The photos at the top show a wrecked P-40B and an AT-6. The bottom photo is the one that counts.
1 Like
Ya the one on the bottom the PBY is a bit rough looking then again they look like they used white paint.
One thing I find interesting is Japan did use a lot of captured equipment in a organized manner but its ill documented unlike Germany. (Best documentation comes from the USA and UK of we found X stuff)
The Japanese used the P-40E, Hurricane II Trop., and M3 tanks in combat. Additionally, they utilized the P-40N, B-17D and E, B-339D and E, and CW-21B for training purposes. The CW-22B was used as a liaison aircraft. The P-47D, P-51C, DB-7C, F4U-1D, F6F-5, LaGG-3-8, SB2C-1, I-152, I-16 Type 10, and SB-2 Bis were simply tested. It is not entirely clear what was done with the Martin 139W and 166, Hudson Mk. I and III, PBY, and DB-5 aircraft.
Of course, I’ve probably forgotten a few other planes.
1 Like
Yes but also Guns, Trucks, Cars, some AFVs, and infantry transports. There is also munitions as well.
This is likely where the whole Japanese Luger came from. (yes some Japanese military used personal Luger or captured from the Dutch but there is no true Luger with the emblems)
2 Likes
It’s simply that the Luger and the Type 14 were quite similar. Besides, Japan used Dutch and British tanks for training in Indonesia.
2 Likes
I knew your response would be dumb, but wow.
Thanks, I made a special effort to use -10 IQ when writing my reply to you.
2 Likes
Seems you never stopped since the first time we interacted : /
I’ve written over 200 suggestions. What you label as “C&P” accounts for only about 20–30 of them. Only a fraction of those are actually C&P (I won’t deny that the Japanese F6F or F4U fall into that category). There’s a conflict of interest here. I submit suggestions—often to showcase an interesting vehicle or its history—without necessarily expecting it to make it into the game. So far, only one vehicle I’ve suggested has actually been added. Yet, you always complain whenever I suggest a foreign vehicle used by Japan, even if it was a significant aircraft for its time (like the PBY-6A during the early days of the JMSDF). I’ve never seen you voice support for unique Japanese aircraft.
1 Like
I mean, would it actually be Copy and paste, though, since the 6A isn’t even in-game? Also from whats mentioned in the suggestion, the Japanese did make some changes to the airframe no?
1 Like
For Pangolin_Fan, it’s enough that the vehicle was manufactured in a different country—like the Vought V-143, which was built in the USA but only Japan showed interest in it. That makes some sense, but it’s often absurd; after all, if a specific aircraft—or even its family—isn’t in the game, how can it be a “copy-paste”?
1 Like
I agree. My interest is actually unique vehicles, and your interest is spam posting every vehicle you can that would be low effort to add with the sad hope that something you suggest might get added.
I don’t understand how such a stupid argument becomes so commonly repeated.
If it gets added, it will be copy pasted to multiple nations with no change. That what copy paste means.
I wouldn’t call it a low-effort task; sometimes, writing a suggestion—including researching the source material—takes a full week of work. However, I try to focus primarily on Japanese-made vehicles. It’s not my fault that Gaijin doesn’t care about smaller nations and rarely adds their indigenous designs (Japan waited about five years for a new WWII-era tank and aircraft; I can’t recall the last time a French, Italian, or Chinese WWII vehicle was added—excluding premiums). I dislike modern vehicles—both when it comes to writing suggestions for them and actually playing them—so I focus on older models (roughly up to the 1960s), yet Gaijin ignores them.
2 Likes
Wonder why
Because they can sell a premium BMPT or F-14D for $70, but they can’t price low-tier vehicles that high—there simply wouldn’t be any buyers. That’s the main reason.
1 Like
For me, true copy-paste gameplay represents the absolute peak of the experience. It doesn’t matter what you play; all the vehicles handle the same way. They’re fast tanks where everyone kills everyone else in a single shot. Tactics are impossible because there’s no point to them. Flanking? Everyone moves at the same speed. Long-range combat? Welcome to the “sniper alley” simulator—everyone will hit you. Counting on heavy armor? Everyone will penetrate it without a problem. From BR 8.3 onwards, the game literally becomes monotonous and identical, regardless of the vehicle you’re using. I can’t speak to the aircraft since I haven’t played at high tiers, but from what I gather, it’s just as boring.
“Copy-paste” vehicles force players to learn how to deal with specific opponents. For instance, a dogfight between a Japanese A6M2 and an American A6M2 necessitates a change in tactics and adaptation; the same applies to ground vehicles. These vehicles also allow for the construction of balanced lineups. Without the M24, M44, and M19/M42, Japan would face a gap—a significant jump—between the 3.3 and 4.7 Battle Ratings. Is this a good solution? Not necessarily. Every player should have the choice of whether to skip C&P vehicles or use them.
1 Like
I mean, not necessarily. From what I’m seeing, there’s quite a lot of variation they could do with the 6A, mainly in reference to the radar pod it carried above the cockpit. For example, the Danish one seems to have had a different radar than the USN’s. Plus, the suggestion implies that the Japanese may have modified some of their armament. Honestly, I don’t think it’s that bad of a premium candidate, all things considered.
2 Likes