Because, as has been said 200000000 times by now, the countries that DO use them or they got aimed at are not trees or subtrees in the game.
If india tree existed, I would say the Vickers mk1 belonged with them.
If Kenya, or Nigeria IIRC existed, the Vickers mk3 would belong with those.
If Rwanada existed, I would argue its tree would get the Ratel 23mm thing they use (they dont, so I assume if/when it comes, it will be put in the SA tree section)
And so on.
They do not exist as their own trees, nor as sub branches of other TTs, so they go into the nation that built them.
You might not like Hungary existing as its own thing as part of Italy to help them be strong, but they do, just like South Africa exists in the UK tree. At some point this obsession of the Lynx is really going to start getting into the xenophobic grounds of claiming that Hungary isnt worthy of existing in the game or something imo with the “hungary sub tree doesnt exist” rhetoric when it clearly does.
If it was made before Hungarians were confirmed as going to the Italians, might have a point, but it was specifically made to be unique for them, let sub nations have their unique toys, especially when theres plenty of other options for the majors.
The only real argument comparison vehicles are things like the RAM II or the Boarhound which were aimed at use with the CW/UK, its a much closer argument to be had and more valid. All this “but vickers” stuff is moot given the countries they were aimed at DONT HAVE A TREE IN THE GAME.
edit: people need to calm down and get a grip they really do. Calm down chaps.
Okay? Whats that got to do with the price of fish?
Translation - completely different argument and nothing to do with my comment. If you want a prototype not offered to Hungary, go suggest it without mentioning Hungary as “not real”. Dont need to try to take from others on that front.
I never said anything about the Hungarian tree not being added. You are saying that the KF-41 should exclusively go to the Hungarian sub tree. I am saying that there is a way for both that and the German tree to get it.
By all means show us what nation in War Thunder serviced any of those vehicles.
Hungary services the KF-41.
Certainly you’ll be able to prove any of those entered service & can be swapped to the correct tech tree since you brought them up.
It’s rhetorical, and I apologize if it sounded harsh.
The morale of my statement is that prototypes, unfinished service vehicles, & service vehicles are treated differently in War Thunder.
So I will agree here that I was wrong initially, I did not know we sold AIM-9Ms to Taiwan in 2002. I would like to see the source of that first purchase list since anything I can find on an AIM-9M sale to Taiwan was in 2002, which if you had read further into my comments about I said that later on the United States sold more advanced weapon systems including AAMs. But as of right now the in game Taiwanese F-16A Block 20 wouldn’t have M’s, and by the time we roll around to that period, it would have AMRAAMs and the Chinese tree will have China’s own aircraft and armament.
Here is everything we sold to Taiwan from 1990 to 2011. This was from a Congressional Research Service report to Congress. And before anyone freaks out, this is found on their website:
May I republish or use content from a report?
CRS reports, as works of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
Don’t worry about that. The reason XF-2B specifically is mentioned is because it (the second XF-2B to be precise) was used for the early weaponst tests and was the first fitted with a radar. The others were only later outfitted with such systems. If we want an XF-2 to stay limited to early armament such as 7F/M, 9L and AAM-3 as it would have had in the earlier testing stages this is an aircraft that could do so while staying historical.
The XF-2As only later received radar and weapons, and would end up as equals to the F-2 even in their earliest configuration unless permanently limited. The XF-2B could receive it’s full (early) weaponry, while still retaining a lower BR that a future production F-2.
The B variant would have also made the turn performance increase from the F-16s less severe, while making it even slower. This could help balance the two additional SARH AAMs compared to other contemporary aircraft.
Meanwhile the XF-2s also later tested systems that would make them interesting additions improving on the production F-2s with experimental systems that didn’t end up being adopted. So they would still have a place in game.
So you are absolutely right about the XF-2A being armed, the XF-2B is just closer to the F-16As.
Right, but now we’re at F-16Cs with AIM-9Ms, so really the only big question is what to do with AESA.
I’m more of a fan of XF-2A with 4 IR + 2 or 4 SARH for the time being, which would be balanced (again depending on how the radar is handled).
That being said, at this point F-2 itself is equally likely too as the only reason to go for the XF-2A would be to justify nerfing or experimenting with the AESA radar implementation. So maybe XF-2A itself might be an event vehicle.
Like I said, I am more than willing to admit when I am wrong, I am just going off of our actual sales records to Taiwan, I am doing my best to find out if the M’s were delivered with it. If they were, then sure bump the Block 20 to 12.3 and give it the M’s.
Here’s something from the Taiwanese archives.
It talks about test firing the AIM-9M in 1993 (1982 in ROC years). It’s just the description, it hasn’t been put online/need permission.
