Duplicate Vehicles: Why We Add Them

Official News, Development Blogs and Updates
1898

Again, Being obsessed with America having the Stingray just shows how biased people like you are.
If they can’t have that then:

Brits shouldn’t have the VFM5. (Was meant for export only)
Germany shouldn’t have the Leopard 2AV and Class 3P. (Both export)

The Stingray is an American design that was built by them.

You don’t need to be a US main to see just how biased the average forum user is with how angry they get when the US side gets something.
If 30%+ of the US tree gets to be copy slopped then the rest of you can learn to share, And in the case of the Stingray, Its not even sharing, Because its an American tank, No matter what your opinion is on its purpose as an export.

Also worth pointing out there are US tanks in other trees that never even owned said tanks.
China and Japan both have a M36, When Japans only connection is they looked at one when designing the Type 61 and never fully owned it, Never intended on owning it, And where not allowed to use it.
Taiwan never owned the base model M36’s, Only ever having a small number of the B2 models.
The M1A2T was passed to be added before any where delivered.

The British Sherman II also still has T45, An experimental APCR shell by the US which they didn’t use, While the US M4A1 still lacks it.

There is an active suggestion to give Japan an F-14 just because of a single test flight by a Japanese pilot, Which was over the US, With a plane that wasn’t taken out of service at the time.
Again, For something to get added to another nation, Someone from said nation just has to physically touch the thing once in a dream and its grounds for being added.

Meanwhile, The requirements for an American tank to be added to the American tree according to forum users here be like:
Must be fully designed by them, Must be fully built by them, Must have entered full production, Must be shared with at least 4 nations no matter how loose the connection is, And if any other nation purchased something, Then it suddenly has nothing to do with the US anymore and therefor must be deleted right away or else there will be a whine fest.

3 Likes
1899

Plenty of trees have vehicles they never used. Japan has a Tiger I that sank before it got there and the M47 it tested but never purchased. Other trees have similar vehicles. If you’re going to have a standard, have a standard for all trees.

Oh and now the British tree has 4 subtrees. That’s insane.

1 Like
1900

Copy and paste makes the game experience worse, so it doesn’t really matter.

1 Like
1901

Don’t bother, these people can’t see their own hypocrisy. Demanding every US vehicle they can find, while wanting theirs to stay unique.

The Skink was derived from a US vehicle and used US sourced components in its construction. That would be plenty to add it to other trees but never the US. The SK105 was added to the French tree for less.

1 Like
1902

What is even more funny is that the cargo sub sinking (Did they even have cargo subs that could carry tanks?) is only a rumor with not a whole lot to back it up.
Its actually likely it was never even sent in the first place.

1903

No it doesn’t, Canada is still split.

I mean the majority of people also disagree with that notion
Screenshot_20261023-171626

Sometimes it can help plug gaps other vehicles can’t. That being said, I’d rather the unique options pop up first when needed.

Imo, the big fuss about the Skink is that when there’s American options available that could’ve also fit the bill iirc, Gajin decided just to make a one to one copy (while keeping Canada in split nation limbo).

2 Likes
1904

Less than half disagree with it.
And the fact its still up as a suggestion again proves the criteria is literally a country needs to think about it once for it to be considered.

2 Likes
1905

Sure, Gaijin could have added other options instead of the Skink and they could have chosen not to add 4 F18s and 2 M1 Abrams to the British tree.

2 Likes
1906

I still mourn the CANZ tree.

If you want you can try and make a suggestion for other nations vehicles for USA. That being said, yeah multiple suggestions imo are stretching it quite a bit.

I’m fine with that because the tank itself existed and eventually ended up being delivered by the time the tank got added to the game.

Thought they ended up trialing it before producing the Type 61. That and there wasn’t much else to provide in terms of domestic options

Seems to be based on the base model captured by the PVA (though flagged wrong, should be PRC and not ROC). If it’s ment to be the ROC operated one, the it wouldn’t be the first tank China had the wrong model of a tank (hello T-26).

1 Like
1907

It’s a private venture by Cadillac Gage, aimed at an international export market. The only Stingray we have in game so far was created exclusively for the Thai military, who purchased 106 tanks of this variant, while the only tanks that stayed in the US were the two Cadillac Gage owned prototypes.

The only Stingray variants ever even offered to and considered by the US military were the M551 Stingray, Stingray AGS and Stingray II. I would even agree with it being an American tank if what we got was one of the Cadillac Gage owned prototypes, but Gaijin was too lazy to not just copy the Thai service model so here we are with the US getting a copy of a Thai tank.

It’s not a double standard either, for example I don’t agree with the Thai M60A3 TTS and M163 being copies of the US variants rather than being the real Thai M60A3 TTS and M163A1 (Thailand never even had the base model).

They did own it. It was bought and even is still in Japan to this day.

image
image1024×683 235 KB

Japanese M36 on display at JGSDF ordnance school (image from 2013)

7 Likes
1910

So what if they owned it? The US has dozens of foreign vehicles they test and entire squadrons they use in training. Should the US also get those vehicles?

1911

Then it’s an eligible addition.

Look at the Japanese spg gap if there was no M36. That would be 7 BR steps with no TD between the M44 and Type 75. Unless there’s a domestic vehicle that can fill a gap, the Japanese M36 imo is justified.

Screenshot_20261023-220908
Screenshot_20261023-220908364×1069 158 KB

3 Likes
1912

Genuinely I don’t care. I’d imagine there’s probably more interesting things to add, but I wouldn’t see it as a big deal if they were.

If a military buys a vehicle that is absolutely a valid criteria to add it to the game. Keep in mind we are not talking about private companies or museums here, this is vehicles that did play their part contributing to their militaries, be it through evaluation for tank development (like the M36) or training use like you put as example.

4 Likes
1913

What’s the point of national trees if you can just demand any vehicle you need to fill a gap? Should the US just get to pick German SPAA to go between the Skink and M163? Kugelblitz would fill the gap fairly well.

1914

Can you prove that America had possessed a Kugelblitz like Mauswaffe proved Japan possessed a M36?

Also keep in mind where I said

If there’s a domestic Japanese, Thai, Indonesian or Malay option, sure I would rather that than the M36. If there is nothing, the M36 helps plug a bit of that horrendous BR gap.

4 Likes
1915

Not that I’m aware of but it would be a good addition to the tree, so I’m for it.

1916

This here is the key. Copy-paste/Import vehicles have their place, most notably to fill gaps that can’t be filled with domestic designs.

Unfortunately that’s not how they’re being used in some trees, see stuff like M109, M44, Leopard 2’s, etc

3 Likes
1917

Honestly I think that even most direct copies in game can at the very least get some minor modifications or visual changes to reflect another nations service. This would help them still feel as unique as possible.

For example the Thai M60A3 TTS (which already just has a wrong turret model, but that’s not the point here) could be fitted with Thai made wooden armor. Likely not enough to raise the BR, but enough to make this a notably distinct vehicle.

grafik
Thai M60A3 TTS with wooden add-on armor

In many cases this can even just be smaller things, different stowage, removed or altered sideskirts, maybe some different smoke launchers, but things like that would still help a lot with making these vehicles feel distinct from each other rather than using the same model everywhere. Camo nets or similar would be another easy choice to make vehicles more unique, because these are often not standard features of vehicles and instead added by their operator nations.

4 Likes
1918

It’s their version of ccvl. Literally co developed.

A leopard developed by Germany companys and used in bundeswehr trials for over a decade after… Surely it was only export.
Class 3P developed by German companies prior to the addition of south africa as a sub tree. Suggestion rules means it’s German.

With the current model in game being Thai. Not the american one they trialed. They shouldn’t have it

1 Like
1919

And it’s not American. It wasn’t used by america. It was added to american due to their bitching what they are very good at

2 Likes