I would like to see more tech trees or sub tech trees in-game, Im getting bored of grinding the same nations like Germany and Sweden. I want something different, other than U.S, Russia, and others.
Here are my opinions on adding sub tech trees:
Sub country / Research country
-Philippines. Israel. (Sabrah Ascod)-Made with Elbeit
-Denmark. Germany. (Leopard 1a5 DK)-German exports
-S.Korea. U.S. (K1 Panther)-Similar to M1 Abrams
Note:
I have no information about these tanks (e.g armour, gun, mobility), but I hope theres more tech trees in-game to make War Thunder more fun. Vehicles I have listed in this forums of proof that these countries shares same components and military technology to their allies.
I have no information if this is going to be added, some vehicles are either premium or tech tree, different tech tree layouts, and so much more.
This year we gonna receive ground swizz, korea tt (maybe late 2026), singapure, greece and cyprus, more india, and a possible turkish subtree (if leaks are correct).
He’s apparently getting bored of grinding the same nations but wants all the same vehicles he can grind right now, just with a different flag behind them. Impressive.
Would not agree on “more sub-trees” but “better representation of present sub-trees”.
You don’t get bored because you grind the same “host” nation, e.g. Germany, Sweden, the US or any other “major” tt. You get bored because what is more or less accessible for grinding/playing without extensive use of real $ is the same thing all around the place.
Finnish sub-tree made Sweden afford wider line-ups, especially if devs get around the actual Finnish SPAAs to fix low-tier Bofors AA problem. However, the TT itself has only 3 domestic(ly modified) (see as “unique”) vehicles (you can kind of count T-55M there with Belgian APFSDS, but otherwise it is 1:1 Soviet T-55M). Out of a dozen represented in researchable category. Those being BT-42, Vickers Mk.E and Leo2 Marksman. 2 of which low-tier that people tend to skip.
Finland can offer a good variety of tanks and other armored vehicles with their unique traits (see Swedish/Finnish armored vehicles thread). But devs take the C&P route as all it takes is copy the model, code and only change the livery and TT location. And that’s not the Finnish problem only.
All existing sub-trees, like Hungarian, Romanian, Thai, Indian, BeNeLux and the other officially declared sub-trees suffer from the same issue. You only see unique vehicles in the premium category (the infamous Finnish air sub-tree, that is actually located in the premium section and not researchable one).
If unique sub-tree additions were not 90% of the time event or premium, you wouldn’t need more and more sub-trees, but the proper representaion of the exisiting ones. The only proper sub-tree to this day is SA in the UK TT.
Look at what you get there in research tab, and you will understand why the current concept of sub-tree and treatment of it is not as effective and refined as it should be nowadays.
I’d like to see more sub tree, never really cared about seeing new independent trees but two or three.
Korea, Yugoslavia and a Middle Eastern tree of some sort.
I dont care lmao regardless it irritates me that people dont use any form of brain power before stating something like this.
He wants Denmark because he thinks the Germans and us are close but proceeded to do no basic research to see who we are the closest to in terms of allies or history.
Ye, at times it seems as if people just make a post with first thought on problem they have, and some of them get offended when people point out mistakes.
Like, I wanted to make in-depth post on 2A4M. For like month or so Im on 4 pages long draft thats being constantly reworked as I test things.
Hell, ive been sitting on article on RISE (P) since last february.
I wish I had the confidence to just send them out to the world without care.
