This sums up the issue perfectly, most appreciated
2 Likes
Why would we be upset if another nation got 2 top tiers? Happens all the time.
2 Likes
So the worst nation gets a decent ship, while the much better nation can wait and get it later, this makes perfect sense.
Heck, this is completely ignoring the elephant in the room that is said much better nation getting an even better ship at the same time.
Britain is doing just fine.
1 Like
The worst navy in ww2 doesn’t mean it’s the worst navy in War Thunder lol That’s the thing you know, Soviets navy quite far from the worst in War Thunder.
While Britain one of the best navy in ww2 (and before), is mediocre in WT when it comes to top tier.
You see where’s the problem?
And I’m not saying Soviet tt shouldn’t get Arkangelsk. They should get it but not before Britain.
They should rather give them Stalingrad. And later Arkangelsk to Soviets, and Britain (same class ship)
5 Likes
As before, where something originated is always irrelevant. Britain is getting an even better Nelson-class this patch and can wait for a Revenge.
Unless you’d prefer Britain got a Revenge now and the Nelson was delayed to whenever the eventual Revenge will release…
A Stalingrad will come, but definitely a bit later on.
Your talking like they are equivalent. They aren’t. Revenge is a weaker side grade to hood.
I prefer Britain to have QE, and R classes in the tech tree already, and get Nelson class now. As it suppose to be.
If Britain is not getting R class then Soviets shouldn’t get it as well. Stalingrad have been waiting, collecting dust for a very long time. I would rather have that in Soviet tt
7 Likes
Stalingrad would be the next thing that comes.
Y’all keep making this point but it ignores the problem. It’s not about the quantity, it’s about the quality. Most of them are filler. You say ‘capitol ship’ instead of BB to make it seem like Britain has been treated well in naval. It hasn’t. It’s only competitive 7.0 is an event vehicle. Not to mention it was a QE added as an event before it came to TT. Getting Rodney and an R class to fill out a 7.0 lineup is perfectly reasonable. But in no way should another nation receive another nations major class of BB before it does.
It is definitely not. Why do you think there is such an outrage about this besides the fact that Russia is getting a R class before Britain.
Dollar sums it up perfectly in this response. Britain has been neglected in naval. That’s not up for discussion. Neither is the idea that Russia should get a R class before Britain.
3 Likes
They do not need to be Delayed
Its a Simple Copy paste job
Its not illegal to have 2 top tier ships arrive in the same patch
R class is of British Design, it should come at the same time as the Arkhangelsk, A design operated by the country of lease should not need to wait longer than the leasee to get it, it would be like if USA having got its M109 and then later every other nation getting theirs the next patch, there is no need to wait, and its also as if the UK tree got M4 Sherman before the US tree. There is no reason for it to be delayed.
5 Likes
Compare the TTs. Compare the Quantity and Quality of USSR 7.0s and British 7.0s. Then get back to me.
The term for this is “entitlement”.
So moving the goalposts to one specific BR and also the minutia of what’s deemed “meta”, and all that silliness.
Anything can be made to sound “unfair” if the goalposts are shifted and arranged just so.
It’s unreasonable to expect this from a game design perspective. Britain is getting what will be one of the best ships in the game. Getting a second battleship in the same patch would definitely be out of place, especially as it would take a battleship away from a future patch, where in turn “Britain mains” would complain they’re getting “nothing” in that patch.
Hyped and/or “upgrade” vehicles for a single nation are always spread out across patches, it’s just good business.
2 Likes
Entitlement? Ok so Russia is entitled to your 5th 7.0 Tech tree ship, and 4th 7.0 tech tree battleship
but were acting “Entitled” when Britain is getting its 3rd tech tree 7.0 ship and 2nd 7.0 Tech tree Battleship?
Double standard if I ever saw one
1 Like
The goalpost was set there in the first place my friend. This topic is about Britain getting competitive top tier. Which means 7.0.
Did USA not get 2 new rank 7s in one Update a while ago? Is Japan not getting 2 new rank 8s at 13.7 this update? Why can’t there be two top be vehicles in a TT? This is the December update. Why not make it big? And a much needed addition for Britain.
3 Likes
The term for everything you have posted here is “obvious Bias”
3 Likes
How is it too much to ask? Nations get multiple top tiers all the time. Sure usually it’s Russia, America or Germany but it can and does happen.
5 Likes
I’m very thankfully not a “nation main”, so this makes no sense.
Top-tier means, at minimum, the top bracket; this is 6.0-7.0. More prosaically, it means “capital ships”.
Trying to argue about who has the best and/or how many of the specifically-top-BR-number vehicles is a huge part of why theses parts of the Air and Ground communities are so insufferably obnoxious and whiny. Don’t bring that over to Naval.
Bias from someone who plays Naval, Air, and Ground across every nation (except Israel)? That’s… hilarious.
The only “bias” I have is towards adding more WWII stuff.
In Naval?
And which of those brs does Britain lack the most in?
You ever thing that maybe that’s because a strong line up matters?. Britain getting Rodney, a R class, to go with hood would give them a full 7.0 lineup.
Then why are you against Britain being able to compete at 7.0?
Why should it matter?
1 Like
Marlborough?
1 Like
Oh is it 7.0? Says 6.7 on the wiki. I can’t check the actual game rn.