Quick edit: “ I specifically go into detail about the NZLAV because I saw a (old) forums poll (2019) about adding a nz/aus tree a majority vote yes close followed by better representation of the two nations, with no out right last, and one of the biggest criticisms is about the NZLAV, despite the fact it’s a arguably better and more mobile vehicle.” than the M3 Bradley, not saying it’s exactly the best tank but it works in game. So the NZLAV should be able to work around the same or slightly better
And basically every vehicle that could be added meets the criteria of being a real vehicle, no concepts and they have as far as I’m aware all seen combat at least once so are a tried and true vehicle
Yes and an Australian server perhaps?
1 Like
I haven’t ran into many issues with nill oce servers but it would be really nice seeing basically every other developer doesn’t neglect the region, that being said Crossout had oce servers once but the peaks were short so they removed them, I’d have to assume same thing with wt.
(Side note) I stand corrected on my comment earlier there is 2 nz vehicles in the game the strike master Mk. 88 (BP Jet season 13, so unfort for any new players or none bp grinders not obtainable until later down the line and they’re lucky to score it on the market, provided they can access it, bit of a sad choice due to the uniqueness of origin) and the hmnzs Leander (upon release didn’t even have the correct flag but was corrected), but also they should add the A-4K Skyhawk 😊 (the last Skyhawk of nz 🥲)
They did in recent times show some love and add part of the South Island as a naval map, so why not chuck us some more love instead of the volleys of already dominant nations?
We get neglected server wise and involvement wise? That kinda hurts can defo live with one but both?
I personally think that’s a lil to much
It’s been confirmed that Australia is really looking into getting some new armor. New SPGs, and new infantry support vehicles too.
New Models
- Hawkei NASAMS - AA vehicle
- Hanwha K9 Vidar - SPG class (first new SPG since the Yeramba)
- Rheinmetall Lynx IFV
- Rheinmetall Lynx CSV
Classic Models
- Bendigo Ordnance Factory Yeramba SP25
- General Dynamics LAV III
- Land Rover Series 2A 1/4 ton 4x4 106mm - SPG class
- Leopard AS1+
- Matilda Dozer
There is some great aircraft from Australia/New Zealand’s past too, that would represent Australia really well.
The Aircraft
CAC CA-15 Kangaroo Prototype
CAC CA-27 Sabre - Fighter (Based on a modified F-86F)
CAC CA-32 Bell OH-58D - Helicopter
CAC Canberra B.20 - (B.2 model with additional fuel tanks)
General Dynamics F-111C Aardvark
1 Like
Found a few missed model and just a couple corrections to your vehicle list
Corrections:
CA-1 Wirraway
CA-12 Boomerang Mk I
CA-13 Boomerang Mk II
CA-23 Prototype
CA-29 Dassault Mirage IIID
Canberra B.20 - (Modified version of B.2)
F-111A
Possible new Aussie additions
BAE Systems Hawk 127
CA-4 Wackett Bomber Prototype
CA-24 Hawker P.1081 Prototype “Australian Fighter”
CA-30 Macchi MB-326H
CA-34 AAC A10 Wamira - (Project canceled not long after completion)
New Zealand Air Force
BAC Strikemaster Mk.88
Beechcraft T-6 Texan II
PAC CT/4 Airtrainter - (F Variant has underwing hardpoints)
Supermarine Walrus Mk. I
Common wealth tree is more realistic as everyone has acknowledged. (CanAuNz) the problem with that is there’s already Canadian, Australian and New Zealand littered through the trees.
Additionally NZ wouldn’t be a sub tree to Aus in any world. They would as Aus would be a sub tree to either Britain or America. Same with Canada. Which all of them kind of… kind of are as is.
I personally like the idea of the Commonwealth tree as it would bring the many great things NZ and Aus have made and utilised (ground, air and sea) to the game for the fellow oceanic players to enjoy. Even just having some of them added to the game would be nice. The problem is there isn’t actually a need for many of the things us 3 country’s can give. Canada is mainly copy past, and nz and aus. Are mainly home manufactured version of already “existing” vehicles in the game (all be it better seeing often faster, better armed, and better armoured (also being better designed for specific jobs) than their American and British counter part.
Then modern day neither of the 3 country’s really have anything new to offer other than just a different version of an already existing American, British, European or Canadian vehicle.
Besides they don’t care about us we don’t even have servers anymore and haven’t for there about 6 years.
TLDR: love the idea just won’t work sadly also bring back oce servers for gods sake.
How is that a problem when we literally gave an Israeli tree in game.
As of now the UK or US cannot get sub-trees.
The only form of sub-tree we have gotten by now is a single full line with a few vehicles elsewhere in the tree.
This leaves UK and US with no space for a sub-tree in either air or ground.
There is plenty that Australia and Canada could give in both aviation and ground.
Low tier would be covered by both, mid tier would still be majority unique and high tier would start to get more copy paste, but would still have large scale modifications as you mention that fundementally make the vehicles in question unique.
The game isn’t about top tier only. When looking at the bigger picture then the combination of these three countries into one tree makes for a good concept, regardless of whether top tier is less unique than some others.
6 Likes
BAC StrikeMaster MK.88 was in the battlepass a while ago.
The t-6 doesn’t fit the war part of war thunder unlike the Mk.88 it is purely a training aircraft that lacks all armament capability’s.
I cannot find anything to back up your claim that the PAC CT/4 Airtrainter (F version/model) had support for any capability’s. All links that I go through including the official manufacturer’s etc. State it was a aerobatic twin seat aircraft (basic trainer(just like the Texan))
Ik the current state of Israel is terrible. You don’t have to tell me.
(I can’t get anymore quotes to work sorry)
As of now in game files there is planned sub for USA, uk and other nations. (There is room, incase you didn’t notice there has been a lot of foldering in recent times making room in tts)
Like I did say I love the idea as it’s been raised for a common wealth tt (I would really like for the uniqueness to be properly highlighted and virtually experienced as such) Canada, Australia and New Zealand during WW2 (where most tt start besides naval) was mainly USA/UK supplied equipment as I stated and you acknowledged both NZ and Aus remanufactured a lot of the stuff supplied to be more fitting for requirements we saw fit, the only pure Australian thing on offer which is in the game already is the AC tanks. The “Aussy” planes of ww2 were plans etc supplied by Britain as it was easier for aus to manufacture these specific planes in shore for their own supply rather than ship them across the world.
The only real thing we have to offer is tanks/ground, because they’re actually unique, all 3 nations planes are just copy paste. And yes agreed as I did say top is copy paste too. Yes top is not all there is to the game. However a lot of people care that the end result isn’t just copy paste from another nation. One of the reasons Israel isn’t to popular is the fact 90% of the tree is copy paste type stuff.
If the tree were to be made the end result would be USA ground top, and USA/Europe top air. But if an off put for the grind to anyone as those 2 are in every tree basically.
The end result while cool and different low-mid would be the appealing part and top would fizzle out the player base and be unappealing to players not from those country’s. Thus making it a bound failure. (So because gaijin want money not financially viable)
The unfortunate thing is if we don’t want to end up as Israel has then we will have to stay as bits and bobs of other trees where respective.
Just look a bit higher than your firsts post in there 2 months ago talking about it. I do want and have had thoughts and discussions about this topic outside of this forum.
Unfortunately we are not a financially viable tt, prems won’t sell and we’ll be another player dead nation like Israel, china and a couple others
:Edit: your not the op to my response lmao just realised, but unfortunately for less significant nations in the grand scheme we don’t get to see the light of day much in games apart from those made by company’s from said country. That is the sad reality
I would love to hit up the NZDF and other respective places to get the required information and white papers for vehicles etc and modifications of vehicles to supply to gaijin but that isn’t going to make them consider adding them only mass community support would have that desired effect.
4 people wanting it doesn’t show that it’s something that’d benefit them
Just think they stopped having the yearly ANZAC celebration in 2015/16 so do you think what we would like really matters to them?
If you press the cog on the top right of your text window you will see the option to ‘hide details’.
You can do this by selecting any text in this forum and then clicking said button.
How Israel is currently represented in game is besides the point.
The point is that it was a country that ad it’s vehicles spread out across three other countries yet it got an independent tree.
Similar cases in smaller scales happened too with every other country that got added post launch.
That is not how that works.
The foldering that happened is just tidying up bloated ends of the tree. It is not merging entire lines and thus making space for new ones.
Again: so far we have only had sub-trees as a full vertical line.
Because of the 5-line limit that was confirmed by Smin this means that UK and US have no more space for another sub-tree until a new form of it has been shown off.
We cannot assume such new forms to be added though, as we have not yet seen them.
A Commonwealth tree would be quite a ridiculous proposition for various reasons, but I’d rather not get into that now and stick with the AU/CA/NZ concept.
While it is true that the majority of the equipment that was used by these countries is foreign supplied, this does not matter in the context of War Thunder.
Only a single vehicle needs to exist of any type in order for it to be a valid option in the game.
It doesn’t matter if a country is 10% or 90% foreign supplied, so long as it has enough unique variants or domestic products.
This is why we have so many prototypes in game and why this tree is possible: because of these ‘rare’ vehicles to call them so.
There is the entire Ram family, the AC family, Schofield tanks, LAV variants, Canuck family, Avro Arrow, the list goes on.
This is even without getting into unique and major modifications such as was seen on the Grizzly tanks or the F-101 Voodoo. With how much these were changed it practically makes them different and unique vehicles with a big enough quantity to warrant a tree.
If you wish I could share some tree proposals to further my point, especially on the Canadian side there are some good ones.
Israel isn’t copy paste, it’s just uninteresting.
Gaijin opted to bloat the Magach line and only add Merkavas instead of expanding into light vehicles and tank destroyers more.
These Magachs are unique, but because it was the only thing they had it made them untinteresting.
On the aviation side of things the playstyles of their modified foreign platforms aren’t altered in air battles, but in ground battles they often have much superior CAS capabilities, which does make them unique in that sense. Again, just uninteresting.
2 Likes
The least that can be done is to continue voicing your wishes, regardless of whether Gaijin thinks it’s viable or not.
There is plenty potential to be had with “minor” trees, just look at the popularity of Sweden for example.
While I do agree that it would likely not be considered viable by Gaijin, there are still plenty of people who would play the tree. It wouldn’t be on the same level as some other options of course, but people still play Israel despite their known problems too.
There are definitely superior options to add as mew trees also, but that still doesn’t take away the quality that the AU/CA/NZ concept could provide, whether it is recognized by the (often uninformed) community and Gaijin or not.
2 Likes
I will specify as I have been the commonwealth tree concept is Can/Au/Nz at the time they were all commonwealth (still are) common wealth doesn’t entail a required link to the uk. I’m sure you are as I am aware of what the common wealth is
Spoiler
This text will be hidden
I never said there isn’t enough unique, I said there’s plenty of uniqueness it could bring, that I want there to be an option to experience. I’m just pointing out to most people that the likes of a a-4k despite being basically an entirely different aircraft. Most people would see it as just another a-4. So while all these things are different vehicles/craft “this is just this from this tree” mentality ruins the difference labelling it as c&p. Unfortunately the way the player base sees these things. I would love for so many au/nz versions of vehicles/craft to be added but the way the base looks at that sort of thing makes it basically impartial to be hopeful. I would love to see the Valentine CS MK III a NZ manufactured Valentine MK III with the QF 3 Pounder instead of the QF 2 pounder. But realistically it doesn’t have a place in the game. The A-4K and Ta-4K were upgraded to be on par and as capable as f-16s but they just wouldn’t work well due to that, cause they’re to advanced for 9.0-10.0 due to these modern upgrades, but do not belong fighting in 12.0-12.7 either.
The unfortunate reality is a lot of our stuff from au/nz doesn’t have a place of proper balance in wt bc of what it is specifically
The entirety of the Israel tree besides the one premium raam, merkava and Zachlam are copy pasted, French, USA, Britain and USSR vehicles
:Edit: thank you for informing me of how to quote multiple
Not sure how the Schofield would really work but hey you know about it.
1 Like
That is definitely the reality of the situation, hopefully one day may our voices be heard
1 Like
Wait is that aircraft supposed to be armed?
The Quote:
The CT-4F is powered by a 300hp Continental piston engine. The variant is fitted with glass cockpit avionics, underwing hardpoints and air conditioning systems. Its demonstrator was developed in May 2007.
Listed under Armament
4x underwing hardpoints, stressed for 250 kg (550 lb) each inboard and 150 kg (330 lb) each outboard
PAC CT-4E/F - built in 2007
PAC CT-4F was based on a CT-4E platform but modified, it was a demonstrator built in 2007 probably the model:
S/n 241 - Company Demonstrator
I found a few more missed Australian military vehicles, some even from WW1.
WW1 Vehicles
- Lancelot de mole tank, 1911-12 (no cannon, just mount a 1 or 2pdr from era)
- Rolls-Royce Armoured Car “RNAS” (NZ)
- Vulcan Engineering 1st Light Patrol Car, 1916
- Vulcan Engineering Daimler 50hp Custom, 1916
Other Missed Vehicles
- Chrysler M3A5 Grant Lee Dozer
- Daimler FV703 Ferret Mk2/6 AUZ ENTAC (Ferret with Missiles)
- Ford S1 Scout Car, 1942 (1 x 0.5in HMG & 2 x 0.3in MGs)
- Vickers/EASAMS Tracked Waler Concept
- Vickers/EASAMS Wheeled Waler Concept
I believe that an Australian/New Zealand tech tree would be awesome for war thunder, as we have a great history of modifying US and UK vehicles as well as making some unique vehicles of our own.