Belgian M47s were modified with LRFs? It does remind me of the similar upgrade conducted on the JPz 4-5.
At least we keep the a10 f14 and hopefully soon the F-22 and YF-23
1 Like
You did give the F-14 to Iran, though it’s in the US tree in game you can’t say you didn’t export it
I mean for in game purposes we keep the f14 and the others in US. And hopefully every advanced eagle
Yeah, a Cobelda FCS, also fitted to the Leopard 1 tank:
https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/document/cia-rdp84m00044r000200890001-1
1 Like
Just saying, people like to brush off copy paste, but the issue grows with every example added.
1 Like
It’s only an issue if you want it to be an issue, you can just as well argue it’s accurate representation
2 Likes
Well in ground RB the match maker is all over the place anyway it wasn’t like pre 17 when we had actual historical match maker.
Very interesting, it’s an indigenous Belgian upgrade that would help me justify seeing some of their less original vehicles in-game. After all, an LRF with HEATFS is quite the potent combo.
1 Like
I mean ahistorical clashing isn’t really related to C&P, it’s a different issue entirely. Copy paste is simply irritating because it results in more uneventful encounters and a lost incentive to play a nation’s unique stock in preference to those of foreign countries.
For example, if we were to give Japan Stuarts, M8 LACs, and captured Russian vehicles, there would not doubt be less interest in the admittedly weaker Ke-Ni and I-Go-Ko.
Likewise, do you not think that it would be disappointing to see people rack up kills in a Belgian or French M46 rather than say, a French vehicle that would actually represent the tree?
1 Like
In my view is, if that country service it then it should be added
2 Likes
It is mostly a personal issue, but when I play 4.0 now, I cannot help but think about all of the more interesting artillery vehicles that would make me say “wow, I should really try out this nation, that tank looks pretty fun”. It gnaws away the point of nations, if they aren’t showcasing their vehicles.
That is actually more an issue of BR compression than anything, if the Stuarts, and M8s are so much better that they entice Japanese players away from domestic vehicles, to a detriment, then the balance is the issue, not the vehicles themselves, as you could very easily say that the same issue entices people away from Japan and towards “stronger” trees like the US and Russia.
The “issue of C&P” has never been clearly defined and generally seems to be based on a mix of feelings and opinions about who should have what with no specific logic to it. If you can define the issue to an enforceable degree, then great, but as far as I see it any definition of the “issue of C&P” requires too many exceptions to be implemented realistically
5 Likes
I think it would be interesting to see historical arsenals in a separate game mode, but as it stands, multiplayer is not really suitable for this.
That’s the think first they go oh it’s C&P then it’s a question of need and finally they end up saying they don’t like it
2 Likes
See i think copy and paste is fine but only if no domestic or unique options are available. No reason to add a copy paste vehicle if either a domestic version exists or unique modified
It gets better, the M47 in Belgian service had a MECAR (a Belgian Munitions Giant) APFSDS round.
| Designation | Gun | Caliber | Type | Velocity | Weight | Penetration | Notes | Fire rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M670 | M36/M41 (Patton) | 90 mm | APFSDS | 1500 m/s | 3,65 kg (2,1 penetrator) | Should be a bit less than 300 mm | Interesting APFSDS for M47 and M48 Developed by MECAR |
3 Likes
Maybe low tier Japan isn’t the best example, but my point is that different nations tend to have different styles of vehicle, and when players are forced to choose between one or another (forced meaning the choice of vehicle in which to play in a match), chances are they’re going to choose one from one of the arguably easier nations such as USA, Germany, or USSR.
It sounds petty but I believe it truly does effect the legacy that different playable countries leave behind. Add a captured T-34 (1940) to Italy and the P40 suddenly becomes undesirable, a Norwegian Stug and Panzer III in Sweden may remove attention from the homegrown Strv m/42 and Pvkv series.
I hope you understand my point; it is of course entirely subjective but I will not drop it anytime soon.
Holy moly, it does get better
Stug and panzer iv would literally be better for most players, explain why anyone would play the PVKV IV when the M10 exists at .3 higher with better armor and gun? Again if vehicles on minor nation got BR’s to match their actual performance that wasn’t determined by the good players people may be more interested.
Who wants to play half the beginning frnech or Japanese vehicles? Their big and have essentially no armor (not the french for this case lol but still no pen.) Japan imo is good at 1.7 and up there are a few rough vehicles but those vehicles are just abysmal. Its why when finland dropped and added actually good vehicles on a lineup it made sweden actually fun below 10.0 too bad the 3.7 free to play lineup instantly got butchered when they put an unarmored t34 at the same br as the t34 and the KV-1B/E
Again gaijin need to make the vehicles that suck either better by lowering their BR or juat not adding them. Again BR’s are way too compressed for a lot of vehicles.