Just accept it, your just mad you dont have it.
1 Like
Not how you make a BR suggestion, bud. You clearly write it just because you want it, despite the turret not existing and the hull being just a Panther hull.
dont care for fake slop.
didnt try for the R2Y2 and wont for the Hori same reason. im glad they are gone
1 Like
Correcting myself on this, I cannot find the mention of Flak 43 in part 3 of Vladimir Francev’s text.
If this thread covers removal of vehicles and changes that could be made to vehicles we should be able to add vehicles back.
and I kinda don’t want it current moment but it is a real vehicle so it should come back
1 Like
Tank Encyclopedia also made a video that provided info about the MM’s thickness.
Im fine with it as long as it had a prototype built with all of the parts for it built but may have never been fitted to it.
The 341 would be an example of this as i believe all the parts were built but im not sure they ever fitted. The cannons being one example.
Its less fake than the ostwind 2 they replaced it with at least lol.
1 Like
Mandela Effect’d lol
I guess it’s also possible some Flak44s were built with leftover Flak43 parts. I have no source for this and it’s based on vibes, but seems plausible since they were so similar. When they looked for markings on them they found “Flak43” on one and called it a day. Or just didn’t check, saw they looked about the same, and wrote Flak43 - assuming they did write that.
1 Like
It’s not less fake, we’re just equally uncertain about the exact statistics.
The only major difference in favour of the 341 is the existence of photographs
1 Like
Better low alt performance: speed, turn rate, less energy bleeding, a slighty better radar, more countermeasures
And yes, I own all the aircraft mentioned, and I’ve tested them all.
I’m not insisting that the MiG-29SMT’s BR should be changed, but it’s the only aircraft that clearly stands out from the rest in a positive way. And I’m not saying that based on paper stats—I’m saying it based on what the aircraft is actually capable of in Arcade Air Battles.
As I said in my original post, it would actually be in my own interest for the developers’ proposed changes to go through. However, I know they would further disrupt an already difficult-to-balance matchmaking system and make the BR logic even less consistent—for example, putting the Su-30 at the same BR as the Viggen , or even below the F-16ADF , simply doesn’t make sense.
turret was never made, hull and guns were existing but not specifically made for the 341, the ostwind in WT might not be fully accurate but since we have no pictures its hard to get it accurate
but it definetly existed as where the 341 only existed as a mockup
Cone is actually wrong there, since we now know the Ho-Ri design process was completed and five prototypes were 50% built by the end of the war, with Ho-Ri-specific cannon already made. So the real Ho-Ri would be a completely valid addition.
To be fair to him, this wasn’t known at the time.
2 Likes
I mean, same case with all those pretty knowledgable and respectable tank historians denouncing the existence of the T-34-88, when we now know better, thanks to the thorough research of someone here on the forums
5 Likes
Everything is possible, no one really knew about Panzer IV’s being equipped with 88mm besides the VFW until some images appeared of Panzer IV ausf. C and H with 88mm FlaK guns in Bory airport, Czechoslovakia.
3 Likes
if thats true why are they removing it
The Ho-Ri we have is not the one that was actually built.
1 Like
That was also in Czechoslovakia? I have a few pictures saved of those, would make for a very funny addition. Maybe as an event vehicle.
Spoiler
2 Likes
A ton of prototypes and modifications got stuck in Czechoslovakia, there are mentions of Anti-Air 2cm Panthers, weird AMR 35 with mortar, etc. . .
2 Likes
Do we know what the one that was built looks like? I’d love to see it added
It has a suggestion here on the forum. Just look up Ho-Ri II
Edit: Here
4 Likes