As the title suggests, China has very realistic issues with the current air tech tree.
Spoiler
Above is what the air tech tree currently looks like.
As we approach the addition of J-11B and J-10B, it draws a serious question, does the far left line make any sense? We are seeing it go from F16A MLU to J-10A, to Mirage 5Ei recently added, and with the addition of J10-B, will return to PLA multi-role. The constant switch between PLA and ROCAF is simply not very reasonable.
A realistic solution to this issue would be to move the entire tech tree to the right, with the Q5/JH7 line following the H5, as already seen with Soviet Mig-27/Su34 line. This then creates a new line, which could be designated to CAIG, and the other devoted to SAC. (CAIG=Chengdu Aerospace Industry Co) (SAC=Shenyang aircraft Corporation)
The lines will thus be as follows:
SAC: J-6, J-8B, J-8F, J-11, J-11A (J-11B)
CAIG: J-7, J-7E, J-10A (J-10B)
This tech will make a lot more sense over the current one, in not only does ROCAF retains a complete line, but also separates SAC and CAIG just like the Mikoyan-Gurevich / Sukhoi lines in Soviet Russian tech tree.
Other vehicles such as J-7G, J-8I are also given space by this move.
Maybe it should be like this: ROC, PLAAF light fighter, PLAAF heavy fighter, PLAAF attack aircraft/bomber/multirole fighter/carrier-based aircraft, and finally a subtree, such as North Korea or Pakistan, etc
From game balance, it makes no sense to have China and Taiwan in the same tree; let alone political aspect of it. There are enough vehicles to do this for Tanks, Planes, & Helicopters so I see no reason not to do this.
These are barely half a tree though. Let alone the fact that they are still both ‘China’, neither of these trees would work to the slightest extent. If u notice, it is singular lines with 5-6 aircrafts in the same line of multiple levels which is very hard to not only justify but also hugely annoying to play. Another issue as u probably realised is that a lot of the early tree is shared, which makes 0 sense for them to be separate vehicles if they really were the same ones. Also take into account that these would be the smallest and most repetitive tree of all currently in WT except Israel.
Gaijin doesn’t plan to see China as a major country, even though the number of Chinese players is quite large. This year, China’s sub-tree is coming, so Gaijin refuses to offer more unique vehicles for China.
Ridiculous, China does not need a sub tree and already has enough vehicles to be 2 seperate trees. Why does Gaijin insist on adding sub-trees to nations that don’t need them.
Look at Thailand, added to Japan, apart from the Alpha Jet those vehicles fill no gaps to the tree and are a complete waste. Thailand should’ve been it’s own tree, just like any other subtree in game currently (Finland, etc.)
A tree is not just if it has enough vehicles. In the case here, China will have literally 0 CAS between 17.7 and 12.7. ROCAF wise it doesn’t go pass 15.0 even with F16V so very unlikely that it will be separate. Again bringing back my point, A tree doesn’t just need sufficient number of vehicles but also they need a couple of lineups. If you look at the tree of China(s) neither has any sort of strong enough lineup to be worth playing. You must consider the fact that they are both still ‘China’. The tree is not called ROC or PRC for a reason. As for subtrees, it should be obvious that even if only one vehicle is useful, that is an improvement, be it small, an improvement is an improvement, I completely stand behind Gaijin on subtrees. Also subtrees like Thailand has less vehicles than 1 single line of SOviet or american tree, it doesn’t matter if u see them spread out to look big, they are very limited, so much to an extent that there is 0 chance they work as a single tree.
I believe that every nation should be in War Thunder as it’s own tree if possible. ANZAC, BeNeLux, etc. and other countries with close relations should be a combined tree assuming they do not have enough vehicles to fill a tree, but given that both RoC + PRoC do have enough vehicles to fill 2 seperate trees they should be split for game balance.
It is okay for a tech tree to have gaps, there are pro’s and con’s to every tree after all…
In a game where France and Italy have the Leopard 2, Japan has the F-16, and Sweden has the Mi-28, you’re telling me that China, which is already at the bottom of the power spectrum, needs to be split into two tech trees that can’t fill the presets? Are you crazy? Even splitting India from the UK tech tree would make more sense than this.
No I get what he is saying, he’s saying that they should have every single country as a separate tree. No subtrees at all. But just that I told him that it is not practicle to do so.
