World is the Soviet Union.
That tends to happen when you export a bunch of stuff, but the people who you export to decide that maybe they wanna switch sides once you implode.
Also btw, USSR TT has 20 pieces of equipment(7 ground, 13 air.) This means that percentage wise, only germany, italy, sweden, and china have more soviet/russian equipment than the soviets have “western” equipment. So statistically the USSR is more filled with western equipment than most western TTs are filled with USSR equipment.
No. Bad idea.
Oh he’s the guy who thought 2A8 for USSR.
Yes
Controversial but fair, why not.
+1 It’s funny how everyone is opposing it, but what if we decided to remove the Su-30MKM from Japan, remove the OSA from Germany, England, and Italy, remove the T-72 from others, thus maintaining each tech tree unique? Don’t you think? After all, it’s a double-edged sword; you don’t want these vehicles for Russia, and we don’t want ours for others.
In fact, I didn’t want Hungarian/Soviet vehicles in the Italian TT, but Gaijin is lazy and always chooses the easiest solution, which is always the most harmful one.
There’s the copy-and-paste aspect, which honestly I don’t mind much. Subtrees benefit more than they hinder. Removing Hungary from the Italian tree would prove you don’t have a 2A7 to play with, a very good 9.7 T72A, and would deprive you of a decent SPAA in 10.3. Subtrees are and always will be welcome, both as a way to strengthen a nation’s rosters and to represent another, but players only see the negative side.
One thing is leased copypaste, another is trialed vehicles. At this point we can add half of the world’s tech to USA for example. We can even go further then, pilot from said country flown aircraft from another - gib, another nation’s tank was stationed on the land of my country - gib, foreign nation base from the same alliance on the country’s land - gib all their vehicles now!
Gaijin’s opened this can of worms and we are supporting them in that, bruh…
because they are already suggested for like, eternity. AND russia didnt build much with regular caliber cannons - except for maybe 2S14 Stinger and some prototypes which are long awaited already tbh.
And other countries get added “export vehicles to complete the experience” :/
1 Like
yes. As UK got India because they were using british tanks and were allies 30 years ago.
I feel Russia is one of the most handheld nations in game. I would personally hate to see Israeli missiles on an Italian IFV in the Russian tree. I like that we still have some distinction between Russian technology and Western technologies.
I do also understand that Russia being incapable of producing a missile like SPIKE are missing this FnF capacity (in game) that other nations have. Problem is this would end up as a Premium/Squadron/Event vehicle and it would be the most played IFV in the history of War Thunder leading to teams just being deleted by FnF missiles and then the combination of LMUR/Kh-38s.
Britain has Soviet vehicles because of her tech tree
as does Germany and Italy.
It’s different proposal from it was tested get it added, really the only nation to benefit from this mindset is Sweden.
That isnt really an argument, besides suggestion mods admitted they dont have any process for selecting suggestions, so best bet would be to contact them and put pressure on them.
Okay, doctorinal differences, but these arent an argument to add something to the TT outside nation normal relations.
Germany lacks Kh38MT equivalent, should it recieve Su30 from some of its operator that isnt already taken?
Difference is if the vehicle is added through subnation that actually operated those vehicles, or its random addition like malaysian Su30.
We need less malaysian Su30.
No.
Still part of the commonwealth, which was mentioned multiple times as main theme of UK.
I mean, it is a good one as forum rules forbid to make doubles of the suggestions, and then the users just dont have enough authority to make things move.
well they look like they ARE to me as we see SA, hungarian, thai, Finnish subtrees. I mean, they exist only to add some “different playstyle” techs and make “full experience” as devs stated. And the different story with F-5 FCU (which if im correct was a trial), T-80U Sweden and Oplot-P which exist as they were trials of subtrees.
it has AGM65s and if i remember right is the only operator of Brimstones ingame?
well as Japan got the SU-30? It looks to me that it WILL once. And the USSR still havent got any AIM-120 or AGM-65 operator, same as no machine using NATO type cannons which from my point of view looks unfair.
So? As you already stated yourseld, many former Warsaw Pact use the armanment of NATO which can be added. Plus there are trialed versions, plus there are subnations which are STILL compations AND use NATO driven vehicles (e.g. Serbia for example). I mean…
I would agree with you if i had a choice BETWEEN removing all copy-pastes (meaning from all the trees, includind T-72Ms copies, leopard 1 copies, leopard 2 copies, ect) and futrher addition of ONLY unique models, AND adding all copypastes to all countries. Im against the copypastes, but im much more against such discriminaton. So if the gaijin chooses the politics of adding such copypastes, with “well technically su-30 of japan COULD use armanment even if it was never bought” and “well Oplot COULD use BTA4 because they are compatible with 80UD”, and adding more trials? Honestly i just feel unfairness in this. So i woud stand for same treatment of USSR which, looking at hungarian tree, really does need a wheeler much more than Italy needed the T-72 and BTR-80.
but has much closer relation to Russia now than to Britain. Same as say that Canada is still under British.
1 Like
Whats there to tell, fact that some suggestions sit in pending approval limbo for weeks and Leopard 2A8 suggestion made by one of the suggestion mods gets approved in 2 days…
Still most of the examples you mentioned do make some sense
- Sweden and Finland were/are allies and share/shared some unique defense relations (such as transfer of swedish drakens to finland should finland be attacked by soviet union) and are part of NATO
- thailand was an ally to japan during WW2 and still share some defense cooperation today IIRC
- hungary was minor axis nation during WW2 and is NATO member today; italy also houses romania, another minor axis nation
- SA IIRC still part of the commonwealth, and was never in openly hostile relation with UK
With the CZ/SK Id go in detail but that would be politics so im just gonna throw TOTALLY RANDOM NUMBERS AND WORDS out there:
- Munich
- 1948
- 1968
- 1989
- RAF pilots
CZ for russia would be like israel to germany.
And frankly should be removed.
None of these is Kh38MT equivalent. Only thing Mavs have common is being FnF. Brimstones are entirely different.
Which shouldnt have been added without making malaysia offiicial subtree.
If i wanted to play sukhois id go and play russia - in fact I already did this with Su-33 instead of asking for sukhoi in german TT.
Aight but let me demonstrate how this logic is flawed:
Germany still hasnt recieved:
- Kh38MT equivalent
- T-80UD equivalent
- T-80BVM equivalent
- tunguska equivalent
- pancir equivalent
- relikt equivalent
- su-27 equivalent
Gaijin gib now its unfair
Besides few of the vehicles I linked in one of the previous comments are turkish made with western weapons - and since theyre kazachstani, there would be no issue with them going to russia whatsoever
Important bit.
its a mystery why for the new purchases they they didnt continue buying soviet/russian tech and went for western stuff.
Shouldnt be added at all and those already in game should be removed - including stuff like swedish T-80U
You know if serbia was tied to possible independent yugoslavia TT id agree with you here. Serbia would make for possible subtree for russia.
If we go with extremely broad definition of copypaste (ie. anything that isnt original chasis) (not perfect but its to demonstrate a point)
Obviously more of a subtree rather than standalone TT.
as you should.
You can be both against discrimination and be against non-sensical additions.
aviable weapons for planes follow entirely different logic to adding entire vehicles or TTs.
same with tank ammo. on top of that, ammo is soft balancing factor.
None of the additions above would cause any controversy - in fact id support them. Domestic russian vehicles even more so.
Seeing as india also operates AH-64s, Rafales and was being offered F-35s on top of soviet/russian tech (meaning to recieve such weapons it would need to be “export safe”), its not the best example of nation that has close relations to.
But then look at it that way: addition of Finnish 2a4-2a6 did not “add” anything to Sweden, and only ranks it mattered are the 9.3 with 72 and an entire 4.0 and 5.7 lineups added.
thus being said the only unique vehicle in finnish subtree is
But still the dev’s position is “it brings the different playstyle”. I mean Japan conquered Korea, a bit of China, now they allies with many different countries, and still they choose to add not the “close to the tech tree mood” tanks, but the completely different playstyle vehicles.
and had no USSR equipment until became under USSR
and has no USSR tanks either. If anything, their tanks were much closer to Sweden then finnish tanks. But they got added to Italy using the communist Hungary equipement AND the modern NATO equiment. Thats what is hypocritical here - its okay to have NATO + USSR equipement in NATO related tech trees. But not okay to have same at USSR with same logic. “Hungary was ally of axis so we add it to italy WITH later given USSR tanks” is same as say “Poland was an ally of USSR at Warsaw Pact so we add it to USSR with later given german Leopard 2s” if you ask me.
I never intended to say that, what i ment is that it had the same “different playstyle” logic applied when added to Britain. It brought fast wheelers to the tree, and germanized machinety to top tier.
Well i can say that the briatin cant be british because numbers, same for the US being ally of Britain and any other country that in some time was an enemy. I mean, Poland has the same question marks with germany as it has with USSR, but polish Leopard exists in german tree. So its irrelevant honestly.
Is agreeable
well one is FnF rocket that tho even if cant be used from same disances, had a superior position to USSR for much time as USSR only had like, Vikhr on one helicopter and Kh29 on several planes which is also not comparable for AGM65 spam. And the Brimstone is one that used against modern SPAAs i believe? I never tried that one tho so cant be sure, correct me if im wrong, but they say its most range weapon out there now.
even if it was, they have justification of “can technically be”, so its no use. Technically Yatagan is successor of T-80 so should be added to USSR xD
Yes, and i believe we should have applied same logic to any other tree.
well if we only count modern politics. But the game is has “no politics rules” so?
idk its just a question of jusutification. If we only count modern politics, there should be no USSR equipment in any NATO (except maybe for the T-90S) as they were either discarded or sold already.
agreed, but no one discards them and more than that, they add MORE of them with Oplot being the third, making their position clear.
Agreed
id say the copypaste is anything that havent been modified to look and work something differently. E.G. bought Centy 10 which is Strv 101 is copypaste, and the Strv104 isnt. Tho the little additions like 7/62 MGs or different tracks which have no effect on how the rank does dont count.
yes, but also no. They follow balance reasons that them devs someow try to justify with logic
Agree, the Boomerags are cool. Them would fit in a role of something like Freccia. And the 2s14 is great as Centauro.
well its debatable, tho it only means that indian subtree can ger HUGE.
1 Like