You know, despite English not being your first language, I find your posts easy to understand.
My opinion hasn’t changed on these issues:
Add vehicles when ready.
Correct flags when able.
Don’t delay a vehicle because there are jealousy filled posts.
If an alleged delay happens, still don’t delay other separate vehicles to same or separate tech trees.
Doubling down on perceived wrong decisions will only make things worse, not better.
A race to the bottom is not a good thing for players to push for.
There is colorful language I have in my mind that can connect to the term “revenge posting”, but obviously I won’t post that.
Opposing the M1A2T harms Republic of China players more than anyone else.
It harms China tech tree players 2nd, which includes myself and many others from America, and many of my friends and strangers from Europe.
Opposing the M1A2T will not harm who the revenge posters think it will harm.
Unless you’re implying the SepV1 is significantly better than the M1A2T, then the more correct & accurate example is comparing the German 2A6 to the French 2A6.
Good thing the player base isn’t modelers. When players use it that term, they are talking about vehicles with near identical model and characteristics which in this case, it is.
It’s why many considered the SepV2 a copy paste when it was first introduced because it didn’t improve upon the SepV1. It was more of a backup than anything else. Fortunatly, Gaijin at least had the dignity to give the SepV2 a better smoke launcher and LWS which makes it now kinda unique
Funny because you seem have the exact opposite opinion yesterday when you dm’d me. lol
the issue is that copy paste isn’t just used by modelers. It is used by everyone in all sorts of fields and they have slight variants to each other while the intent of that word remains the same.
People should be willing to say “similar” instead.
The word exists, so they should use it.
“Too similar.” “Insultingly similar.”
So on and so forth.
Accurate, and more impactful than using incorrect words.
Again, you seem to think copy paste is referring to the model, it could very well be referring to the characteristics. So no, people using copy paste in this sense is accurate.
And I have my standard Leclerc vs M1A1 response.
And ironically, the M1A1 is slightly better cause OFL F1 is less pen than M829A1.
Both have 300 - 400mm of hull armor.
Both have around 550mm of turret armor.
I can bring up OF-40 and Leopard 1.
I can bring up Type 74G, Leopard 1A5, AMX-32 105, and AMX-30 Super which do indeed play identically due to their characteristics.
Every single wheeled L7 105mm vehicle around 9.3.
That standard is easily defeated by showing how absurd the standard is.
Like if I show up saying SPz BMP1 shouldn’t be in Germany and instead USSR, the response I should get is: “Okay, then Leopard 2A7HU to Germany. F-18s should only be allowed in USA.” because that’s the standard that position provides.
Leclerc and M1A1 being copy-paste isn’t my take, it will never be my take. The fact I play them identically is just a consequence of their similar characteristics.
It’s a bad measure.
I understand that they feel something. I understand that they’re upset.
I just want them to describe their feelings more accurately.
I support people voicing their opinions, their views, I love reading them.
But having to internally translate “copy paste” to “insultingly similar” doesn’t help them in my view.
So you gonna ignore the internal layout, armor profile, gun handling, depression and reload mechanism again?
You conflating play style with characteristics again
Not sure how this relates to what I said?
You seem to not understand why people call the M1A2T a copy paste. same mobility, gun handling, armor, internal layout, *round, and all other characteristics that impact performance in game.
I have no issues seeing the M1A2T in game… as long as the Vt4 is in japan. However due to the backlash, that’s not the case.
USA already has Abrams. They don’t need another country’s tank.
@HondaCivici
Leclerc and M1A1…
Internal layout? Ammo at the back of the turret.
Gunner on the right, other crew member on the left.
A breech to hit.
Gun handling is over 30 degrees per second for both horizontal, 20 vertical.
Depression difference of 2 degrees is only useful on <2% of positions I see myself on in the game, but those maps are rare so it’s <1%.
Use to be above 10% before community feedback removed those positions.
Reload mechanism difference only kicks in if 2 crew members are lost.
Armor profile are weak hulls, weak turrets, with large weak spots outside of the generally eh armor.
I’ve been destroying all these tanks for over 6 years now. My mind is “Ammo, breech, crew.”
Also, the Thai VT-4 is not denied for War Thunder.
So… do you support 2A7HU and KF-41 going to Germany, all DDR tanks to USSR, F-104S to USA, Oplot to USSR? All things I personally oppose.
Or do you have a double standard just for M1A2T?
@HondaCivici
“VT-4 was not planned for this update.” - Smin.
Something that wasn’t planned can’t be delayed.
And considering the Thai VT-4’s correct 3D model would be closest to the VT-4A1, a rather old vehicle in the game, the trial/prototype/Pakistan VT-4 China got can’t be used as an example.
Though so far, it is turret differences I’ve noticed. Haven’t looked too deep on the hull.
