To be honest I think it should stay as it is. Why? On the battlefield there are situations where you cannot clearly identify the enemy unit. Example The enemy unit looks like a T-80 but it is not clear which type it is. It might be a T-80, T-80B or just a T-72. Conclusion I mean I get your point. So...
For Japanese tanks in particular, I wish they called it Type whatever it was. Not only is the example of Guntank a strange anomaly in the list, they did the same thing for Chinese tanks (which were added at the same time so its not like it's outdated). Why would the same game, with units added at t...
... Yeah, using local names is great and using english to pronounce of kanji characters is the best way to do it, but its inconsistent. Why? How is it inconsistent? Instead of using english word for Tan-SAM short arrow it should've been Tan-SAM chikaku ya or hachi-ju ichi shiki SAM, and for Guntank...
^ dope ass answer TBH I guess I’m just being autistic about it TBH. I would have prefered if for the IDF, it just added the local nickname after the real life designation (like F-16C Barak). F-16C Barak is not the official designation. It is just Barak. Look up at Wikipedia where IAF planes are lis...
I agree with much of what’s been said, and especially agree that for infantry in particular, having local names is a freash breath of air when every other game has “Marines” for every single faction. However, while I agree that nations that didn’t use the nickname shouldn’t have it (F-16 for the du...
As stated above it's to give units distinction between each other. It's so bad how they named japan, hachi-maru shiki instead of Type 89 or Kyu-maru shiki instead of Type 90 but when comes to AA they used nicknames like Guntank, it makes it so confusing. Read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typ...