gaijin inconsistencies.
where? I am just giving examples of gaijin being inconsistent and favourite different nations in different aspect rather than some focussed campaign.
2 Likes
On old models which have bustle autoloaders that Gaijin doesnt exactly know what they look like.
Here. The autoloader is not a corresponding module to the basket, because they dont fulfill the same purpose and dont have the same functionality in game and since were discussing the different treatment of 2 existing and modeled modules its a goalpost move. Just like me moving the goalpost to Nato MBTs having their human loader modeled before carousels got modeled. Its both irrelevant for the question i asked below that you ignored so please indulge me now and answer it.
Thats right. The logical corresponding “module” would be the loader. It was modeled from day #1 of WT. When loaders get hit, it stops reload cycles until replaced. Same what happens to damaged autoloaders, which unfortnately wasn’t modeled from day #1.
Only western tanks seem to have a turret basket, which totally jams everything and prevents you from aiming the gun. Its an imbalance.
3 Likes
Tanks & aircraft are allowed to have prototypes.
Ships are exclusively only allowed to have production vehicles.
Tanks & aircraft are given far, far more privilege for addition to the game than ships.
If tanks & aircraft were on the same standards as ships, all real prototypes wouldn’t be in War Thunder.
@UNN_Daedalos
Rules are equally applied to all tech trees. You even admit it to be the case.
There are no paper ships in War Thunder & never will be.
Only paper ships from one nation are unbalanced
Actually only one : Sov
There are no paper ships in War Thunder, so your post contains obvious disinformation.
Also I have one question:
Is M10 Booker a paper tank to you?
Keep crying buddy.
At mid-high tier I ha really hard time with Russian ground veichles, problem I haven’t found on other trees.
The prototypes problem is not only russian cuz they placed things like the Begleitpanzer57 (only one prototype built) and the Kpz70/his American version in the normal tree while you have mass produced vehicles such as the L39 albatross placed as Premiums.
1 Like
I don’t care about M10
Remove it if you want
Soyuz IRL has a keel made of steel, the rest was never mounted and is therefore : thin air
I have nothing against implementing a realistic soyuz with 2000 dude sitting on one metal plate and a few compartments with no guns, no engines and no armor belt.
I’ll gladly give my Clemenceau up this instant if Sov disappears from top tier.
Russian mains like to repeat NATO should have built more AA when mentioning the obvious imbalance in that area. Well I guess the soviet navy should have built more battleships
Because ships are too expensive to make a distinction especially in the timeframe we have in war thunder. Youre comparing apples to oranges. Tanks and Aircraft have much harsher standards than ships.
This is enough for a ship to be eligible for addition into war thunder, do you think a tank or aircraft in the corresponding state of building would be eligible?
Crew sailing into battle on this with the power of thoughts and prayers
2 Likes
I don’t want production vehicles [which includes Soyuz] removed from War Thunder, because then we lose all prototypes in War Thunder as well, then War Thunder just becomes another boring game.
@H_ngma
Considering M10 Booker is in the game, tanks in that unfinished production runs & cancelled for service are added to the game.
The production looks different, because different sizes of vehicles; but M10 Booker is THE tank equivalent of laid down ships later cancelled.
You cannot hate on laid down ships without hating on M10 Booker, it’s impossible.
How do you manage to contradict yourself only 10 words apart ?
This kind of reasoning is genuinely impressive. Not in a good way, but still
If you can’t see why an Iowa can be considered a true and produced ship and not Soyuz, we can stop there. There’s nothing i can do to help you
The M10 could move, shoot and do all that stuff on its own. Do you think if we push the ship on my picture off the slipway that it can do any of that?
A. sure you can just look at the difference between the state of the Booker pre cancellation and the state of the ship in the picture.
B. Im not hating laid down ships, i rather like the idea of unfinished ships getting their deserved spotlight. Im hating unbalanced additions that are only unbalanced, because Gaijin decided to implement fantasy stats instead of a balanced and equally or even more realistic iteration.
I’m not even sure that… thing has enough buoyancy to float anywhere, assuming you can move it to the water in the first place X)
Just a metal Noel’s arc waiting for the flood
1 Like
Gets funnier when you consider, NATO tanks have APUs
1 Like
Everyone got added modules, BUT :
1m0s : T-90M (no changes)
AND
1m50s : ZTZ99A (no changes)
Absolutely no preference for eastern nations in Russia Thunder :)
China and Gaijin preference in a single sentence lmao.
Still clueless I see.
4 Likes
China must be so strong then, go play it and enjoy the bias.
2 Likes
Ah yes, truly the most overpowered tank in the game
Definitely not stuck with shitty armour and second longest reload at top tier.
T-90M isn’t even that good lol
Oh, what about the leclerc FCS btw?
5 Likes