For the US, for Britain and for France, Gib B-25C to all users
Did I say that?
There is no mention of the US in your post
not now, but then again, the US tree should except this even more than the french tree, and once that’s the case, then yes, it is copypaste, specially if other operators get theirs too, which may include britain, russia, china, possibly even italy and indonesia
Because this topic is about the French one.
The Fins/Swedes got the Fokker D.XXI before the Dutch, noone complaining about that.
Copy-paste means more effort to be used on unique aircraft.
B-25J added to France for example takes away no time from other French vehicles if it’s truly copy-paste.
Copy-paste is uncommon in War Thunder as is, but it does mean more time for dev teams to work on unique vehicles.
B-25C is not copy-paste regardless.
1 Like
Copy-paste means more effort to be used on unique aircraft.
i don’t believe that for a single second. not when relatively easy additions to make, like SO.8000-2, or Lorraine 155 Mle.51 ; are still on the table.
B-25C is not copy-paste
it will be, wether its on the update its added or a little later, gaijin is just that predictable.
2 Likes
Red herring fallacy.
Vehicles not being in-game is not proof.
Proof would be average vehicles added each update.
In 2024 the average vehicle per update was ~42.
In 2025 that increased to ~48.
& in 2026 so far the average per update is over 50.
And that’s within only adding 2 - 6 copy-paste vehicles more than in 2024.
Also, service vehicles with English documetnation are the easiest additions.
1 Like
+1 copypaste
1 Like
Well said
Granted, at least some of those countries modified their and/or used different armaments compared to the baseline ones. For example, the Indonesian B-25J would have its waist gunners removed and be able to carry Soviet Bombs and rocket pods.
Red herring fallacy.
that’s an ‘argument from fallacy’, the exemples provided clearly illustrate why the statement “Copy-paste means more effort to be used on unique aircraft.” is false by gaijin’s own track record. even if they do not directly relate to the B-25C (which they indirectly do, as french TT exemples)
Vehicles not being in-game is not proof.
we could have said the same about the M44, which did not exist before “storm warning”, but is not any less of a copypasted vehicle nowadays
the very same could easily happen with the B-25C, and that the latter is a hypothetical does not make it less likely or less problematic
And that’s within only adding 2 - 6 copy-paste vehicles more than in 2024.
“Storm warning” (december 2024) alone had 10 (five M44s, three Strelas, the F84G and the Alphajet A) with “Seek and Destroy” and “Alpha strike” also happenning in 2024, and also bringing their own batch of copies too.
Also, service vehicles with English documetnation are the easiest additions.
that and the fact that suggestions like these exist, are voted-for and defended, are the causes behind all the copypasta.
its generally easier for gaijin to copy a vehicle that’s easy to source (and possibly already modelled) into as many tech trees as they can get away with, so they can claim its a “new addition to the tree” and casually forget about the alternatives.
1 Like
So… enlighten us by specifying what bombers those are in the 3.3-4.3?
i can think of at least the Latécoère 570, the SNCAC NC.150, the Nord “Noroit” 1401 &/or 1402, and possibly the MB.175 although that one is probably better foldered under the 175T
presuming that the B-25C would be 3.3-3.7 medium bomber, i’m fairly confident that at least one of those would make the cut for that role & bracket. and possibly even help fill the rest of the gap.
…and even if they do not exactly play or feel or look like the B-25C, that’s the whole point
(also, all of the above suggestions were also written by Mathll, thank you Mathll. that said i do not like the copy-paste suggestions. no, thank you Mathll. otherwise, keep cooking Mathll)
3.0 at best.
3.7 at best, would be a good sister bomber to the B-25s.
2.7 at best for both.
i’d argue we have at least one 3.3 and one 3.7, which could cover both BRs a B-25C might, meaning : we do not need to give it france; and because its a North American airframe, the US tree can have it, and keep it…
…rather than pulling another “Storm (of M44s) Warning”, all over again.
Vehicles aren’t added because of need, they’re added cause they’re cool.
Stop opposing vehicles to France.
French tech tree M44 is awesome as well.
1 Like
Vehicles aren’t added because of need, they’re added cause they’re cool.
that’s not what has been communicated in the “Duplicate Vehicles : why we add them” post. (link)
Stop opposing vehicles to France.
i literally just asked for five (5) seperate french bombers.
what i’m opposing isn’t “vehicles to france”, its, specifically : copy-paste
French tech tree M44 is awesome as well.
…aaand that’s precisely why we’re still waiting for : the Lorraine 155, or the AMX mk.61 / 62 / F3, or the FV433 “Abbot”, or the Semovente da 149/40
the M44 was faster to add, easier to spam and clearly you like it, so why bother with the rest?
Honestly, I’m not even sure that can be added, since it relies on a completely separate vehicle to carry its ammunition and only carries the one round already in the breach. Also, I’m pretty sure it lacks direct-fire capability.