Only because the missing hock isnt simulated. Without the catapult those carriers had a to short to launch runway.
EDIT: Even when a plane could start without one it usually boild down to the plane inheriting the speed from the moveing carrier with perfect wind condition but since ingame they just stand still that isnt an option eighter plus at least one of the carriers is not faceing the wind correctly as both carriers face each other so that doesnt help eighter.
Wow, you can’t waste 3 minutes flying a damaged aircraft to the carrier to spend another 2 1/2 minutes going to objective.
When you could have just died and let another team member which lets face it is probably better then you in the plane take it.
Two posts now have tried to frame carrier spawn as an advantage and i wholeheartedly think you have no idea what makes planes good or a good effect on the enemy team.
These aircraft carriers didn’t have catapults The planes flew off of them.
They had wires to recover aircraft.
But there was no zero that was ever built as far as I know that did not have the ability to land on an aircraft carrier.
That doesn’t mean that some units that operate at zero didn’t do so from the land only, But I do know that land based zero units did often operate from aircraft carriers as well.
There is no advantage to spawning your aircraft on an aircraft carrier when the enemy team is spawning all of its aircraft in the air.
There’s a distinct to disadvantage to launching from the aircraft carrier when you’re facing P 38 that are spawning in the air.
It’s taken them like a year or so to come around to the fact that they finally were going to let tier one and two Japanese air start.
But instead of adding an actual Japanese army fighter plane which there are several they could be adding for that level they just switched the Most iconic Japanese Navy fighter of the war and made it impossible for it to go to an aircraft carrier for repair.
It just seems hugely lazy of them that they did not simply add an IJA fighter to the line up, it is not like there is no room in the research tree for it.
This is true… personally i’d prefer them adding an option for all planes TO spawn on the carrier if the player would like the novelty and keep it for repairs.
However as other was trying to say this one got air spawn because it lacked the ability to land and or take off from the carrier for the mentioned reasoning (arresting hook iirc?)
There is no historical reason for denying them the ability to operate from an aircraft carrier.
I think it’s just something that they’re repeating because they saw it someplace else.
Especially for an early War Zero, They could all land and take off from aircraft carriers.
But like I mentioned above the game seldom makes choices based on historical content, Or the historical record.
My assumption is they did this because it would be the only air start fighter that could land on an aircraft carrier and get repaired if they did so.
Which would probably cause a lot of twitchiness in the community.
Of course it was perfectly fine for us to spend an entire year or more with no Japanese fighter plane being able to air start in tier one or two.
And now that we actually can, we can’t land it on the aircraft carrier anymore and get it repaired, Because as I mentioned above it’s perfectly functional landing on an aircraft carrier the arresting hook works just fine in game atm.
Still for the life of me I can’t figure out why they wouldn’t just add an Oscar II from war thunder in Tier one or two as an air start.
The A5M At the beginning of the war actually spent more time taking off from land bases than it did operating from aircraft carriers than the Zero did.
There is.
After hearing of these reports, the Navy immediately ordered the A6M2 into production as the Type 0 Carrier Fighter, Model 11 (only 60 some odd early model 11’s did not have the arrestor hook and they were used in China prewar)
They could still operate from carriers The big difference was the wing tips but that was only because of the elevators on some of the aircraft carriers.
Like I said there really is not a historical reason to do this it’s a gameplay reason.
It has nothing to do with them being able to launch or being recovered from aircraft carriers from a historical context.
The only possible reason they’re doing this as I mentioned above is because it would be the only air start fighter in the game that could repair on an aircraft carrier.
I would much rather they return zero to the aircraft carrier Put an army fighter aircraft in the game.
Off all the sugestions I’ve ever made the last one I thought would pass was this haha and while controversial, I’m glad it did, I just hope this means we may get the model 21 eventualy
When my plane is damaged, I usually just bale out and proceed as an assaulter, which is why I tend to fly more bombers then fighters since they have more crew for more assaulters. 
Well it has nothing to do with reality the devs can bend reality as they see fit:
Justice For Battle Pass A6M2 Mod. 21 ‘‘Zero’’ 
- Suggestions / Vehicles - Enlisted — official forum
Since the battle pass has arrestor hook but now it cant be repaired on a ship.
Ya they make no distinctions in game as to what model number they are.
Only a tiny fraction of the Zero’s built were model 11’s,(like 65 and they were used pre war in China to battle test the Zero)
AFIK, non of the Zero’s used in any of the battles the game model were Model 11’s
Not that any kind of historical aspects make a difference to them in any way.
All it says in Game is Carrier fighter, and of course we cant use it that way now…
Well, if you read my post, I wanted the model to be changed to the mod. 21 or at least to have them both, what Yoshi said in his post about making the BP a mod. 21 would be perfect tbh, if only they would also give it it’s 250kg bomb
practice. In early 1944, the IJN desperately needed to replace their aging D3A dive bombers. As a stopgap measure many older Model 21s were retrofitted to carry a single 250kg bomb on a centerline bomb rack.
D’Angina, James. Mitsubishi A6M Zero (Air Vanguard Book 19) (p. 55). Bloomsbury Publishing. Kindle Edition.
Disagree with you on the timing. The carriers in a lot of the battles appear to have been moved a little closer to the battle. The advantage was not in the spawning, which I would agree could be a disadvantage but in the ability to repair. I would have rather seen all planes go to a carrier or land spawn and retain the repair.
Flying around in a damaged plane only to take off again is definitively a waste of time when you could just crash, spawn on the ground and actually be useful to your team and let a teammate spawn a fresh plane only to camp it for the rest of the game 
Only serves to help people who just camp in the plane the entire time and surprisingly those seem to be the worst… a good player will use it as a tool not a playstyle.
Even one of my buds who is a plane main knows when to drop the act.
Also i’ll mention i’m damn well sure those noobs will get shot at randomly by a ground target but not even do critical damage but they land anyway… and or people doing it to cheat the infantry out of a kill… there would be no more reason for shooting planes with small arms…
Yes it would make the guy go back and land but i prefer to look at it from when it’s on your side.
Attempting to land a damaged aircraft on the carrier is actually a pretty fun challenge.
Yeah it’s not the most efficient use of the limited game time but who cares. It’s fun and it can absolutely demoralize your opponents. Overall, it is definitely a rewarding mechanic for those who are good at flying.
I bet if I sucked at flying I would hate the mechanic too.
Nice sneak diss buddy… i hate the mechanic because it slows down gameplay and like i’ve said plenty of times i shouldn’t have to take off to destroy a tank that is inflicting massive casualties on our infantry… there i will say perhaps i suck at using AT, ill respond with i just dont bother anymore… a plane is the guaranteed solution.
“Rewarding mechanic for those who are good at flying” Ironically most of the people who make use of it are simply running to the carrier to avoid a dogfight… as people have mentioned it can be used to reset fights which i have done and had happen to me and was a nice change of pace… so i suppose.
Relating this to another poster asking for airfield for all…
I totally understand looking at this from that standpoint and the novelty of taking off… however i will continue to repeat the ramifications this will have in game… and let’s be honest half of this is to slow down plane users because most players grasp onto HE spam for every complaint
Well congratulations… now that tank shelling the chateau is going to be up for that much longer only because you want to further push this stupid mechanic
Now for repairs? Sure… keep it in and like someone has mentioned give it for first take off maybe even avoid the timer in that case.
Forcing it every time? Only slows down gameplay… i kind of forgot this wasn’t veekays post… so pardon the derailment sort of
Yeah that was definitely rude.
I apologize.
Brought that up though to highlight a theory that only two types of people dislike the mechanic.
You know the first. The second just simply being “impatience”. Which does play into what you said about it slowing down gameplay. And you are absolutely correct.
I guess I just don’t mind that it slows things up.
There should be an option though. Just like how paratroopers have a choice.
