Again, I still dont understand why this is needed over our own domestic top tier coastal options.
Id still much rather see a stuff like the Type 21 than a soviet PT boat.
Given their standardisation and the information in the latest report, i dont know why it should differ from anyone else.
I thought they got rid of national documents and went with a “one way of doing it for all”. So just model it the same way as everyone else’s.
Again, we are talking about a new addition in a year or 2 not next week. So things might have changed by then. But the point is, It can be added eventually if the need arises. But at the moment, the CR2s would be competitive if they were modeled even half correctly and this is largely irrelevant to whether or not India should be added to our TT because they add no alternative that is even better than the CR1.
Okay, so it seems our opinion is on the horizion and never meet crosses, so I’ll end it here with my final opinion.
Because their purpose is difference. Frigates, are just smalller and weaker destroyers in overall games, not a true coastal ‘boat’ that hides from capital ships’ eye and capture. And in that case, Royal Navy, even with export version, cannot give anything over Brave Borderer, which is not a competitive option for now, and even more for later as Soviet still didn’t get their best boat(even it is not missile boat)
I do agree British frigates now are okay. I do enjoy HMS Leopard, and I’ll soon play HMCS Terra Nova too. But for top BR naval, boat is what needed, not frigate.
Even with fully correcting Challenger 2, I don’t think it would be competitive even with BR decompression, as Challenger 2 does not fit to the gameplay meta of this game. I do love challenger 2, which is the only tank that I bought book about, but I do also insist that Challenger 2 is not well suited to point-capturing, village fighting game.
Perhaps, but I still dont understand what this has to do with Britain needing India. And rather an argument to get our multiple missing top tier IFV options
I see a future for Britain as the king of Support. With strong SPAA, IFVs, Sniper tanks and great CAS
Yet you think that india in israel would be less out of place than in UK.
just selling and upgrading weapons and maybe some security cooperation isnt strong enough justification, otherwise, as i already mentioned, you can make some pretty shady claims, like Czech Republic to USA and such.
You cant even convince one random forum user, how do you expect to make Gaijin change its mind?
They just sell them weapons and maybe upgrade them, and share some security intelligence.
They have no mutual defense treaty.
If India didnt want to have historical connections to Britain, it shouldnt allow itself to get colonised.
Again, no mutual defense treaty. On top of not being related through geography, history, culture or geopolitical interests.
Because they have either historical, geographical or political connection or some combination of of these. Israel and India have none beside some security cooperation.
Any country that sells them weapon would “aid” india.
Any country whose geopolitical interests oppose pakistan and china would “aid” india.
Israel is not special in this case.
I can assure you its not only possible but quite easy to deny it.
It’s nothing near a T-90, why are you people so close minded? not everything Indian is Copy/Paste even the Copy/Paste that does exist is heavily modified.
stop argue with him.
he just wants NATO C&P from the place that not be part of the British subtree.
He will be very happy to see gaijin add 5 version of tornado
