My point exactly.
That was just a sarcastic way of saying that adding Iranian aircraft to US tech tree will add nothing new.
And the reason why I have no intention of branching to other tech tree is the grind in this game.
When I started playing War Thunder, I had no idea it would take me 4 years to fully research USSR tech tree. When I saw how much time it takes, I gave up any idea of going for any other tech tree (although there are a few, which are tempting me).
Instead, I play other nations on my friends account, which couldn’t resist the temptation, and went to research every nations tech tree in the game.
That way I get to try out other nations tech, while he is getting a help in that colossal grinding effort. It’s a win-win situation.
But, thanks for checking my account.
Maybe you thought my playstyle would make my arguments any less relevant?
Because it would constitute the further C&P of yet another otherwise unique airframe going to other trees, especially considering how few export operators of the type there are. wouldn’t it be enough already for practically every nation to have arbitrarily access to the rest of the Teen series due to how widely exported they were, let alone the earlier Century series, and assorted older airframes.
It’d be fine with it if, in return all FME airframes(Assorted variants of the; MiG-15, -17, -19, -21, -23 / -27, -29. Su-24 , -25, -27. Yak-141, etc. And these are just the ones we know about.) were added to the US tree as compensation. Its only fair right and there is really precedent with captured vehicles anyway.
There are still gaps in The US’s lineup of F-4s, that could be filled;
- Non-PD with Countermeasures (F-110 / F-4B)
- Early PGMs / Countermeasures (F-4D)
- Anti-Radiation (F-4G)
- PGM / Standoff ordnance (Early / Late F-4E split)
The is no particular need for an Iranian F-4, but I could certainty see at least two more F-4s being added in the future to augment particular lineups when BR changes adjust things or as event rewards, since Gaijin seem oddly resistant to revising existing airframes / configurations and their ordnance, or clarifying particular blocks so they can be accurately modeled.
If we refer to the (IR) F-4’s you can see that most of the changes are deletions and substitutions, so they don’t really add anything of note unless you are trying to place a hard limit on performance to meet some specific target BR for some reason.
Do I need point out lend lease or the captured equipment across various trees, I doubt various nations have great relations with Russia these days and yet things like the various M4s and Yak-3s still apear in their respective nations trees.
4 Likes
Yeah if the Iran F-14 were to come to the game then it would probably be another US top tier premimum
1 Like
thats not really an excuse but whatever. you dont spade or play other ranks. If it took you 4 years to grind 1 tech tree then obviously ur doing something wrong
TBH, instead premium Iranian F14, I would like to see late model of F14A in US Navy service.
2 Likes
yeah but foldered with the F-14A Early
Look at all those words written, since I left the post.
If I had this much interest in my bug report posts, maybe some of the bugs would be resolved by now.
Anyway…
Because it would constitute the further C&P of yet another otherwise unique airframe going to other trees, especially considering how few export operators of the type there are.
As you have stated, there are already enough aircraft shared between various tech trees.
Why would it matter if another one got added to a different tech tree?
Didn’t people state above how bad this aircraft is? Why would it matter if this particular “bad aircraft” is added to the USSR tech tree?
The is no particular need for an Iranian F-4
You said it yourself.
There is no need for adding Iranian aircraft to US tech tree. And the gaps the US tech tree has can easily be filled by other US aircraft of some other nations variants (without involving Iran).
Do I need point out lend lease or the captured equipment across various trees, I doubt various nations have great relations with Russia these days and yet things like the various M4s and Yak-3s still apear in their respective nations trees.
If that’s the case, then I will make a post, requesting the addition of Polish F-16s to the USSR tech tree.
If you want to disregard the feelings of minor nations players, then we can disregard them both ways.
The way I see it, adding minor nation vehicles to the game had two purposes.
First, it had the goal of filling technological gap, or adding variety to existing nations vehicles.
Second, it had the goal of catering to feelings of players from nations which had little hope of seeing their respective nations vehicles in the game, as a standalone nation tech tree.
I always supported both of those goals.
But if you want to disregard Iranian players opinion, then we can also disregard personal feelings of players from Ukraine, Poland, Argentina, and others.
1 Like
Iran has nothing to do with Russia. Just because they tested some of their weapons on a plane doent mean that they will get the vehicle.
Also Gaijin probably wont add itto the game anyway because of political reasons. Those F-14As were bought under the Sha not the Current Iranian political government. So that creates tension
thats not really an excuse but whatever. you dont spade or play other ranks. If it took you 4 years to grind 1 tech tree then obviously ur doing something wrong
I will waste no more words on someone who thinks personal attacks make other peoples opinions invalid.
And I don’t play the game because I care for your opinion on the way I play the game.
Nice of you to mention it.
I’m also fine with adding soviet vehicles to US tech tree, just as I’m fine with adding US vehicles to USSR tech tree.
Just as you said - it’s only fair.
Although I would suggest that each nation keeps it’s unique vehicles (vehicles that have never been exported, prototypes etc), just so that each nation would have it’s own “style”.
For example US could be the only ones with access to F-117, or USSR could keep their Yak-141 (I don’t know where you pulled Yak-141, when it was never exported or given to another nation?).
I would even like to suggest a “plane for a plane” addition to each respective nation.
For example, USSR would get Iranian F-14A, and US would have MiG-29S they bought from Moldova.
Or USSR could get Iranian F-4s, while US would get MiG-23s it got from Egypt.
Lockheed helped bankroll the program post collapse.
To be more exact they were paying for VTOL powerplant technology transfer (they needed experience and technical solutions for their upcoming F-35B program).
They didn’t give them money out of their good will.
And they didn’t buy the aircraft, nor was it sent to them for evaluation.
I don’t see how financial support equals “we get the plane” logic?
And the F-14A wasnt either smh
Refering to Iran
Because spreading vehicles to trees that have nothing to do with them and no need for them is just bad game design.
Theres already enough problems with the mess caused by subtrees and nations all buying yhe same aircrafts, we dont need MORE loss of individualism between nations.
You wanna play the F-14? Grind the US TT.
2 Likes
You mean all 12 of them? So let me get this straight, you think Gaijin would prefer pissing off its largest playerbase by putting an iconic american aircraft to the Russian tree than making the ridiculously small iranian playerbase angry? How does that make sense. Also you realize that that the US/Russia are also technically hostile right? Maybe not officially but for all intents and purposes they are. How is that any different.
There’s really no need to put an Iranian Tomcat at all. They could simply just put a F-14A late. Or switch the current TT one to a late variant and put a early one as premium. Drama free.
It would just be a painful experience to grind that line, like Chinese or Japanese Bomber line.