Belgium Ground forces ? why not. While they use Leo 1s that could actually fill the MBT gap at around 9.0 (and don’t start me on the AMX32s), they also have lots of funny stuff that could fit nice with the French TT (mainly Cockerill vehicles, which while Belgium also has lots of dealings with France). Air ? they would bring some f16s and later down f35s I guess ? Won’t really matter, M2K and Rafale still fit the bill, and some could say that would add some diversity.
Netherlands tho ? That’s a bit stupid in my books
1 Like
Belgium ground forces is for the most part unique and would build upon what France already has going for it, the bigger issue is Netherlands which just doesn’t provide anything and might turn France into Little Sweden depending on how the devs handle it. Belgium is nice, Netherlands can go to Germany.
5 Likes
there isnt really a gap at around 9.0, the gap is between 11.7 and 9.7
This is indeed the intention of sub-trees, which isn’t a bad idea on its own. However I do share the pessimism that it is highly probable that France will suffer homogenization like the other trees have. The only benifit I would see is that France would get an F-35, so it won’t be the only nation without a stealth jet.
1 Like
9.x could be filled by many HOME-MADE light tanks and 10.x could be filled with all Leclerc’s prototypes + light tanks like the Jaguar. I still think BeNeLux was a bad idea. What is the point of adding Leopard / F16 to a unique tech-tree ? The only valable argument for a sub tech-tree would be in the future with stealth fighters. In this case, belgium’s F-35 would be welcomed (even if rafale F4 or F5 might be an equivalent).
Once again I find it really disapointing to ruin the only Minor nation (thanks Gaijin btw) which is almost totally unique and could be developped with domestically produced vehicles if developpers were somehow a bit more receptive to the french community requests and needs.
4 Likes
So what? If I’m playing France its because of the Rafale, why would i want to play an F35 in my french tree?
4 Likes
having a f35 in a completely different line would not affect your capability to play the rafale. My concern with this is the homogenisation of different tech trees. France used to have the benefit of being unique (from Leclercs to Mirages), but if France start getting f16s and f35s, and UK getting Indian Rafales, China getting Mirage 2000, it loses it’s uniqueness
12 Likes
Same conclusion for different reasons. Both of them are valid in my opinion and aren’t exclusive to each other.
1 Like
I only said this as a possible positive since France would be the only nation that wouldn’t have access to a stealth fighter otherwise. You would still be able to use the Rafale if you choose to do so. Funny enough you basically stated why I don’t use the ItO90 for French ground.
I just realized Benelux is the only way France gets a stealth fighter in a few years when they’re added.
1 Like
The Rafale modernizations give it some active stealth capabilities. But stealth for the most part is overrated, it likely will have little effect in Warthunder if nothing changes. So the F-35 and F-22 will have a small advantage.
The Su-57 is partial stealth in that it won’t light up on a radar. Then the J20 is likely only good from the front aspect.
1 Like
Depends on what you mean, but it is critical for most modern planes to have reduced RCS. Could be quite helpful vs radar missiles
Stealth is one part of modern warfare.
You can’t just expect stealth to be the thing that will decide a confrontation. If you can’t use stealth properly you might as well not have it.
If someone without stealth is in a better position then someone with stealth, then it ultimately wouldn’t matter.
If you’re already in Fox-1 range it doesn’t do anything for you either.
Yeah honestly, stealth is useful against most fox 3s, but now, it isn’t even that helpful against modern AESA equipped radar missiles, especially if they are guided by a platform having both an AESA and good IRST tracking.
taf, i am just an armchair “specialist” (lol), and stealth and how radar can pick their signatures is highly classified, but as long as, let’s say, the f35 can’t secure a good firing position (inside it’s own long range missile range), from outside of the IRST + AESA combo of let’s say, a rafale, then it’s stealth aspect might not be as useful as most people would assume. And considering how many advanced we see just in the consumer optics, I doubt the f35 can fire any type of AIM120 (even the D) without the rafale noticing. Maybe it could with the Aim260 tho ?
To me, it seems that stealth is far less useful in air combat that many people make it seem. It looks far more useful for penetration in enemy territories where you want to avoid detection, but that would be in combination to many other factors (altitude, route…)
1 Like
I’ve seen a few think tanks put out reports that stealth will be best for penetrating air space to knock out AWACS, SAM, or any other strategic targets.
This is a very well thought out explanation on the limitations of stealth though.
By the way, we should probably move this part of the discussion elsewhere, we’re way off topic from the Leclerc now.
1 Like
This has definitely turned into the “France suffers” thread, but it’s the only one that has kept traction on different problems without fizzling out.
1 Like
lol Just… lol
Su-57 isn’t stealth, buddy.
F-35, F22, and so forth will have massive advantages.
1 Like
That’s really just a non point.
atleast take this to the mirage 2000 thread