None have been.
And the Ho-Ri I (slopped) is actually the most advanced one with a wooden mockup done of it; while the Ho-Ri I and Ho-Ri II would be using the same hull as the Chi-Ri project (and not the opposite).
So if we don’t count the 105mm gun, the only one that left the drawing is the Ho-Ri I with the slopped UFP.
As previously explained several times now, ships have entirely different requirements to be added to the game, due to the nature of their construction:
So the comparison to the O-I here is not the same, as it a tank. Which has different requirements to be considered for the game. Sadly we cannot add something that lacks the available clear information to add in the first place.
2 Likes
or this
4 Likes
This Double Standard always bothered me. Either all project vessels get removed on the same basis as did the Planes like R2Y2 and Ground Vehicles like Panther II, or the Naval Standards get extended to Air and Ground Forces.
If Naval is such an Anti-Thesis to the core War Thunder principle of historically accurate vehicles, then it should not have been introduced in the first place.
I cannot speak for others, but I want and like unique vehicles, I play the removed German Tanks lineup almost exclusively for example. It is a shame and a mistake to remove them and add Copy Paste slop in their stead as replacements.
What were the German Tanks replaced with? Some completely unrelated American Tanks and an SPAA (Ostwind II) that is more controversial than the Coelian ever was. And then a Premium Ostwind II was sold in the Two Fronts Pack as a Premium with victory marks, as if that thing was a real vehicle that saw Combat. It did not.
What were the R2Y2’s replaced with? Copy Paste American Planes, some Thailand Paintjob, roundels and markings doesn’t make it new content.
No matter how historically inaccurate, every vehicle removed looks authentic and is grounded on some period accurate project or more.
Rather than leading this crusade against some of the best gameplay content in War Thunder, how about Gaijin Devs focus on the fake matchmaking that is a time travel mess, and more Game modes and Ground Progression that is equivalent to Air?
4 Likes
I think its probably because you don’t randomly make a Prototype Capital Ship until the plans are more or less finalised.
Even ships that had to go thru some major modifications like Ise class vs Fuso class still had their main specifications very close to the Originall designs. Or even the redesigned Kongo and Nagato classes.
Don’t forget Ersatz Yorck only had 5% of her completed compared to 20% of Sovetsky Soyuz lol
There are no domestic equals?
Either you don’t know or have forgotten, or are just ignoring the fact they did.
Let me share some equals that could have replaced the R2Y2
Ki-201
NHK
calling it a Phantom Fighter jet due to it being mostly a unknown aircraft parts (Engine cover and exhaust) were found at a university campus.
Kawasaki T-33A
D.H.115 Vampire T.55
Fuji T-1A, T-1B, T-1B-10
(Although personally I’d rather see those in the T-2/F-2 line after the Ki-200)
Fuji T-1A - Suggestions - Devs / Passed - War Thunder — official forum
Fuji T-1B Hatsutaka - Suggestions / Aircraft - War Thunder — official forum
Fuji T-1B-10/C Hatsutaka - Suggestions - Devs / Passed - War Thunder — official forum
RF-86F
Kawasaki T-4 / XT-4
6 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
5 Likes
Who’s gonna tell them?
The steel plates (probably thinner plates <50mm) for 5 Ho-Ri were completed at Yahata in the 1st half of FY1944, that is, April~September 1944
5 Likes
I guess he mistyped it with Yak-141
1 Like
There’s literally images of Maus with V2 hull and V2 turret doing testing. The surviving vehicle is the V2 turret and V1 hull.
There’s literally no issues here. It was a functioning prototype. If the model is reflecting the surviving vehicle then that’s a model issue, not a historical one.
2 Likes
Stop coping, the ho Ri never existed.
Same as the R2Y, F-16AJ and your misconception of AIM-9P, AIM-9L AIM-7F for the EJ.
It is about time Gaijin start cleaning house and remove the fictional Jap vehicles.
They also should remove the J7W, the Kikka, Ki-200 and the Chi Ri because they were never armed.
Remove the missiles on the T-2 because it never carried them in service
This is a fake document.
The Ho-Ri never went further than a wooden small scale model.
Mai faked everything around the Ho-Ri
Ong, unarmed jet trainers replacing fictional bombers?
This man is delusional.
Japan has no other alternative. Accept this, Japan needs foreign nations to become relevant.
After 1944 they are incapable of making anything good.
Shy (this dude with character nick) is back on forum to spreading misinfo with hidden (for forum rules) Japan hating and Youka_Saryn personal hating
Before someone will waist their emotions in arguing here just remind that it is same person who faked that F-4EJ Kai is missing AAM-3, faked a lot of other stuff (like T-2 never carried missiles and other stuff what was already deleted from forum) and etc
Or like an example where new made MPMS Kai with new missile was called land cruiser (wrong) and missile from 80s (just a yelling lie)
So I advice to not start useless arguing with this person here which will inevitably go into an uncontrolled fight on the forum with numerous violations of the forum rules.
8 Likes
Personally, I gotta say, I do enjoy the rules for ships since it does give us some pretty neat ones. Glad to hear that more are being considered. That said, I think the point people are trying to make here is that Gaijin has added a couple of ships with fantastical performance that have kind of upended the balance of naval power in-game. I personally don’t think Soyuz, for example, would be as controversial if she were modeled to be more historically accurate in performance.
6 Likes
Yes. This.
Gaijin’s greatest magic trick. Making Russian stuff actually good.
2 Likes
And I mean, with Soyuz, there are options to reduce the ship’s effectiveness. One idea I’ve seen is to remodel the ship’s belt armor to be RHA instead of RCA to more accurately reproduce the original Soviet plan of doing multiple thinner plates to produce her belt (since the Soviets flat-out had no ability to make armor thicker than 230mm). Additionally, they could also nerf the dispersion, because as it currently stands, she’s got better dispersion than even Iowa or Yamato. Which, for the 406mm B-37, is sheer fantasy.
3 Likes
Let me just say this; Both the Production and Prototype Ho Ri will be ten years old next year. The fact that they survived this long in the game should be celebrated. Yes, acknowledge they’re fictional vehicles, but they should’ve just been left alone and be a digital preservation for the “what-if” aspects of the project. If they were SUCH a problem before now, they either should not have been introduced in the first place or removed when Japan started getting “better” options.
I even said this in my feedback survey; The game is 10+ years, at this rate we should start seeing the wild, whacky and what-if vehicles from throughout history. If there’s enough information to work with, make good on it! Do we REALLY need another T-80 variant? Do we REALLY need another F-16 variant? If “balance” is a concern, that’s a good joke; Game balance died years ago.
Japan alone still has PLENTY of options to introduce to the game for air and ground, whether they be experimental, prototypes, projects or produced options. The BR gap between the Ka Mi (which is still missing its pontoons btw) and the Chaffee is laughably horrendous, which can easily be fulfilled by some native options like the Type 2 Ke To (an improvement to the Type 98 Ke Ni), the Type 4 Ke Nu (which rearmed and re-turreted the Ke To) and the other Type 4 Ke Nu (which was a Ha Go rearmed and re-turreted with the Chi Ha turret).
Overall, the Ho Ri serves as a nice “what-if” aspect to Japan’s end of WWII options. If new information has come to light about the Ho Ri, make good on it and introduce a more accurate version! Because let’s be honest, the Type 99 is a laughable “replacement” at 7.3. “Oh, but the M163 is a thing!” I am not going to replay the M163 when I’ve already spaded it in the US tree, plus I have zero interest in Thai air and ground. “Oh, but the M47 is there at 7.3!” again, I am not going to replay a vehicle I’ve already spaded in its home tree. I want to play the interesting and unique, the little known and the what-ifs.
4 Likes
My suggestion is for them to be permanently available but only playable in custom battles (and you unlock them spaded of course).
Funnily enough we do have enough information on the real ho-ri for it to be added, which had 5 vehicles partially built!
2 Likes