Fake AH-64 service.
Montana.
A-150.
Obviously fake list.
3 Likes
Probably fake indeed, but I’m not gonna lie; given Soyuz’s implementation, Montana and A-150 would be warmly welcome, hahah.
Either of those would be more grounded and sensible than Soyuz’s current implementation; despite not being laid down, their construction was actually feasible. Soyuz on the other hand is depicted with characteristics that could not possibly have ever been constructed with.
Maybe Montana and A-150 would then be able to counter Soyuz and bring some balance to Top Tier! Hopefullly, with 3x such powerful ships, we would finally be seeing 9.0/9.3. Alsace and Lion would be two other semi-historical ships that could be added as counterparts.
H-39 will help Germany, but I doubt it will be more than 8.7 or even 8.3 material, as it’s kind of a Bismarck sidegrade or marginal upgrade at best, but it will be welcome for lineup reasons and also as an interesting materialisation of the “what if they DID finish the improved Bismarck style ship?” premise.
1 Like
Soyuz was laid down, production began, equivalent to M10 Booker.
Montana & A-150 were never laid down; adding them would actually change the rules of addition.
I have no opinions on changing the rules of addition, personally.
All I know is ships have the strictest rules out of all vehicle types.
Next step is adding the Space Battleship Yamato
Hmm, I feel the Death Star would be a solid 5.7 and the Ring a 6.0
Yeah but we have AESA now so its automatically better :)))
Issue is: Gaijin gave Soyuz an armor which the Soviets couldn’t possibly have constructed.
Montana and A-159 were far more sensible and viable projects than the Soyuz Gaijin implemented.
I wouldn’t be so mad about Soyuz if it had its realistic low quality 0.9x RHA multipliers instead of top notch 1.1x Cemented multipliers.
The reason why the armor was SO insanely thick was to compensate for the weaker material… yet Gaijin gave it both the thickness to offset the weaker material, AND material of which lack they couldn’t make such thickness plates.
2 Likes
muhhhhhh…
5 Likes
Lol. A little low for planet-destroying superweapons, but then again, I doubt deleting the map gives “target destroyed” notifications.
1 Like
Your solution to a bad implemented ship is more bad implemented ships?
1 Like
Colony Laser 3.7
Solar System II 4.0
Some state metal was cut for them so it could happen… 😁😁😁
2 Likes
1- Speculative.
They gave what was intended during construction, which it was under construction.
To claim they couldn’t follow through is speculative, because it was bombed into cancellation prior to getting to that point.
2- Pure fictional speculation, as well as a double standard.
On top of being ships that were never laid down to begin with, causing a false equivalence.
Germany in-game has the most laid-down ships of any tech tree, BTW. As well as having the most powerful 7.7 BB.
Subjective standards, & speculation are not solutions to War Thunder’s strict standards.
The ideas in your post have consequences much further than benefitting the Soviets.
2 Likes
If we get carrier lines I hope USA can get her USS United States (CVA-58) (keel laid down)
Keel plate
Would be interesting in the future of naval with missile ships, carriers, and subs sending a heavy bomber to handle a enemy ship. Would also be a cool AI easy to land on.
I don’t believe that’s quite true but idk
I’m aware, just pointing out the links/similarities the aircraft share, and that it actually extends beyond it being the same base model and Python 5s.
Probably never gonna happen, best you can hope for is Emil 1 with Cent MK.10 turret or AKV 151
Gneisenau, Ersatz Yorck, Mackensen, SMS Sachsen, Z15, Z51, Z52, Z46, Z47 all have project status in game.
Although idk about exact condition of each one, since Gaijin calls RN Conte di Cavour a “project”, because in the game it has planned AA refit.
Can’t say about coastal fleet.
Was built.
Was also built although she was given to the Soviets in 38