Lol.
At least they could give us a Tiran 5 or Namer lol
Wouldn’t be that hard for them.
Maybe…but after next 4 updates. WE NEED MORE MAGACHS
1 Like
Man, I’ve only got 2 more to go.
I’m not stat bullying you. I’m point out that you’re a level four who’s played 15 matches and you’re talking like an authority on the community.
You’ve barely played the game.
15 Matches and 68 minutes in game. That is all you have on your nearly two-year-old account.
Where is this authority to tell people like me, who’ve sunk thousands of hours into the game, that I can’t have similar vehicles in another tree.
3 Likes
Lmao sure buddy
How did this fair and non-controversial topic deteriorate as it did. Jesus wept.
2 Likes
Somebody declaring they didn’t want another round of cut and paste vehicles and somebody trying to refer to that players stats as some part of an argument, I guess.
Not sure how not wanting lazy work is argued by stats.
My point is that there are some good suggestions elsewhere on this forum regarding some nice variants that the Finland army did have on tanks taken or loaned from other armies, so I see both sides.
1 Like
Well I voiced my disagreement with the focus on copy paste vehicles in the topic at hand, I think both pro- and anti-copy/paste for a sub-tree has fair points.
More so referring to how childish the conversation has become.
2 Likes
Indeed. No argument there. People bring old grievances in I suspect.
2 Likes
? what are you winding up about
2 Likes
5 Likes
Erks me that someone still doing the tutorial is saying these suggestions would ruin the game.
2 Likes
He (Presumably) has made a number of posts elsewhere which indicate he has had more games than that, I have been reading them among all the others.
I would advise for what it’s worth not worrying about people but what they are saying.
The case for some interesting Finland vehicles such as the Stug the Finns converted is a good one and was made elsewhere on the forum with pictures to support the case. Might be good to jump over to that one or get the Moderator to merge the two posts and lose the slanging match.
The Finnish Army used 60 converted 59 StuG III Ausf. Gs and added concrete and wood poles to make quite a different looking vehicle plus they added distinctive green paint. Would have been a better addition than the cut n’ paste Sherman.
So yes, let’s look at the genuine candidates for nations that are lacking and give up on lazy Cut n’ paste vehicles. A sensible resolution for all.
3 Likes
I’m not opposed to copy and paste; however, I am opposed to spamming it. For vehicles like the Merkava Mk.3D and KV-1B, they exist only outside their own nation. As such, they should be Copied over to the Finish and Israeli line respectfully.
I believe copy and paste should only be done where it’s necessary to give a nation a boost or if that nation uses the vehicle frequently enough to justify it being added in game. I do not believe that modifications, even the smallest of ones, such as the Sho’t are Copy and Paste. If a vehicle is different in any way from its counterpart, that is enough to justify the vehicle being implemented in my eyes.
What is unreasonable is verbally abusing people on the Forums, supposedly, using an alt account as he has stated. There is no ordinary reason in WarThunder to have an alt account. Especially if you’re posting and replying on the Forums with said “Alt Account”. If anything, it seems like an easy way to get around punishment for abusing others.
Him liking your post is enough to reinforce that exact point. He’s likely evading punishment. His account has only an hour in matches. That is sketchy.
I personally think copy and paste is just lazy game making as well. I have many of the premiums such as the KV1C or T34 747 which are a worthwhile addition, and I would ask you to study the difference between those and the other lazy Copy and Paste examples we have thrown into the game. So, I still agree with that point.
If War Thunder can’t find enough vehicles to make a nation, then they should not make the nation and they should have given it more thought before trying to appease the masses which again is a common viewpoint.
Finland isn’t even a tree, it’s a subtree and has given us another T34 a long side China and Russia. Sweden adds another M4 like we don’t have enough already. So, we will have a game consisting of the same tank on both sides like something from a bygone age.
Another KV1? Does the game desperately need this?
The one thing I did like about Sweden was the difference in style of vehicle as I would say the same about Italy. I would rather have the gaps than the copy/paste.
In close proximity now it is hard to tell who is who sometimes with the smoke and the series of Blue letters scattered across the map. Then we have SIM.
As for this business I have no real interest without wishing to be rude. It deflects from the OP. I can clearly see one person being rounded on by others and people clearly upset because they can’t stat bait which is something that happens on this forum.
NOM1337AD and BoveyBadBoy69 are having a go at each other on another thread so it’s a carry over. I wouldn’t worry about it.
Many players have numerous accounts apparently for whatever reason I guess. I struggle enough with one.
Have a good day.
its just a dumb forum no one gives a shit about, take it easy
1 Like
All you did was just Echo everything I said with the occasional nitpick.
I didn’t say spam the tanks. I said the opposite. The tanks I DID list are only seen in other trees, which they do not belong in originally. With their parent nations formally inside the game, they should be added to them.
Sweden and Finland have plenty of tanks they can still receive, and this post suggests giving them a Stug and KV-1B and E.
Sweden has ZERO heavy tanks. If someone was to grind Sweden, they would not be able to do certain battle pass challenges simply based on the tree they chose to play. That is not fair in the slightest and should be rectified.
The same goes for Israel. Israel also has no heavy tanks present. That is not because Israel lacks them, rather Gaijin has been somewhat lazy giving Israel content other than a handful of Magachs in TWO years. It would not be hard to give Israel their IS-3M tank. It would be different than the Soviet one in the sense that it has a T-54 engine and more mantlet armor.
These are issues that must be fixed somehow, and we have the assets to fix it, so why not do it.
2 Likes
I agree in this one
I haven’t insulted him, but you seem to be very fond of taking shots at me.
Stay on topic.
Lets be civillized and not insulting one another and just by addressing the problem you have