Yeah this is true.
Would it be the end of the world if Britain got 2x BBs in the same update?
I honestly dont think it would matter.
But If I had to choose between an R-Class and a Late-refit KGV. I think KGV would win
2 Likes
no
1 Like
Idk, im personally not touching the russian tech tree until an r is added to Britain, haven’t since it was added
I wouldnt do that anyway.
But yeah, it is annoying
I was actually planning on grinding the russian tree with murmansk before they added the r class
I enjoy Naval more than ground and have been tempted to grind another naval tree, but I just cant bring myself to do it.
I haven’t played a single russian vehicle in nearly 6 months now
1 Like
Hahaha
And its gonna stay that way until an r class is added, originally i didn’t play anything russian designed in any tech tree but warspite made other trees ok but russian tree no
1 Like
yes, having your stuff added to other tree first is pretty infuriating. AV-8B+ all over again
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
M4A3E2 Jumbo and M4/T26 are essentially the same tank. /s
They aren’t
@Morvran
Those Chieftains should be tech tree, as they fill holes.
Challenger 1 wouldn’t fill a hole, and it’s also far more difficult to research and would elongate the development time for a squadron vehicle, it also came after T-90S was chosen.
Then you have bad-faith arguments of “Gaijin doesn’t care about Britain cause they don’t have a squadron vehicle.” cause the Challenger Falcon takes an extra year over researching a vehicle that has plenty of English-language export documentation.
Stop implying Challenger 3 is copy-paste by calling unique vehicles what they aren’t.
Oh, and yes, 1 year is indeed faster than 3+ years which was the alternative.
I’m here stuck defending the British tech tree and Italian tech tree.
@Mitchverr
Hawk would’ve slowed down development for other vehicles, which could’ve caused one more major update without Typhoons.
Also your post calling SAAB liars is just sad.
1 Like
T-90a and t-90s actually are the same, a is a variant of the export s model of the t-90, a is literally the s adopted into russian army service
2 Likes
well i have time and the round will still have more exploive filler after the nerf than it should have
total explosive weight of the M380A1 is 18.69lb, including the propellant to fire it
and we also know that it uses the same propellant as the M329A1
with the M329A1 being a sabot it only has the propellant as an explosive, which ammounts to 17.5lb
18.69lb - 17.5 lb = 1.19lb
1.19lb = 0.54kg
so the round has more explosive filler after the nerf than it has IRL
1 Like
But seriously though Italy needs a squadron vehicle
and what vehicle would you like to give him?
So they just used a website journal?