Well I was more so talking about how he said “rare example of lend lease cooperation” when he himself has made a ton of USSR lend lease copy paste suggestion
1 Like
Well, the Mustang Mk.I itself was actually a very rare Lend-Lease aircraft supplied to the Soviet Union, that’s what he was referring to… factually.
2 Likes
It was about the vehicle itself. Perhaps I should’ve worded it differently.
2 Likes
while the mustang was made to British order we did lend lease a load of them over to the sovets
Looks like AI gibberish to me.
2 Likes
Very nice suggestion.
Nevertheless i voted no.
From my pov we need to stop watering down unique characteristics of certain TTs with stuff that these nations actually rejected.
In addition this is no Lend-Lease aircraft in the classic sense as just the US had a Lend-Lease act and the UK exports of aircraft to the USSR were usually unwanted / outdated or already used aircraft - meaning that these aircraft were either a gesture of good will or just an a placebo answer to USSR requests for support.
If you write:
Why should we see it in the USSR TT?
Have a good one!
2 Likes
“invaluable” I don’t think that word means what you think it means. It means something is so useful that it’s impossible to place value on it, which would contradict the first part of the statement that they underperformed.
There are already many trainer aircraft and vehicles that where leased for trials but never adopted into service, some of which where even returned to their home nation afterwards, most of the captured trophy vehicles in game where tested and moth balled, not used in combat. So this is well within the established norms for adding something… not that Gaijin doesn’t just ignore their own guidelines to add what ever they want where ever they want.
2 Likes
+1 more lend lease in game is good lend lease.
even when it does nothing but make trees less unique and interesting? if i wanted an early mustang id play US or UK. there are many Yakolevs and Lavochkins for the USSR
1 Like
It’s not. Only things I use AI with is help with specifications and I’ll cross reference with other sources.
Oh and I’ll use it to template the specifications too.
And yes, the Mustangs weren’t really liked by Soviet Pilots, you’re welcome to do your own research.
Whilst i fully agree with this statement on a stand-alone basis - my point still stands from the watering-down perspective.
Besides the IFF issues for the fellow SB players - there is zero benefit for the USSR TT. Ever thought about a proper BR? If i see the A-36 at (Air RB) BR 2.7 a similar performing aircraft with way weaker armament has to be lower. U get a decent USSR fighter with a 20 mm at 2.3…
So we talk about an entry level aircraft for rookies or enthusiasts. There is nothing wrong with this aircraft in the UK TT.
As addition: Adding such aircraft makes either sense for players (like closing gaps) or for gaijin (adding premiums & earn money). There is neither a gap nor a lack of imho way better premium aircraft in the USSR tree.
1 Like
Then you should take my comment as a condemnation of your very bad writing.
+1, Lend-Lease Aircraft to the Soviet Union
1 Like
It looks like - i should have marked my “nice suggestion” comment with [irony/sarcasm].
Grab a beverage and read your OP again.
You will find a massive contradiction:
- You claimed that the plane saw service in th VVS
- You claimed that the plane never saw service
This kind of stuff happens either if you work for way too long on the same document or AI had a bad day.
This:
and this:
are contradicting each other.
Have a good one!
I would much prefer new and unique aircraft, and the Russian tree doesn’t have any holes that require plugging, one could argue that they lack a good high alt fighter, but the game rarely plays out at high alt and the Allison engine in the Mustang 1 sucks at altitude anyway, it was mostly used for ground attack and low level photo recon.
Take my comment as more a statement of it being in line with Gaijins policy of adding vehicles, rather than support of adding it, or of copy paste in general.
I personally prefer vehicles to have some unique modifications to justify adding them outside the nation of manufacture.
1 Like
Fine me - looks like we are on the same page.
Have a good one!
1 Like
Yes, it saw service training pilots. But I do see what you mean, I do need to change it, I meant it never saw service at the front.
This post was changed a few times, and I forgot to go back and reword certain things. Thanks.
If you say so, thanks!
gib
The key word is “handful”. The matchmaker has no context for this, so with all the people buying the soviet mustang it’ll almost be as if they’re mass produced.
1 Like