Guess there’s actually not much copy and paste for the Nordic countries by your point.
Most of our equipment is modified in some way, even our Leopards though personally I’m more so a fan of aircraft and 8.x-9.x vehicles
1 Like
I’ve seen people complain when I asked for the M55 Bedford or the Sisu 6x6 because of the gun
2 Likes
I’d say that there are levels to copy-paste and not all copy-paste is bad.
When the copy-paste is done in places where domestic or otherwise unique vehicles could be added, it becomes a problem.
If it’s done for the sake of padding out a tech-tree it’s usually just annoying and makes Gaijin look very lazy.
When the only difference is the ammo/ordnance, that is a model copy-paste job, but at least it has some gameplay difference.
As soon as the model features changes, it isn’t really copy-paste anymore, but if the gameplay isn’t affected, I can understand why people would regard it as copy-paste.
6 Likes
That’s about my same stance too, it’s unfortunate gaijin skips out on unique models whenever they can unfortunately
4 Likes
Gotta love those M109s and M44s
bible words there, exactly my stance too just like Pheonix said, it’s just that they love to de-unique-fyi wathever copy paste possible and oh boy the love to take any chance possible…
1 Like
one thing to realise is that people have varying definitions of “copy and paste”, some things I wouldn’t consider copy and paste, others would consider copy and paste
4 Likes
Tbf most of them are different short barrel smoke launcher roof gun ect, I just think they should’ve been spaced out and domestic options should’ve been looked at first over one large C&P
It’s like I could ask for the Danish M109A3 but Norways model has ammo from Bofors which makes it different.
1 Like
“It’s your nations fault for exporting/importing so many vehicles”
No, it’s Gaijins fault for skipping over suggestions for unique additions and adding copies of vehicles just for the sake of adding more vehicles to a tree
6 Likes
Not like that’s inherently a bad thing or “just for the sake of adding more vehicles”, the Tor and Osa for Israel are perfect examples.
5 Likes
Tbf id call the Finnish one C&P easy, I bug reported it when it first came out and nothing has come from it.
It has the exact same weight while stock as the Russian 1941 model which has the add on armor upgrade which increases the weight from 31.1t to 31.3t, the Finnish version without any of the actual parts that the Fins put on and less parts than the Russian yet it has the weight of 31.3t
Nothing about that vehicle was given care of love from gaijin, if you look at the T-34 I showed earlier even that model has the headlight covers.
1 Like
I wouldn’t say that the Tor and OSA were just added for the sake of adding more vehicles, but yes, there can be cases where that is acceptable
3 Likes
That just shows how much more they used to care about certain vehicles back then
I’m talking in general. 60m to 30m wouldn’t hurt the game. Could still multi-path just mostly on flat maps. Multi-path gameplay isn’t that bad. But it’s what most players do in sim lobbies because they don’t know how to notch right. Most players would still stick to Denmark or Tunisia in sim anyway.
1 Like
My point is that a lot of copy and paste is often seen as “just for the sake of it” when these vehicles usually add something to a lineup. We’ve also been told before that copy and paste doesn’t take away from their work (rather than them “skipping over suggestions for unique additions”), but whether you believe that or not is up to you ^^
5 Likes
The problem with that is that in that one “recent” Q&A, we’ve been told that they didn’t really want to add the AS90, because Britain already had the M109 and the G6, so I am very much inclined to not believe the statement that copy-paste doesn’t take away from the work on other vehicles.
2 Likes
At 30m you are pretty much going to get hit by a missile most of the time, it just turns Multipath from something somewhat-reliable to something gimmicky. It also will probably create a situation where missiles w/ a larger warhead are now pretty much immune to multipath.
1 Like
the more we get cases such as this the more Mauswaffe’s suggestion is shining as our comet XD
1 Like
I don’t recall this, was this in the last Q&A? All I could find was this;
After several rounds of that, we just decided that whenever possible, we’ll include those shared vehicles in multiple tech trees right away.
That doesn’t mean, of course, that we don’t have plans to add unique vehicles to the game — far from it. Those are still being added, and more are planned.
For instance, we’ve got unique self-propelled artillery vehicles and other vehicles in the works. So we’re doing both: shared designs and original ones.
(YouTube Transcript)
It’s why it hard to call it a proper problem. And more “I just hate these nations/additions and want to labed it” so I can get others to call it a problem.
There is a reason why if I held what constantly moving description of C&P is, I’d confidently be able to call every vehicle in War Thunder C&P and there is Zero unique vehicles in War Thunder
Same family
Plays like something else
Share a part with something else
Etc.
Every vehicle in the world meets two or more of these complaints. Especially stuff like MBTs and Aircraft.
3 Likes