China should not get a M1A2T Abrams

Machinery of War Discussion
,
1

China, nor any nation besides the USA, should have an Abrams tank in their tech tree. Full stop.

China already has its own domestic tank production that provides plenty of options at higher tiers, on par with the United States and Britain. From a game play standpoint, they have zero need to have it to fill their roster.
We have already seen the massive spread of US Aircraft and German Leos to other tech trees. While in some cases, like Italy, it is necessary to improve an abysmal roster and make the nation more viable to play, China is not one of them. China has 3 12.0 MBTs, to the US’s 2. Germany’s Leo spread certainly hasn’t been rewarded appropriately, but their tech tree has 4 12.0 Leo MBTs, more home produced tanks of any nation. Sweden has 4 as well, while France has a whopping 6 12.0 MBTs as they were given 2 Leo variants. Italy, the United States, and Britain all only have 2 12.0 Tanks in their trees, yet the wisdom is we should give China it’s 4th?

You also don’t see the United States getting additional vehicles from foreign nations at higher tiers like Italy and France have, and never will. The argument that it “allows other nations to experience more play styles” is complete bogus then, as the United States won’t have anything going for it besides the Abrams, thus US players will have no “opportunities” to experience different vehicle designs. Why should the Chinese tech tree be more rewarding than the US tech tree? It shouldn’t.
If a US Player is expected to grind to the top of the US tree to get the Abrams, with no other reward, no other nation should be permitted to also have the Abrams and thus dilute the reasons to play the US tech tree.

Like the M1A1 AIM before it, all future Abrams variants should be restricted to the US tech tree to maintain the tree’s uniqueness. Yes, I know the Skink is in the tree, but that lower tier AA vehicle hardly qualifies. The marketplace only Merkavas will never been seen by the average player either.

Germany at least has a T-72 in its tree that any player can grind to, but that hardly makes up for the lack of a unique tank in the highest tier. Britain has also not received any NATO tanks used by the Commonwealth, such as the Australian Abrams or the Canadian Leo.

There is an argument to be made to add foreign tanks to the US tree, such as the experimental Leo the US tested or captured Russian armor, but at that point why have separate tech trees at all?
Having solely unique rewards at the end of tech trees is one of the few reasons to spend months and years grinding the tree. China’s players were up in arms over their unique tanks going to another nation. And rightfully so: why play China if I can get their tanks in the Japanese tree, along with Japan’s unique tanks.

Furthermore, forcing players to player other nations to get unique top tier vehicles helps spread around skilled players, contributing to better balanced teams, even marginally.

In summation, only the US tech tree should contain the Abrams tank to maintain the uniqueness and reward of the tree.

  • Agreed, the Abrams should remain unique to the US
  • Disagree, other tech trees should get the Abrams
0 voters

.

29 Likes
2

yes,and then there’s the little theater
China:I need a car
gaijin:Singapore for you
China:I want a China’s car
gaijin:(keep silent)
China:Are you here?I just want a new car,China’s own
gaijin:oh,Abrams for you

I would like to express my opinion as a Chinese,China do not need Abrams,I don’t care about that.But at least not like some stupid speech,I saw a man said it need in Japan today,it’s crazy and impossinle.

39 Likes
3

Suddenly I thought of a song by David Tao,the lyrics are:
fb050d1005271791f51a0cf693e5a238
I should fall asleep listening to the song,it’s one o’clock in China

1 Like
4

Agreed, Abrams should stay unique to US and Chinese MBTs need heavy fixing and balance changes (better reload).

21 Likes
5

You know, getting them to admit that Chinese tanks have numerous bugs is harder than launching a whale to Mars.

15 Likes
7

At this point, all tech trees in WT have some export vehicles in them. Almost all tech trees also have access to vehicles manufactured in the US.

Why make a special exception for the Abrams?

4 Likes
8

The sad thing is the average single nation main who play the other trees only see the US tree as a copy-pasta pinata, They want everything that the US built to be in their tree but will unironically say the US shouldn’t get anything in return at all because “They have too much”.

Low tier has been destroyed from the copy-paste spam.

Not including Premiums/Events (many of which you cant get anymore anyway)
Rank 2 8/10 tanks have a 1-1 copy in another tree, One of those 2 is the M4 which is functionally the same as any other Sherman so in reality they have 1 unique rank 2.

Rank 3 10/14 are copy-pasted

Rank 4 they already share the M41, And soon the M56 since Korea had them.

Rank 5 4/9 are copy-pasted.

Many of the tanks that don’t have a exact 1-1 copy-paste are still so similar to what we see in other trees that they might as well be counted as copied,

Its not until rank 6 that the tree becomes truly unique, And now Gaijin wants to destroy that to appease the crybaby single nation mains who are too lazy, Over-entitled and stupid to play more than a single tree.

Its bad enough several nations have Leopards/T-80’s when they have loads of their own MBT’s, We don’t need more of this junk.
Every time a native tree loses exclusive access to one of their vehicles they should automatically get a unique vehicle in return for each and every single vehicle they share as compensation for the loss of uniqueness.

4 Likes
9

It’s not a problem that the Abrams will become the new T-80.

10

Does China (ROC) operates Abrams? Yes
Does this brings some diversity in Chinese TT on the top? Also yes

Case closed

25 Likes
11

agree

1 Like
12

Because the inverse is not true. The US has no foreign export tanks in its regular tree. It has the Skink SPAA, which is US hull, and two low-tier “British” premiums that are also US hulls. The only foreign hulls in the entire page are the marketplace only Merkavas. Since they are marketplace, they don’t count: very, very few people, if any, will ever have them.

Taking the Abrams pretty much removes the last unique tank to work for in the US Tree. Shermans are everywhere, mainline US cold war mediums are in multiple trees, all that’s really left is the Abrams.

7 Likes
13

I don’t get your point. The US sells their shit to literaly everyone so why should it be unique

10 Likes
14

what tanks did the US import?

2 Likes
15

The only reason I could see if they (US) did not get/had the same or similar tank to their TT (think whole situation of Tor-M1 in Chinese TT, but not in Soviet), but US have a top Abrams in their TT

1 Like
16

so i waiting for trophy abrams in soviet tt

1 Like
18

Given that the Abrams AIM and Canadian Leo are in the US and German trees, respectively, there is already precedent to keep export variants to the owning nation.

The point is to maintain a tree’s uniqueness and reward. If all the trees are practically the same, there is no reason to try a new tree.

Worse though, is the US tree won’t have any other tanks to try out, so why bother with it? If you can get the US, Japanese, and Chinese experience in a single tree, why would you not save time and effort by grinding that tree to gain more reward.

5 Likes
19

I think it would be unfair if China gets the Abrams tank. If they give it to China, then let them give the Thai vt-4 to Japan along with it.

13 Likes
20

I agree to this

4 Likes
21

They purchased loads of Soviet tanks when the union fell, They have around 90 T-72’s that to this day are used in combat training.

They purchased 80 ish Fireflies of several models and used them in 2 armies in the last year of the war.

They imported at least 1 Centurion MK5 that was later gutted to use as a platform for the LPT program.

3 Likes
22

then i think they should get them too if there is room in the tree