Duplicate Vehicles: Why We Add Them

[Henchgirls]

I mean, sure. But there are times when there are clearly more interesting vehicles to add, and yet there are copy-pastes instead! Take the Leopard 1A5 BE. Why not add the leopard with a cockerill 3015 turret instead? Or an ERC? Or, a personal sticking point, the AMX-13/105? There are still so many unique french things to add, that haven’t been touched, too!

[Morvran]

@Stona_WT

Our current approach at the high ranks is generally to make premium vehicles useful for progression without making them the only way to access a unique capability, weapon system, or a historically significant vehicle.

The issue though is that they are boring C&Ps applied to multiple TTs at once, rather than being “unique” to each TT.

I.E

F-18 to Germany, Britain and the US
F-16 to France and Israel (and probably soon to at least 1-2 more nations)
Su-30 to China and Soviets

Instead, why arent they C&Ps of actual TT vehicles.

So instead of a F-18 for Britain, why wasnt it a Tornado F3?

Instead of the F-16 to France, why wasnt it a Mirage 20005F?

etc etc etc

This the negative part of the C&P, that they just C&P the same premium into a half dozen trees, perticuarly when the main nation never even operated said vehicle.

Its lazy and Its Boring.

@Stona_WT

This is a difficult balance to find. Lineup strength and gameplay variety are important, but so is the identity of each nation and the feeling that a tree offers something distinct.
The reality is however that some nations such as Israel and Japan simply don’t have a large number of unique vehicles left to add. Now, of course we know these nations do have unique vehicles that could come to the game, and many of them are in our plans. We want to keep adding vehicles to every nation for years and years to come, and hypothetically if we could add all of those remaining unique vehicles right now, there would be nothing left for the future, or forever, potentially.

But the point is even nations with many many unique options left get C&Ps. Let alone existing vehicles are ignored and bug reports rejected for BS reasons to make the C&Ps look like more needed options.

Challenger 2s would be fine if you fixed them. And then you can add a Challenger 3 for top tier. Instead C&P Abrams.

@Stona_WT

We want to make it clear that when we add a duplicate vehicle to a nation, this vehicle isn’t replacing a unique option that could be added

Except it often does, as its highly unlikely for a unique native option to be added in the near future.

For example, every tree got M109 and then years later 155mm SPHs are slowly being added ot the other trees.

and there are dozens of light tanks missing and unlikely to be added because Britian already has light tanks at those exact BRs

@Stona_WT

A recent example is in the recent dev server feedback. Initially we planned the new F-16 premium as a Belgian variant, but as a result of your feedback we went back to the plans to see what we could do to improve it in the timeframe we had. The result was the Dutch F-16AM, a variant not already in the tree, which uses a different radar and the LITENING pod.

Though you completely ignored the part about having loads of F-16s to begin with and this new one doesnt really add anything to the tree and the French Mains would have prefered a Mirage 2K5F premium.

[Pipimer]

Unfortunately Japan burn a lot of files in the end of the war, I don’t think we will ever get it

[_WarDiddy]

That’s it, i’ve heard enough, 10 more T-80s and 3 more BMPT varients as premiums NOW! Also buff Kontakt-5 too while at it.

[ivanacco]

@Stona_WT

For example, the Leopard 1A5BE addition doesn’t negate the AMX-30C2 (which is in our plans for the future), but fills a progression gap right now

You say this but you coud have grabbed the same amx model and given it a stabilizer, whats the point of another leopard on the french tree?

No opinion on the fact that there is more F16s on the french tree than on the american one?

[joshje100]

So what about in the case of the F-14D then? The poll on the dev server thread was nearly at 1.2k votes but that feedback got ignored.

You say you prefer to add duplicate vehicles rather than unique and historically significant vehicles as premiums and then turn around and lock away the final F-14 variant behind a paywall but still call it a “sidegrade” to the B when in reality it represents a major upgrade to it. Please pick a lane.

[_Renzo]

@Leo2A6EX-live

Event in Germany they have no plan of moving it it’s been said before

Well the “it’s already an event vehicle in X tree” doesn’t seem to be as solid of an excuse as it was in the past.

[Mathll]

Just imagine adding the french heli that are in the Chinese TT but not in the french one 😭

[Stona_WT]

@Stona_WT

We want to make it clear that when we add a duplicate vehicle to a nation, this vehicle isn’t replacing a unique option that could be added. Instead, it’s an addition to help gameplay lineups and variety “right now”, while more unique vehicles are in development and come in time. For example, the Leopard 1A5BE addition doesn’t negate the AMX-30C2 (which is in our plans for the future), but fills a progression gap right now, so that players can have a better experience playing their nation.

I think we answered it here:

We want to make it clear that when we add a duplicate vehicle to a nation, this vehicle isn’t replacing a unique option that could be added. Instead, it’s an addition to help gameplay lineups and variety “right now”, while more unique vehicles are in development and come in time. For example, the Leopard 1A5BE addition doesn’t negate the AMX-30C2 (which is in our plans for the future) , but fills a progression gap right now, so that players can have a better experience playing their nation.

[Leo2A6EX-live]

@Stona_WT

that players can have a better experience playing their nation

So why is there still such a lack of German light tanks. Better experience is just a lie at this point

[CoFro_8-psn]

@Stona_WT

For example the M44 for Germany, this vehicle filled a gameplay gap in the tree while we worked on developing and implementing the Hummel

Then tell the community you’re actively working on plughing the gap with a unique vehicle instead of adding a copy paste vehicle that actively ruins ground SIM. Most people would rather wait an update for a unique vehicle than see the sake vehicle added to half the tech trees.

[Master_Teaz]

oh and the Gazelle for the British

and the Revenge class battleships for britain (currently only in russia ffs) that TD_SEB mentioned

[Pipimer]

They are way bigger gaps than this one, Germany isn’t the only TT

[Exocetta]

@Bonrath

You guys sure this isnt just a poor attempt to cool things off?

That is their jobs.

[Miraz05]

C&P Bangladeshi Yak-130 for China when?

[Pipimer]

The M44 doesn’t destroy Sim, the T-80U(Sweden) and the M1A2T do

[PJ_2003_TH]

I be like a B+ not D they did like its not have an any upgrade. i dont know what are they thinking. if they want to sell premuim why they didnt use F-14A late as a premuim then. Its would make sense in pack thath have a title Maverrick then F-14D that not use in TOP GUN movie.

[Leo2A6EX-live]

@Pipimer

They are way bigger gaps than this one

That’s a whole 3 br gap of tanks in mobility please tell me another nation with a gap like that. Only one I can think of is some of the american anti airs

[Pipimer]

The m41 is has good mobility at 6.7

[Blackbirds71]

I just want to say Im loving the community feedback recently, making statements on issues going on in the community. For example the Abrams, even if it wasnt the answer we wanted they at least made a statement showing their side (even with classified documents lol)

While not quite as open as they should be it’s a step in the right direction. I really hope this improvement isn’t just to cover their mistakes to save the steam reviews from going negitive…