs such as the Dicker max, Emil, and this Tiger are when they take left over hulls, guns, or whatever they can get their hands on, and make an experimental vehicle. A prototype is a vehicle that they make before production to see what works and needs to be improved, while an experimental design is just they throwing stuff together to make something with worth. The command tank was an experimental design of them taking a failed prototype and turning it into a command vehicle to make it useful. Prototype is preproduction, experimental design is when they use what they have available to make something useful.
So wrong😂🤦
I’m not ☺️ but if that helps you sleep at night, then be my guest.
Look at the definitions, of prototype and experimental…
Prototype: preproduction model used to find pros and cons of a vehicle before production. VK 45.01
Production vehicle: a vehicle that is produced in great numbers after its prototype has had its flaws fixed (or majority of) Tiger H1
Experimental design: a vehicle that is made when engineers take parts and components from different vehicles or just what they have in stock to make a new vehicle that is not intended to be mass produced. Pz.Bef.Wg.VI P
Prototypes tend to not see combat. Production vehicles and experimental designs do see combat. I’m done with this conversation. I have much better things to do.
T58
F14D
Do i need to go on and on building a list that there not really avoiding placing entirely unique or historical important vehicle as premiums?
I hope they add the US as a Sub-tree for Isreal for historical accuracy
3 Likes
Lets also mention the excuse of “bloated TTs via useless vehicles” can now avoided via Folders AND squadron vehicles.
MLRS vehicles imo would make for incredible squadron material.
1 Like
I don’t really mind the addition of “copy pasted” vehicles too much, as long as they don’t replace (or are added instead of) a nation’s original vehicles, specially when they could fill that same “gap”, and here’s a really good example of it, i don’t agree with the addition of the Stuart I and Stuart III to beef up Rank I of the British Tech Tree. And here’s why:
“oh, but the british did use those tanks”
Yes, but we have original british vehicles that could perfectly fill this “gap” filled by the Stuarts, the Cruiser Mk V, Covenanter (A13 Mk III) and the Crusader Mk. I i would be completely fine with the addition of the Stuarts to the British tree, if we already had the Covenanter and the Crusader Mk. I in our TT, the Stuarts could have been added after those tanks.
So, with much respect, this is the problem guys, we get copy-paste instead of our original vehicles and nothing else, it should be the other way around, unique vehicle first copy-paste second! But instead, we get copy-paste now, and unique vehicle never.
This is the part the devs aren’t getting (for some reason), everyone would stop complaining, if the standard procedure was, here’s all the unique vehicles used by your nation, now here are all the lend-lease vehicles that other nations gave them to complement the tech tree. This is what needs to change, the unique vehicles first, the copy-paste second.
4 Likes
agreed but they specifically point out the german varient in the post instead of the other ones in some cases they even make sense like the british tech tree but adding it to the german tech tree and saying that that one specifically filled a gameplay gap is just bullshit
The gameplay gap in question was “open-top 155mm bonk machine”, and while Germany already had plenty of direct fire tank destroyers and a casemated 105mm (the StuH) it did not yet have a 155 until the M109G. M44 was available and being brought in to fill gaps in other trees so re-skinning it as a Bundeswehr M44 was an easy addition while Hummel was still in development.
Do you think there would have been outcry if the other nations received M44 but Germany did not?
1 Like
If only the US got it there would be littlem outcry. Outcry would happen if everyone that has it now got it except germany.
1 Like
I’m going to disagree on those filling the gap in the place of Stuarts, mostly as I think Cruiser tanks should all be classified as medium, as not only does that classification match their role in real life as best as possible, when googling UK tank classifications/UK light tanks of WW2, you find a light tank classification that isn’t grouped under Cruiser/Infantry. (Yes, this does mean, I think all Infantry tanks should be labelled as heavy)
Of course, outside of the Tank, Light Mk X line, most of what I can find listed as light tanks are the lend-lease vehicles.
1 Like
oh yeah, i do agree with that, but this a different topic, the thing i’m comparing, is that, in War Thunder, the Covenanter and the Crusader Mk. I, would perfectly fulfill the job the stuarts are doing. and it’s something unique to the British and not copy-pasted.
Stop adding slop and fix whats already in game but broken.
Leaving the TURMS shooting ghost shells for months, F2 with a broken radar the same… it isnt making me want to spend.
You already lost over £100 just on me alone. About to be another £50 as I want the XM but theres no way Il spend another penny whilst the greed > everything else.