so if you say this Canada tech tree is gonna be just as bad as the other tech trees you keep bringing why should it be added. And what does this tech tree offer over those other. I can’t shake the thought you just wanna have your nation in the game, what ever the cost? I sure hope thats not the case, that would be brain rot lol
fair you got me there, I will admit, this has become a crusade to me now ;) Nah im kidding. I would not object to canadian vehicles being added if only they were atleast semi uniqe. Can we call that common ground, that you spoke of earlier?
You’re missing the main point here.
What difference would it make?
That’s what I’ve been saying, but you’re moving the goalpost when I state something and changing the argument.
“Oh there’s IFVs and ATGM slingers, so not good”
But most nations have IFVs and ATGM slingers at those ranges.
“Oh there’s too much C&P”
There’s literally Sweden, Israel, Italy, and China.
“Oh so now you just want your own nation in the game”
A lot of people want to see their own nation, it only makes sense.
It’s hard to reason if you’re not capable of giving valid reasons as to why Canada shouldnt be added due to fact that other nations have been added while having the exact same issues.
2 Likes
But yes, I can reason with adding semi-unique vehicles, which is why its nice to see vehicles such as the Ram Mk II and the QF 3.7 Ram ingame.
Alongside the various Canadian Leopards
I can tell you, even more IFV’s, atgm-carriers and recoiless rifles shooting heat-fs at rank IV and V. I was only wondering if you noticed this.
two wrongs dont make a right, neither does 10+
Yeah I happened to notice, but that appears to be the Ranks where we make that jump from APHE/AP (Britain and France) to HEAT-FS, unless you’re Sweden that has APDS and HEAT-FS at the lower ranks due to their tank designs
1 Like
I thougt we agreed on this specific topic lol
I feel you are being just a tad bit disingenuous saying this. The point of a discussion is not to “win” its about being honest. And i feel we both shared our honest opinions, cheers to that
Hey guys, I think we’ve sort of run the course of the debate. Sure there are a number of vehicles that use hollow-charge weapons, but that is not bad in-of-itself. War Thunder gives precedent for that, and those vehicles are not without drawback.
There can be a good chunk of copy-and-paste, but that can also be entirely avoided as I illustrated in my first pitch with a “lean” tree. By no means does it require substantial copy and paste, but that can be used if you want more depth.
1 Like
Leopard 2A6MC2 when
2 Likes
Oh boy…there we go again
I don’t think I posted this here before but I found a “8 “barrel” Smoke projector” that is supposedly linked to Canada.
*almost all photos are from that mapleleafup thread.
Wasp
Staghounds
Sherman V
Sherman Firefly
www.canadiansoldiers.com
https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/services/military-history/history-heritage/official-military-history-lineages/lineages/infantry-regiments/governor-generals-foot-guards.html
Does anyone have more on this? As it’s something that could make the “C&Ps” a bit more unique.
3 Likes
3 Likes
Eh I’m kinda opposed to the MRZR TOW, just because the ammunition capacity, the survivability, and the firepower are so lacking, especially after the TOW nerfs. It does not seem like a fun time for anyone having to play through that, and almost no one would buy it as a premium.
I just think there are better options in the M150A1, M113A2 TUA, LAV TUA, and export LAV-AT(S), and LAV-AT(S)A1.
Personally, I love it and would love its inclusion and is one of my favourites from Thatz’s Tree.
Just because it won’t be “good” shouldn’t mean it shouldn’t be added.
None of the “meme vehicles” will ever be good but they are unique and goofy, so less likely for people to scream “C&P” which is an extra bonus.
1 Like
-1 from me. A lot of this is copy paste, and Naval and Air are unlikely to be better. It would be better if Gaijin increases the amount of lines a nation can have, and make Canada a sub tree of either Britain or the US, preferably Britain. They don’t have the MiC to justify being their own tree, at most having a handful of unique vehicles, mostly early in the tree.
1 Like
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