No, no and no.
USA doesn’t need any sort of sub-tree.
3 Likes
TBF, neither does Germany or GB, the other two nations where it would go.
Completely agreed.
I don’t mind single vehicle additions such as C2 for Germany, but I’m honestly saddened that UK got a sub-tree in the end.
1 Like
Individual vehicles in different trees make much more sense than one set of vehicles in one tree. I love the MEXAS (I’ve used it once or twice) and think it was a great event vehicle- and I think how the Mexas was implemented was exactly how I would go forward with Canada.
1 Like
Split the nation between multiple Tech-trees as unattainable event vehicles?
That’s the worst way to do Canada. please picture your nation or even the US like that. The C2 Mexas(because it’s not the only Leo with Mexas) is one of the worst event vehicle options.
3 Likes
I meant more add them on an individual bases. Not as event vehicles. Although so e would make good event vehicles, by adding them on an individual basis you can sort of keep people happy (again, as I said earlier, there is no implementation of Canada that makes everyone happy. That’s just the truth)
Why would it be like Isreail? Canada did exist during WW2 and has multiple Rank I possible domestic vehicles in both Air and Ground. Not to mention it has somethings domestic in every rank. (ground more so do to the number of licenced built in the Air)
2 Likes
There is no implementation of any country that would make people happy.
And outside of the UK no Canadian vehicles are TT possible so they all would end up as events. The sad truth is some sort of independent tree is needed else Canada would be one of the worst nations to be a fan of unless you’re a billionaire.
1 Like
Yes, but Canada is a highly contested country because it has so many different vehicles from different nations. It would be different if it only had vehicles from one nation OR if there was a clear and obvious gap in one. The Thai F-5E, for example, or the Hungarian line, both made sense because they went to nations that needed them to fill gaps. But, again, because that isn’t the case, it should either be independent and like Israel or split.
You could change that to any other nation and still be correct. Australia, Benelux, Poland, Korea etc.
Why like Israil? it would be more like (pre-subtree Italy) or Japan. a Rank I start tree with some C&P to help fill holes. Technically you could make a 5-line tree like the big 3 but remove some of the less needed C&P and it would a 4-line tree(could get an Australia/ANZAC sub-tree).
Nothing would be like Israel as it wouldn’t be a half-tree but a full one.
You should never argue for splitting a nation up(it’s like saying you hate the nation and it’s how they become the worst-treated nation in WT). We fight for Tech-trees/sub-trees because we want to make line-ups of our stuff together not apart. And split nations only are used for one thing unattainable event vehicles that you need to spend thousands of dollars to get after if you missed it. It’s better no more tech for that nation comes at that point.
2 Likes
The LAV 6 and LAV III are made in canada but made and produced by by General Dynamics (GD) which is an american company.
And Bradleys are produced by BAE you point being?
2 Likes
idk just looked it up, there made in canada and made by americans
btw CAT makes the engine an american company and the buchmaster gun is american company.
There made by Canadians in Canadian by an comapny that is owned by americans.
2 Likes
Yes and all US fighters use Martin-Baker Ejector seats doesn’t stop them being americans. Point is just because something is manufactured by an American subsidiary in a different country doesnt make that vehicle american.
2 Likes
Are us fighters made Almost entirely in america???
Yes so making them american. When most of the parts from your vehicle arent from youre nation is it really youre vehicle??
General dynamics Canada is American subsidiary but the people who designed it were Canadian and it was built in Canada for Canada
It be like saying the Warrior CSP should go to US as Lockheed Martin UK made the turret
Or the CV90 should go to UK because BAE makes it
3 Likes
General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada.
It is built by the Canadian subsidiary of the company. Which for most of its life didn’t have any reason to listen to the American section.
The LAV was ordered by the Canadian government to be built by a Canadian company. It just so happens that said Canadian company has an American parent but that doesn’t make the LAV American.
But if you want to use the company argument other nations like the UK whose clams can get so much worse.
1 Like