Eh, the Zero was actually used by France, which makes it interesting. This is just an early variant bought by Japan, evaluated, and effectively discarded, presumably being scraped as the war deteriorated. I’d rather see Germany get early variants of the Junkers. I’d also hardly consider the JU more interesting then a French Zero, as the French actually used leftover Japanese equipment against communist forces in Indo-China, even if for a relatively brief moment in time. How that is less interesting then an early JU Japan bought, evaluated, showed off, then forgot about until they needed metal is beyond me.
Just ignore him, he doesn’t know his facts, the guy was trying to gaslight others pretty much into arguments on other suggestions related to Japan. Heck, he’s already somewhat wrong with this one as well cause the A6M2 Model 11 was used by Indochina not directly by the French Air Force.o
2 Likes
Yes, the French used a few A6M2s for fighting in Indochina, which were not modified in any way. And 1 A6M2-N plane which crashed quickly after repair. Very interesting planes (that’s sarcasm)
3 Likes
How is that not interesting? Seriously, aircraft are more then just the stats on the paper, it’s also the history that surrounds them. The fact that they weren’t modified is a silly hang-up to be on.
This is the same as your arguments about the Japanese F6F-5, Hurricane IIb and probably other planes captured by the Japanese. Most of them have interesting stories associated with them.
1 Like
That’s because they really don’t, at least not to the point that would warrant inclusion. What typically happens with captured aircraft is one of three things, either something goes wrong with the engine, which forces the pilot to land in enemy territory, the pilot bails and the aircraft hits the ground in a solid enough piece to be salvaged, or the aircraft was failed to be destroyed before forces captured. The end result is almost always the same though, the ‘captors’ poke around the plane, try to figure out what makes it tick, and then either scraps it, stuff it somewhere and forget about it, or uses it for aggressor training. While that is, admittedly, a little interesting, it isn’t to the point where I would consider it interesting enough to warrant the inclusion into War Thunder as, at the end of the day, they didn’t really use it for much else. You also run into the issue that practically everything in the Japanese and German tech trees would be valid inclusions into the American TT, something which would be incredibly silly. Which is why I feel that, for a captured or bought vehicle to be a valid addition to a tech tree, it should have something more beyond simple evaluation. An excellent example of this would be the Polish and French Panthers, one of which was used in the uprising in Warsaw, and the other being equipment actually put into service by the French. They weren’t vehicles they bought/captured, poked a bit, and then discarded or used as aggressors.
As a disclaimer, if a TT has no alternative option for a vehicle, then it’s fine to use captured vehicles, but there really shouldn’t be premium captured vehicles that were only evaluated, especially when talking about WW2 Japanese aircraft as they have plenty of vehicles in that general bracket
According to this assumption, all prototypes should disappear from the technology trees because they were only tested and not used in combat. This argument makes no sense because it means that half of the vehicles should disappear from the game
2 Likes
No, because prototypes aren’t captured vehicles. You apply my rule to current War Thunder, and the only vehicles touched would be like 90% of the captured premiums with a few captured tanks in the Russian and German trees remaining as those nations had a habit of using captured equipment in combat, as well as the aforementioned French and Polish Panthers. Knowing how extensive this game can be, there might be a few other captured vehicles that would remain, but I can’t recall what they would be.
So… Like the Ju 87 K-1 bought for evaluation and potential adoption? Keep in mind this aircraft wasn’t captured, but rather similar in role to what a prototype would be.
3 Likes
In some respect, every vehicle that a country buys for testing becomes a prototype for that country.
1 Like
Japan didn’t develop the JU 87 nor did they use it in service, and I consider things bought for evaluation to be in the same boat as captured vehicles if the country didn’t develop it. Either there is a really interesting story behind it, more so then what is standard for evaluated/captured vehicles, or the nation has literally no other options, otherwise the evaluated/captured vehicle shouldn’t be added.
First of all, the Japanese wanted to introduce him to naval service. Secondly, they tested it, and for the Japanese it became a prototype plane. Thirdly, each plane purchased for testing becomes a prototype plane in the country that bought it
1 Like
The technology used in the Ju 87 was used to improve the D3A aircraft and to develop the B7A. So for the Japanese, the Ju 87 K-1 was a useful design
1 Like
They wanted to introduce it to naval service, but because it didn’t have the range they wanted they never bought anymore after the evaluation units, instead going with a domestic design. As far as we can gather from the sources we have, it never saw service under Japan.
Testing is completely irrelevant. If your trying to say that there is precedent for its inclusion in War Thunder, then yes there is. That is not the same as it being a good idea, however and is not what is being argued about.
Now your getting into semantics. Perhaps if you want to get really technical, but it would be disingenuous to say so. The JU 87 had already been fielded in combat at this point and become a production aircraft. These are not prototype aircraft, rather production aircraft being evaluated by a prospective buyer.
As for the overall usefulness of the aircraft, that is frankly irrelevant. While it may have been a useful source of data, that does not change the fact it is not an indigenous design, that it was bought off the proverbial shelf from Germany, never saw service under Japan, and was forgotten about until they needed the metal.
One of the Ju 87 K-1s was not scrapped but destroyed in an American air raid. The second machine was probably dismantled for parts and sold as souvenirs after aircraft shows in 1940.
1 Like
Ok, that’s neat, but it doesn’t change the overall point(s).
The point is that I propose a cluster of pixels based on a real vehicle, for a game about vehicles that exist in real life. Since it is a video game (not a real world), any cluster of pixels can appear in it, creating anything, for example a French Panther, an American A6M Zero or a Japanese Ju 87 K-1. So I don’t understand the objections in this matter, you can do anything and add anything in games. That’s all I have to say
1 Like
I object to it because there isn’t any point to it, and all it does is contribute to making nations less unique when an indigenous vehicle can fill the role just as well, and if we use the precedent for including a captured vehicle into a TT simply because the it was captured, then you could justify almost every Axis vehicle being put into the Allied TTs, which would make Axis TTs largely pointless. While adding something like the JU 87 to Japan wouldn’t suddenly make Germany pointless to grind overnight, I don’t see the point in making the problem worse. As for the French Panthers and similar, those get a pass as, while they are captured/reparations, they were put into service by the ‘captor’ nations which cannot be said with most captured vehicles, at least as far as what is present in War Thunder is concerned. If I had my way, the US wouldn’t have any captured or evaluated foreign aircraft at all for the reasons I’ve already outlined.
This is not a question of could, it is a matter of should.
Maybe you’re right, the future will judge it. But your opinion won’t make me remove this suggestion, plus I’m planning more captured vehicles for Japan, so you’ll have nowhere to complain. Have a nice day
3 Likes
Eh why not, have a +1 from me. It could make for a somewhat neat premium, plus it’s a variant we don’t yet have in-game so that’s definitely a bonus
3 Likes