The votes on forum posts really don’t sway wether or not they are added, this was even said by staff themselves. It seems to be just for community interaction and opinion and nothing else.
1 Like
That applies to vehicles like the F16 or other mandatory vehicles, that were to come regardless, for suggestions like this, wich are much a debate topic, the final opinion in a poll of the community is vital and thank God the results are the way they should be.
I won’t answer unless i find it extremly needed so goodbye (so that i don’t give any more advertisement to this topic).
The difference with the Pantsir is that SPAA is a far more important niche then a wheeled vehicle large caliber vehicle, and NATO doctrine precludes a proper Pantsir equivalent. Suggestions about adding Pantsirs to nations that didn’t field them are a response to this, however multipiece systems would also be an acceptable and preferable alternative.
I have found a few vehicles that could fill this niche, but it’s in the form of Cuban vehicles, no high tier options and only mid tier options but I believe they would fit fine somewhere in the Soviet tree just fine.
Where did you find that image of the Centauro? That’s a series production hull with the 120 turret on it. And it seems to be on a parade?
The inhabitants of the forum have an interesting logic. It is normal to put Soviet and German military equipment in the development tree of Italy, but in their opinion, Italian equipment cannot be added to the development tree of the USSR.
3 Likes
In this case, why was Soviet technology pushed into countries such as Great Britain, Sweden, and Italy? These nations are self-sufficient in the game, and the fact that they lacked some niches, in your opinion, is normal.
It’s not that easy. The German and Soviet veichles in the Italian tt were used by Italy and Hungary (subtree). This veichles was never adopted nor purchased by Russia, It was in trials for 6 months aka It was never used.
4 Likes
Please tell me when Sweden acquired the T-80U and Mi-28 from Russia? I somehow forgot the date…
1 Like
I always stated that these two veichles should not be in game.
1 Like
However, they are in the game. And since the path has been paved, then let the Centauros follow it to the Soviet development tree.
1 Like
No, just because the devs made an error It doesn’t mean It has to be repeated. It will be better to ask to remove these two veichles istead.
1 Like
What’s not? This is not a mistake by the developers, but a planned extension of the branch. Since this applies to Sweden, it will also apply to the USSR/Russia.
1 Like
How about keep some of the unique things in one tree from going into another tree?
Centauros are Italian, they should be in the Italian tree.
Honestly while i dont want russia to get a centauro.
Your argument with the uniqueness is long gone.
When everyone is getting subtrees for leopards and or american planes etc
2 Likes
This is stupid, yes Sweden has 2 trialed vehicles, the t-80 is a squadron vehicle and not just in the tech tree for that reason I think but that does not mean Russia should a trialed centauro. Explain to me without bringing up Germany Italy Sweden Orr any other country why they should get this?
In your opinion, the T-80U is not unique, and the Mi-28 is not unique? Who will determine the degree of uniqueness? Let’s still follow the chosen path of the developers. They added equipment to the game based only on the fact that this country was conducting tests. There is a similar situation here.
2 Likes
Why don’t you want to?
Read trough the treat will u, explained it more then once.
Russia doesnt need it.
Its not a gap that needs to be filled
Because they were tested in Russia, because there are no wheeled tanks in the USSR/Russia development tree. And it’s fun, while pumping up one nation, to try the technology of other countries. Italy, Sweden, Germany, Japan, Britain will not let me lie. Almost all branches contain equipment that has never been in service with these countries, and only the USSR/Russia and the USA stand aside.
2 Likes