UHT needs the one buff that should distinguish it from the HAC
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/cj6F80mmdFmn
3 Likes
Yeah agreed as well, but generally speaking the F18A at 12.3 is pretty ridiculous as well xD its the best 12.3 in the game by miles
Seeing as Spains a major global player, heck even instrumental in developing the EF2000, will we ever see it as a sub tree or even part of a tree in the future?
It would probably have made more sense with a spanish tree within Italy than hungarian, but thats water under the bridge.
1 Like
The documentation presented so far simply supports the statements I made regarding the Tiger HAC.
I wonder how anyone can come to any conclusion other than that France has neither completed development nor ever used the Tiger UHT/HAC and the PARS LR?
The same sources also show that the Trigat LR does not correspond to the PARS 3. How could it be, if you withdraw from the program five years before the end of development?
I can live with the argument that France and Germany developed the Tiger as a joint project, and so France should have access to all variants and their equipment.
Then, to be fair, it should also be done the other way around.
The premium variant is a start.
Now, the Tiger UHT lacks the option for the Mistral and, more generally, the Spike/Mistral variant of the Tiger HAD.
3 Likes
They wont, by that standard most trees would need to share stuff, hunter F58 comes to mind.
Much like the DF105 and clovis this patch.
While I do agree though
In all fairness, its mantlet is/was BETTER protected for the longest time (it even eats/ate spall much more reliably), so much so I had made a report on it to bring the 2A7V to HU’s level protection wise:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/a2drqJJ1T155
It’s been 8 month since then :P
6 Likes
Quite a few others would be given to other nations and i can tell it would cause massive outrage.
1 Like
Like the LRF for the chieftain, been over 15 months I believe now xD
now that is a wild report, did not realize that massive of a difference
Good lord
1 Like
Then Gaijin need to make a decision to stop splitting bits and bobs here and there, or go all out.
this way just annoys everyone so far.
It gets worse tbh, cus there’s another 10 screenshots that I’ve included in the “additional files” section that isn’t visible to y’all, but basically the 2A7HU has/had on average twice to thrice the protection of the 2A7Vs all over the mantlet, in some spots as much as 5 times, examples:
And yeah, 2A7HUs mantlet basically eats all spall, making it much more resiliant to crew damage.
4 Likes
I mean a good example is the Trinity SPAA. Its a joint project of Bofors and the Swiss but who gets it? The vehicle was assembled and did almost all of its testing and assembly in sweden.
Imo both should get it. Its a joint project but you have people who want it for one nation exclusively. Same deal with the begleitpanzer ect ect. People will argue that giving it to both would take the unique aspect of the vehicle away.
Realistically you’re going to make one group upset either way
2 Likes
This is why we can’t have nice things.
That is utterly ridiculous
There is clear evidence of France conducting use of the TRIGAT LR in testing:
“In service” has never been a mandatory requirement for consideration.
Reports are welcome with clear evidence to show spesifically how the TRIGAT should be performing differently: Community Bug Reporting System
Isnt that a secondary source?
Yeah I get exactly what you mean .
I do wanna see the game balanced and nations get their own indigenious equipment xd
Its one such example of a source I had to hand. There are many others out there. France has very clearly tested and fired TRIGAT.
1 Like
Just a disclaimer that was a genuine question as I know next to nothing about these helicopters.
Just making sure, so if i can compile a report of various news reports and the likes, on say the chieftains armerment or the Shir 2 armerment It could work as a report?
As ive been focuing a lot on trying to locate both primary sources and books, which are unfortunately hidden behind either a payment or long wait times.
Thanks in advance.
The sourcing requirements for reports are available here: Community Bug Reporting System
What is appropriate source material for historical issues?
OEM Manuals (primary source):User manuals, repair manuals, factory manuals, operating manuals, technical manuals etc.Single source is required (preferred source).
Authored works (secondary source):Reference books on collections of vehicles/aircraft/ships (‘coffee table books’), biographies, specialist books, “expert” opinion publications, industry magazines etc.At least two unrelated sources required.
You need to provide the following information about the source:
- Title and if applicable: publication date, document number, ISBN;
- Author or organisation;
- Image of the cover;
- Images of all the referenced pages and their page numbers;
- References for photographs;
1 Like
Roger appreciate it.
I am aware that you nudged the reports for the UHT (Outer Rockets and Missing Mistral)
but why the heck isnt this allready fixed, like sure there are reports which are more important, but these reports are 2 years old and the HAC gets both on day 1
3 Likes