Firstly, this is not to say the IJN were not powerful they most certainly were, and according to UK estimates to fight both the Germans, Italians and Japanese they needed 4 years of aggressive ship building (keeping in mind the KGV’s took 3 to build 5). However:
The Royal Navy was only overtaken in late 1943-1944 by the US Navy, on an individual basis it was the most powerful navy until it was overtaken and this was mainly not an issue of capacity but an issue of funding and being bombed.
Often when people compare the RN and IJN its always the actions against PoW and Repulse, which were arrogant actions to have ordered and flawed but the RN also was not expecting to be engaged.
On an individual basis the RN had more ships, generally more powerful capital ship (baring of course the Yamato’s but those only entered service in 1939-40, additionally the UK had just as strong a capability of dealing with them as the US), they had more carriers though smaller.
The UK also had the advantage of radar FCS and all the tactics Japan used for nightfighting, were primarily learned from the UK. The UK also had a range advantage against many of the Japanese ships that weren’t Nagato and Yamato class ships.
The UK’s Fleet Air Arm was also the only navy at the time capable of conducting efficient night operations from carriers.
The primary advantage Japan had over the UK, was that it’s allies stretched the UK across several bases. Until WW2 hell probably even until Suez the UK was perfectly capable of being either the first or second largest naval power.
Also that the Australia (and Canada but not pacific) was included as part of the UK’s naval ‘budget’ despite being wholly independent and perfectly capable of financing a fleet that could stand up to the Japanese a lot better than the 2 ships the UK could send. Though we know they would have probably just bought British ships.
They don’t stress me out unless i’m in Hood in which case I can’t usually get shots in accurately enough to detonate the barbette. But ironically in a much worse and older BC I don’t worry about them too much.
I often fire individual turrets against US standards so I have a higher chance of detonating them.
Despite the fact that I do not think US ships are particularly good, I would like to see them be competitive. On one hand, removing the shell room detonation would make them unkillable and would be ahistorical, on the other hand, it must be infuriating to get killed by a ship who is also famous for detonating.
So many of the sub-tree problems would be solved if they were treated as a full nation and given its own tab(s) for air, ground and naval.
As pointed out the only time we’d see unique stuff as TT is if it’s a new full nation(and only 1-2 nations). So have sub-trees act like full new nations we wouldn’t see all its unique stuff end up premium and event like we have lately.
There are a few other things that need to end like the “German priority” with placements. and as said keeping event stuff locked to an old nation.
Why did you need to message me about harm? I never mentioned it, also thats up to gaijin to add or not. I doubt the F18 will be useful CAS wise like the gimped gripens are since sweden usually gets shafted with CAS being implemented properly. Doesn’t matter im happy the gripens are decent for CAS but the people that think the F16C is worse are actual brainlets.
Regardless neither of us had any mention of Harm so why mention it? We literally weren’t even talking about the f18
Yeah, you know they are still missing their 5th pylon right? Regardless the f18 would have to bring something really strong to be better than the gripen. Also gaijin can and will probably add armaments to vehicles even if the nation didn’t use it because of balance, they just need to be able to hold and use said equipment for it to be added. That is why the SAAF gripen was the first gripen to be added with ground equipment it neverbused but since people hate sweden more they tend to say AGM 65G was added to them furst despite them getting it 3 weeks after the SAAF gripen did.
Regardless these armaments should be something gaijin thinks about going forward since balance should still be a priority
It doesn’t matter? The gripen A we have now isnt even real and is artificially held back since the current C’s in game are just A models. Gaijin does this with the gripens and viggens because they have no idea how to actually add these vehicles properly. Gaijin can literally decide to make the C the MS20 upgrade regardless if said nation actually used them. I see no reason the SAAF gripen wouldn’t be given special treatment if the MS20 upgrade actually buffs it. Besides the MS20 model wont be a vehicle we see as it wouldn’t have any equipment aside from missiles to warrant it being added. At that point the Grioen NG would be more likely to be added in between the C and E considering gaijin has no idea when or how to add the gripens.
Also again? Did you actually read what i put down? Why bring up the RTAF? the gripen is rated for the AGM 65. My point was that people didn’t care that the SAAF gripen got agm 65G, people only bitched when 3 weeks later it was added to the swedish version because hur dur sweden. Despite the SAAF gripen literally having agms it never used from the very start.
Again i do not know to what extent the fins restored CAS capability so its not logical to think gaijin will make the finnish f18 on par CAS wise to the US model. I assume the three people who actually bug report and suggest stuff for sweden/finland will have to ask for it to get equipment from the US f18
We do have a pretty good idea as to a few vehicles that are coming probably in the next patch or in another patch. We have quite a few vehicles which haven’t been added that have been on the prior leak list.
Again, MS20 will not work with the meta as the airframe will hold it back additionally when the NG can fill that role but better so again a DOA vehicle if added with later EFT and Rafale. Additionally The F16AM and the RTAF have no reason to be broight up. You could’ve mentioned the JAS39C HUN and they use the agm 65G and H. So instead of going off a vehicle that isnt in game yet id suggest looking at something already here. Idk what your fascination is with the gripen MS20 considering if it was added it would literally be there to throw yet another middle finger at sweden air players. We have 2 top tier 400k rp jets that already do this dumb shit of being 1 missile 400k rp sinks we dont need another one without significant differences. Honestly with how you seem to think you might be perfect for gaijin to hire since apparently 1 small change is worthy of another 400k rp sink. Additionally by the time we get HARM any vehicle without HARM will be massively inferior so again not worth it for CAS thus again having no reason to keep bringing it up. The finnish MLU 2 will go 1 of 3 ways. Broken OP with the other F18’s, A decent Air fighter but definitely not the best. And lastly a useful CAS plane but still not bringing anything of value to CAS.
The only way to make the F18 for finland actually useful would be for it to be able to carry 10x Aim 120 and for it to be a better CAS plane than the gripen.
Regardless do not message me again if you aren’t willing to think about its position in game, if it cant logically fit into the game it has no purpose.
Just to make the topic less volatile, anniversary is coming in less than 2 months, with that being said, what are the possible event vehicles for the dreams come true? From the past 2 events we know they are:
Somewhere 1930s-1940s
Iconic for military buffs, known by almost all WT players(possibly before they start playing the game)
Meme and fun value over actual strengths
Is a land vehicle, in BR less than 7.0-ish
The list I wouldve thought of are the Japanese O-I superheavy, KV-8 flamethrower tank, M-51 Roem modified with a 155mm soltam howitzer etc.