Given that the F-15IA exists as a baseline, but it’s individual model has not been delivered yet, could we expect to see these Leo 2A8 variants any time soon?.
If anyone needs it here, it’s Italy. They have three top tier tanks and two of them are the same BR as the premium Abrams.
The bottom of page 2 (through google translate): “The second phase (2027 - 2037) is instead aimed at the acquisition of: up to 132 MBT platforms, to equip no. 2 tank regiments and the institutes of training…”
It’s funny to think that the Swedish tree will get an A8 before the Danish A7.
I like the addition of the F-15IA and the A-8, but it goes to show how biased Gaijin is toward China; the inclusion of the F-16V Block 72 instead of the Block 70 was based on the fact that Taiwan has not yet received its Block 70 fighters (they have been paid for and ordered, but have not yet been delivered).
I don’t think this type of addition is a bad thing, but Gaijin should be consistent in these kinds of decisions—either they do it for all nations, or they don’t do it for any of them.
I was considering asking a CM like smin if he could provide a definitive gaijin position on vehicles,
Such as whether a vehicle or weapon has to tick the following criteria to be added:
Marketed for Sale (F-16AJ)
Sold with defined configuration (F-15IA)
Planned for production but funding cut (Ho-Ri)
Compatible but not bought (Malaysian KH-38)
Tested but not produced yet (AESA typhoon)
Etc, etc
I think the community needs to press for consistency whenever gaijin does this stuff, and having a concrete answer would allow for so many bug reporting possibilities
There is already consistency.
Your entire post is consistency.
Ho-Ri & F-16AJ are removed or to be removed vehicles.
The rest of your list is literally the consistent rules set over a decade ago.
