Question, Do they operate it?
I hope not it would be out classes by everything
It depends on how you understand operational activity. Neither the Germans nor the Japanese used this plane in combat, in both countries it was used for testing or breaking speed records. Of course, we can also suggest two variants for Germany, i.e. He 119 V2/V4 or V3 with floats.
1 Like
The way it should be. The idea is that it has to be in combat. Always made little sense to me. The definition of combat implies “a fight or contest between individuals or groups.” which would count testing trials, or Aerial combat mockups. Might even include Airshows.
No. They never used it in service, and it is not an indigenous Japanese vehicle. Germany doesn’t even have this aircraft, so you would have to divert resources away from actual, indigenous designs in order for Japan to have it, unless you have the German team implement it, at which point it becomes copy paste.
Outside of testing? Nope.
Japan bought it, it would be fitting as a premium in the Japanese tree.
Or maybe you start to consider that there is no “diverted resources”, instead resources are used more efficiently when Gaijin can use this model to add to multiple countries.
There is nothing about a copy paste premium that takes away from anything. You can just not buy it if you don’t want to, but players that do would really appreciate such an addition. It’s also not locking a unique vehicle behind a paywall if you can go over to the German tree and research it for free.
2 Likes
Dude, I think you’re exaggerating a bit with your complaints about captured vehicles. Your actions cause your suggestions to reach more people, which usually results in more yes votes. As a rule, you are the only one actively against it, so every weak percentage shows that the community is against a certain vehicle. Additionally, I plan to write about the captured LaGG-3 and P-40N, and your complaints will not stop me.
4 Likes
in principle, i am not against such, as long as you make suggestions for the german equivalents (or japanese in case of original Japanese design tested by germany)
For now, I only write about the Japanese. If I run out of suggestions, I will move to other countries. I do not deny that there will be suggestions for He 119 V2/4 and V3
3 Likes
funny plane also good speed
+1, i have no problem of a nation getting a vehicle from another nation before the other nation itself (ju-86 per example)
Oh yeah, I actually forgot about the Ju 86…
1 Like
1 Like
Oh, I’m glad to see someone suggested it! It’s a pretty neat plane, in my honest opinion. It’s a shame there’s only one intact example left, though.
I could’ve sworn I replied to this…
Anyway!
No, that’s silly. By that logic, you can justify large swafts of all the tech trees being in both the US and Russian TTs simply by justifying it by them owning the vehicle in question, effectively rendering redundant the concept of other nation tech trees. Granted, it wouldn’t be as bad as because you would have to pay for what you want, but I can guarantee you a lot of players wouldn’t even touch the German and Japanese tech trees if they can just buy the interesting vehicles and grind out either the US or Russian tech trees. Moreover, it degrades the unique flavor of Japan as a nation by stuffing it with what is effectively bloatware. Japan has no need for it, Japan never used it in service, and it is not Japanese. Therefore, Japan shouldn’t have it. I feel this response also adequately pushes back on your second response. If you want to make efficient use of resources, you can certainly do better than a relatively obscure German prototype.
The problem with that statement is that, at least personally, I see a very different sentiment outside of the suggestion forums. Many are sick and tired of copy paste, premium or no, especially when it dilutes tech trees with foreign vehicles. This leads me to believe that the suggestion forums have a positivity bias, which is backedd up by circumstantial evidence. The Swedish Tiger, for instance, had an approval rating of 60 to 70 percent, yet was subject to intense controversy upon release.
Even if the majority is in support of you, which I highly doubt is the case outside of the suggestion forums, inflating the Japanese tech tree with foreign designs it never used in service does not suddenly become a good idea.
Then I will be there to point out how they are bad ideas.
Yes, but no…
Yes - the plane was purchased, crewed, maintained and evaluated specifically for military purposes. This puts it in advance of several vehicles already in the game both old and new.
No - There are several home grown Japanese bombers and attackers still missing. Inclusion should only be after the original German prototypes are added, with a suitable amount of time before the Japanese one comes along. It doesn’t fill any obvious gap, even less so if true Japanese planes are added.
I place it alongside the Japanese B-17D suggestion. It should be added eventually once conditions are met, but until then it’s simply a controversy waiting to happen. In 2 or 3 years time when the trees reach their zenith and lower tiers need filling out following a top to bottom decompression then it will find a home, although probably as a premium.
XP-50, XP-72 (suggestion), XP-55, A2D-1, P-38 K, Su-9, VB 10, etc. - just to name a few. Not a serious argument…
Never, because it was stolen tech and never saw US service (your pov)…
I have zero clue why you even argue with the OP.
You insist on things like historical accuracy in a game which offers fantasy game play. And you require things like “seeing service” whilst you support stuff like the F-16 XL which never saw service.
So imho you are not consistent and you might consider leaving the OP alone…
2 Likes
And to my understanding, those are all indigenous prototypes for their respective nations, not evaluated foreign designs. And, before you bring them up, no, I do not like the Swedish T-80 and other, similar foreign vehicles that were only ever evaluated.
The point was to demonstrate the absurdity of the argument being presented. Simply owning the vehicle in question should not be enough to warrant inclusion.
And, for the record, precedent isn’t what is being argued here. It is wether or not that it’s inclusion is a good idea that I am arguing, and my position is a firm no.
Because I delineate between foreign vehicles that were evaluated and never saw service, and indigenous prototypes that never saw service. The two are different, and so I treat them differently, as one is copy paste and the other is a unique vehicle that cannot be copy-pasted.
Imho you are way too fixated on accuracy instead of accepting the realities. WT in itself is a mess - a single prop will not change this. WT is a business and not an accuracy simulator.
Don’t get me wrong - i would love to see actually realistic combat scenarios (independent from BRs) without the fantasy vehicles and game set ups wt is currently willing to offer (in order to please the masses), but from my pov we will get this in few years behind a pay wall (subscription based).
No, I simply see no point in advocating to make copy paste worse, which is what these suggestions do. It doesn’t have anything to do with accuracy, otherwise people, myself included, wouldn’t groan whenever a nation recieves a copy pasted aircraft that the nation used in service.