Eh I’ll disagree with the MIC comment, mostly because the Canadian Army, USMC, SBCTs, and the SANG are all mechanized on several different forms of the LAV. Just because the Canadian Army itself sucks, doesn’t mean the export industry does.
3 Likes
I’m not saying their MiC sucks, just that it isn’t strong enough to justify their own TT. They got a few solid vehicles that make it worthy of representation in War Thunder, it just isn’t strong enough to make itself it’s own tech tree.
Also, I thought the LAV was American?
Nope the LAV is Canadian. And has been since 1976 with the AVGP which the US never used.
Americans try to claim it as theirs because General Dynamics Land Systems – Canada builds them. Despite even the US ones being built in London, Ontario.
Mix in with all the stuff built during WW2, Rams, Grizzlys, CMP Trucks etc. Canada has a domestic selling point for both WW2 and the Modern Day.
4 Likes
Nope, made at the GDLS-C, formerly GM of Canada plant in London, Ontario. Exported over 2000 of various forms to the SANG, not to mention being the APC of the USMC since 1981, and the basis of the Strykers also exported to the US.
I stand corrected. Still, I don’t think this is enough for a standalone TT. Solid sub tree? Absolutely, but not on its own. Hope to see that change in the future though.
The problem is where to put it, as far too many problems with the US and the UK is full of no room. Besides, there is enough domestic stuff on this tree for at least 2 lines and it’s currently missing stuff(and even removing all the non-essential C&P for the air and ground you’d still be a 4 line tree.) Tho I dislike sub-trees as Gajijn has shown they are lazy with those and only add C&P to the TT, with all unique vehicles ending up premium and event with sub-trees. Maybe if a sub-tree rework happens I’d be receptive to it but as of right now, a sub-tree is asking to see all unique stuff locked behind paywalls and events.
A better alternative to Canada by itself is being pared with the ANZACs in a “pseudo-commonwealth-tree”
About tree size limit:
Sub-tree rework:
1 Like
Mostly because this is my niche interest, here are some LAV candidates not used by the CAF but still eligible for a Canadian Ground Tree:
4 Likes
And I’ll be honest, I find the 5 lines limit an arbitrary limit imposed by the UI that can be solved with a scrollbar, and I find limiting TTs because of the UI silly. I feel subtrees are the way of the future for War Thunder, we are kinda starting to run low on viable nations a far as fully fleshed out tech trees.
Noice.
When will the mods add this to the suggestions passed to devs? It’s one of the bigger threads on the platform and has been still getting comments after such a long time.
2 Likes
The devs said no to the scroll bar. and the nation tabs are a better idea anyway, as it lets both the host and the sub-tree get the room they need to have unique stuff as TT and stops the “all-tech trees are that same” problem that is starting as you don’t need to grind the sub-tree.
Sure if you like all unique stuff being premium and events go ahead, I’ll point to the sub-tree in-game and how they are almost all C&P as TT over the unique vehicle.
I disagree. It just requires doing some research(something Gaijin hates based on their claims)/nation pairs over just one on ones.
2 Likes
And, as a treat, here’s a few more.
Outside of this, Roshel and Streit might have a few missile carriers. Roshel recently revealed a Senator armed with Gsh-23s for the VSHORAD/C-UAS role. Definitely more than a few things made-in-Canada that would be useful for a tree.
4 Likes
I going to point well I have been complaining about copy and paste, I don’t mind it and even welcome as if a nation used it they should get it. However I do have a problem when copy and paste comes instead of unique stuff.
And one the point of the MiC well it not big and flashy like many others, bar Japan(as far as I can tell) every nation in game can get something Canadian built, whether it themselves or a related nation(sub-tree, nation that seen to just be going to them)
1 Like
I also managed to get 2 books that can help out this forum, so there’s extra sources and such that’ll only help it out more
2 Likes
Eh, the devs words are only marginally more valuable then a pinch of salt at this point. They said the same thing about MBTs and Supersonic aircraft if I am not mistaken. I know the US and Russia at least can make use of an extra line for a car/armored car line. And tabs are just another way of adding in subtrees, my point was it’s kinda silly to let something like UI prevent new subtrees and the like.
I suppose knowing Gaijin that’s fair. The way I see the sub trees is that it allows you to have all the cool unique stuff without having to worry about filling up a whole tech tree, that’s why is see them as the future.
If only Gaijin saw it that way. However they don’t they see them as a easy way to buff the host tree without fixing/modeling the host or sub-tree unique stuff. And Smin and the others effectively out right said that.
I can’t see sub-tree as the future without making it so we so no more unique stuff as TT.
If you want to make a Canadian sub-tree, I have a post the marks all C&P. Pick one unique vehicle that will be event and the only unique vehicle of the sub-tree and the rest C&P those are you TT vehicle.
In the vein of copy-paste, I did my own take on a lean tree that omitted a good chunk of the copy-paste vics. Of course you’ll still have your Leopards and Centurions - Cold War tank development was obviously a high cost of entry affair, so it was always easier to buy. But this take drops a lot of the fluff.
After this, I made a middle-ground case. What would be the ideal, including copy-paste if it added beneficial depth to lineups, and better reflected the historic equipment of the Canadian Army.
Think at the end of the day, you can do a fairly good tree without too much copy-paste. Thatz’ post was more about “here’s a lot of stuff, Gaijin take your pick” and was more about options than explicitly “use all of these.”
3 Likes
-1. I’m normally in support of a lot of full trees but I just don’t think there’s enough here that’s so unique it warrants a whole new tree. Would rather see a Canadian sub-tree/nation folder in the US or UK tree (not gonna argue which is best lol). Still have nations like Yugoslavia, Korea, LatAM, etc. to be added that can offer far more unique vehicles.
2 Likes
On a better topic than people asking for all the unique stuff to end up as event vehicles. I have something I should have shared some time ago.
The Discord server has been doing so research on this thing. and here is what we found.
A. it uses an American half-track model
B. it’s rockets are RP-3s.
Along with anything else we could find point it to being connected to the rocket Staghound program that both Canada & the UK took part in.
If anyone has more info that would be appreciated.
5 Likes
Could you DM me the invite, I have some good resources you might enjoy
Why people always look this tree, say it’s full C&P when not ALL the tree is and then saying other nations with C&P are better
1 Like