That’s the same thing. You’re the one choosing to make that distinction, thus it’s simply your preference.
Vehicle A appeals to you, Vehicle B doesn’t.
1 Like
Yeah, for example UK has F-111C from UK main wanting an F-111 even though UK did not design or operate them and it wasn’t a subtree vehicle
This guy, man.
So I take it then you would be fine if we axed Isreal TT and put it in US. Then Axed China put it in USSR. Axed Swed and Italy throw them in Germany and France?
That’s where you wrong, slightly wrong since we did brought them and starting to build 2 of them in good time but then got squatted on mid way through construction. The US didn’t need two F-111’s in the same update and the C was close to our K so gaijin thought it was a good replacement
2 Likes
Never actually operated or even flown, for all we know it could have just not made it off the runway. And since it’s not naval unfinished prototype doesn’t count
And the C is not very close to the K, no more than the C is close to the A or F
Anyway the C still tech flew under a UK flag lol
Eh that doesn’t really mean anything whatsoever though, a similar flag doesn’t make it UK design or opertaed airplane. Anyways isn’t it worse than the tornado at the same BR ?
It had some potential as a US or UK squadron vehicle but is dumb in main UK tree
I mean it’s better than an Indian Mig-27K : P
Plus we needed a heavy bomber
Ok, let’s remove C&P, now where to stop? After the Firefly? Jumbo? Only the base M4 is left? Simply put there is no stopping point as justification to remove a C&P will grow until there are less than 5 vehicles in the game.
After all, C&P is subjective.
And what about international projects? who gets to keep the vehicle? After all, you guys said it: “Any vehicle shared across trees degrades them”
Meaning only one nation is allowed to keep it, else all of them need to be removed.
4 Likes
That’s why you made tornado no? It can haul a fair bit of stuff too
If it was a squadron vehicle you could’ve used it as well
Because new turret and armor is the exact same tank as before, and a different hull turret and gun for the firefly make it the same as a standard M4 75
What is copy paste is Italy getting a zsu-57 they never operated or even tested through Hungary subtree that is pound for pound the same vehicle as the one in the Russian tree
No one has issues with International projects. It is foreign purchase/export.
It is especially starting to get out of hand with suggestions being made solely off X nation tested Y vehicle so they should get it.
1 Like
Tornado bomb load isn’t on the same level as a F-111, in fact it has twice the bomb load as the Tornado which we never had an that could baring the Vulcan
Well that’s just different UK design and doctrine, and btw I’m all for adding big guys like the Vulcan to fill that role faithfully to the UK
British Commonwealth & Dominion operated tho
1 Like
So what you’re saying is that if Italy-the-country had used the ZSU-57 in the real world, then it would be okay to have it in the Italian WT tree?
Even though in pure WT terms there’s no actual difference, it’s a ZSU-57 in the Italian tree either way?
Time to remove the Tornado’s, AV-8s and the eurofighter lol
Australia military alliance with US is stronger and far more meaningful than between UK, and it’s a vehicle made in America and designed by American engineers in America, and was almost certainly tested by Air Force pilots before delivery.
0 involvement by UK in that project
Yes, because then it is faithful to Italy military history and what they actually used