To build the Project 23 battleships, only 4 R-5 missiles and control systems for them would be needed, and all this in 1941.
did sweden ever start building a battle ship?
if no then not
Chinese top tier MBTs are very underpowered compared to how they should be IRL. The main artificial nerfs they’re dealing with are a longer reload, and complete lack of spall liners.
Overall top tier China has one of the worst lineups. They have poor CAS, a mediocre SPAA from what I’ve heard, and bottom 3 MBTs. They are also missing a lot of light tanks, but that isn’t unique to China.
2 Likes
I don’t know but since Russia fantasy ship can be in the game why not Sweden since they both have one thing in common
It does not exist.
He probably confused it with project-23-3x3-456 or with project 24
Spall liners are a marginal feature.
And reloads of 7.1 seconds is still more than usable.
China’s top lineup is great.
Type 99A is a top 10 MBT.
@ARK_BOI
There are no fantasy ships in War Thunder. All ships in-game have proof of production.
If they were paper ships they wouldn’t have been added to begin with, and the War Thunder community has evidence for every ship in the game.
they made the hull for king tiger 105… so it’s not a paper tank
cope
They were all laid down.
Of course you have zero issues with the german Ersatz Yorck, of which there is no photos and was about 1% or less complete. That ship is not phantasy, but those that were 10-20% complete are phantasy ships.
Funny what delusions can do.
2 Likes
The Renault FT-17 however baaaam… Its like from space with no predessor. Just this … thing … which couldn’t have constructed like this irl.
I don’t see ship all i see is just unfinish hull that probably unable to complete
never finish never sail probably never even touch sea water at all.
Who say i don’t?
if it does not exist then remove it along with other fake stuff in the game too for all i care.
damn i guess you cant read
it was laid out by gaijin that the requirements for ships differ from the ones for tanks and planes
yeah we all see that you are coping
1 Like
and i see that you cant read
i explained that the requierments for ships to be added to the game are different from tanks and planes
and it is enough for them to have started construction on them
that was openly stated before
1 Like
if you cant read the suggestion rules and what can be added that is not my issue
so you arent even trying to argue anymore
please just leave the internet for a few years until you have grown up to be an adult
3 Likes
So what? The devs’ criteria for ships is different.
Why?
Idk, maybe, juuuust maaaaaybe because you can’t just build a “prototype” battleship and see how it will work. You can do it with a tank or a plane, since they are just a few tons, and not 30.000 that takes 1000s of people’s work for years.
If the ship had at least some of it’s unique parts made, then it is fine for WT.
That’s why can they add later the H-39, A-150 (possibly even the 500.000 ton Zipang xd), and some French project battleship (they had their guns made, it is even visible on google maps).
Because you then would complain about ALL of them, not singling out a single nation.
It DID exist.
My that “logic” should we remove the Kpz-70 since it’s autoloader did not work? Or remove Panthers because their final drives were bad?
EVERY navy.
Hey, let’s do some counting, shall we?
Project ships:
USA: no project ships that i could find.
Germany:
Z15 Erich Steinbrinck
Z46
Ersatz Yorck
Sachsen
Mackensen
Gneisenau
Z47
USSR:
Izmail
Kronshtadt
Soyuz
Sevastopol
Shcherbakov
Britain: no project ships that i could find.
Japan:
Amagi
Italy:
Comandante Margottini
Etna
Francesco Caracciolo
Conte di Cavour
France:no project ships that i could find.
2 Likes
this hull looks pretty laid down to me:
1 Like