It looks similar yes, but Ive looked it up and it seems the designers used info some from captured German FW-190, which kinda surprised me.
But it’s also like, if multiple parties (be it natural evolution, or development of a vehicle or building or whatever), things are bound to look similar, like the Concorde and Tu-144; 1 goal, 2 seperate parties, similar result.
Simply, there are different rules for the full tech-tree and the sub-tree.
As indicated by comments, that the Greek heli is unlikely to move to its new home.
So:
Independent/full tree: Premium and reward vehicle will join the new home (at some point, with premium moving right away)
Sub-tree: premium and event stuff won’t move and join them.
The KV-1 situation has not changed. If it would have, then we would have updated about it.
The Merkava was a key tank for the Israeli tree.
Should something change for another vehicle in the future, then we would update about that too. But currently there is none. So the answer regarding the KV-1B remains for now.
MB.5 “Stretched Mustang”
CAC-15 “Chubby Mustang”
Just kidding XD
i think i asked already but never got a response could this THREE YEAR OLD btw report be nudged for the cheiftains reload speed i think its about time with the mk10/900 uptier and the mk3 and 5 at the same br as tanks with a bigger gun and less than half the reload time
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/FGRPzxUVcn7Y
Again why is only the Merkava considered a key vehicle? Why are other vehicles that are important to other trees not given the same treatment?
You keep going around my question
Reload speeds are subject to balancing considerations. Not nudging.
that is pretty lame but i appreciate the honesty
Because it is the main Israeli domestic tank. Known internationally as such and a key tank for their line-ups.
I have personally answered you numerous times on the KV-1B. As mentioned, that answer has not changed. Continually spamming me about it will not do so. Please stop.
Man even Smin showed to unprompted to radio this guy lmao
i was suprised the only time me and smin communicate is me angering him with challenger questions
For a small list, here’s the ones that I could find:
(Obviously only vehicles from nations that have permanently fixed placement in another techtree)
There’s also a handful that were carried over already, like the Merkava Mk.1, Type 62, D.520 and others, those weren’t included in the list
No you didn’t read my questions you keep assuming something. You only now sort of answered that. It’s the fact that the Merkava is the first of Israels uniquely developed tanks. I asked why is the KV-1B treated differently from the Merkava.
Since I originally asked for the KV to fill a BR gap but that wasn’t why the Merkava was added entirely, it was also added because of its historical significance to their domestic tank line.
That makes sense do I agree that Finland still gets treated like dirt every update no, but I get the devs decision but I do ask that you read my questions. You could’ve immediately explained that it wasn’t just BR but also historically significant via being the first production Merkava.
Yes I get things change but it would be better to explain why they got preferred treatment compared to others in the future.
Let’s hope they do, exclusivity in no game should get to the point where it hurts other aspects like8in this case) nation placement, especially when the value of the lineup is still there no matter what.
I have read everything. Im afraid its you not reading here.
The KV-1B is being treated no differently from all other previous event vehicles in other trees. The Merkava was the exception here, as I have explained. Not the other way around.
Currently, nothing has changed regarding the KV-1B. So there is no new answer to provide you. As I have explained numerous times now. The Merkava was not connected to the KV-1B and was introduced to the Israeli tree for its own standalone reasons. Which have been explained to you.
You are attempting to apply these to the KV-1B. Which is clear. However as I have explained, the situation regarding the KV-1B and our answers for it have not changed. So asking me the same question over and over is sadly not going to yield a different response. Not because your question is being “ignored”. But because you are applying a different case to an unrelated (besides the fact they are both past event vehicles) vehicle.
So to reiterate. The answer and thus current plans for the KV-1B have not changed. If they do, then we would answer as such. As they have not, there is no new answer to provide you. This will be the final response on the matter and a final warning on the subject please. I have answered you personally on this not just today, but more times than can be counted. Please do not derail further.
I doubt it but I can hope, I’ve been waiting for Finland to get treated fairly since it was added but still nothing. Maybe years from now it might be a decent addition when gaijin stops actively doing their best to ruin it.
Same goes for the other subs that have been mishandled throughout their time in game.
i have another unrelated question is the double missile rack pylons for the su30s taken from a su30 source or something for the su35 because as far as im aware the only photo evidence is on the su35
But the amount of sub-tree’s just keeps on piling up
Su-30s have been seen in combat footage with them. They are cross compatible with the Flanker family.
Getting back on track since June is the highest chance to be a naval theme update, would this year be any different ?