Same reason they decided to make our only SPAA at top tier a “tank destroyer”, and they are happy for the second best SPAA to be functionally useless for months at a time.
The fact there isn’t more outrage from US/UK players about the ADATS being designated as a tank destroyer is just an illustration of how low our expectations are.
Meanwhile Russia gets the best SPAA at 11.7 with no peer, one of the best at 10.7 with the 2s6, and even when the Strela goes up to 9.7 it’s still going to be completely busted OP. The Strela deserves to be 10.3 as a minimum, but I’d be surprised if it ever reaches that given the tree it is in.
It’s not that simple.
Internals have to be modeled, statistics have to be recalibrated, data has to be collected on things such as ammo count, often times visual changes are still made to the hulls or turrets and probably more that I fail to mention.
That is slightly different, but yes.
It’s like saying M113 TOW would be copy paste just cause SIDAM 25 existed beforehand as if the internals don’t get overhauled.
Easy said when you’re not the one who has to research the model and vehicle, with this logic you’d be making more made up vehicles than Gaijin does.
Think about what you’re saying: “The internals don’t need to be overhauled except for the fact that things have to be changed significantly compared to the Stormers we already have in game, but it’s okay because we can copy paste the layout of a completely different vehicle with completely different dimensions.”
Alongside this you mention new components that have to be added to the vehicle.
So TL:DR; you admitted to the vehicle not being copy paste but are continuing an ego battle. Right.
My point has been made clear, so I don’t intend to continue this conversation.
