I have a strong feeling that many of the discussions about recent Thai sub-tree getting added into Japan misses the key problem, that is failing to ask what opinion the player community should form over the standards of how to decide if an IRL vehicle gets added to what tech-trees.
Currently the game follows three competing logic:
1.A vehicle gets added to the designer nation of that vehicle.
2.A vehicle gets added to a the tech tree of a nation that has close g-p ties to the nation that operates this specific version of the vehicle.
3.A vehicle gets added to the tech tree of a nation that has deep historical ties to the nation that operates this specific version of the vehicle.
(P.S.1. when discussing the sub-trees usually logic 1 is discarded
(P.S.2. due to the g-p implications of arms sales it is usually the case for logic 1 and 2 to be true at same time, and 3 depends)
The examples are,
M1 AIM follows logic 1 and 2
T90 TWMP follows logic 3
TAM 2IP follows logic 1
T72AV follows logic 1 and 2
CV 9030NL (or Lowland Nations subtree) follows logic 2
VT5 is logic 1 while T80UD follows logic 2
F14A IRIAF follows logic 1
The Swiss subtree follows logic 2 (or even 3 depends on personal perspective)
The F111C despite being Australian and American design now gets added into British tech tree under logic 2 and 3 (which means a time displacement)
The Thai air subtree is in Japanese tech tree for logic 2 and 3
As for the Hungarian sub tree… why are they in Italian tech tree? None of the logics seems to strictly apply other than them all being EU nations and thus follows… logic 2? Are they together for their flags? An act of convenience I guess
Finnish subtree in Swedish tech tree for logic 2 and maybe 3
As you can see the logics are all over the place with no obvious priorities among them
The head-less arguments over how vehicles and subtrees should be added will persist if there is no majority opinion formed on that matter in the player base
Comment and discuss your perceived logics and priorities under, what are the should-be logics and priorities!
There are zero double standards with sub-trees.
Australia, Argentina, Syria, Iran, etc are not sub-trees nor should they be.
Almost all of the vehicles you listed are not sub-tree vehicles.
Out of the vehicles listed, only CV9030NL, T-90 TWMP, Thailand vehicles, and Switzerland vehicles are sub-tree vehicles.
The above reasonings are not only for subtrees remind you, Australian M1 AIM and F111C getting split into 2 different tech trees despite having the exact same characteristics in terms of deciding which tech tree they should go to gives you quite a lot of hint.
Italy and Hungary were both Axis nations with (relatively) small air forces. I think that’s about it. They could have added Hungary to Germany but Germany has plenty of planes, and they ended up getting Switzerland anyway which makes more sense (I guess?)
There’s really no standards to it at all. They will add whatever wherever they want to. They could have made a separate “minor nations” tree, but that would have meant everyone would have to grind it from scratch, and the number of unique planes would still be kind of low.
The subtrees are just a way to give people access to iconic planes from trees they don’t want to grind, there’s not really any rhyme or reason to them besides that.
Yes and no, there is a hidden context that I failed to mention that is all the operated vehicles by the main nation of that tech tree is automatically theirs with no problem.
I don’t really see the issue. To my knowledge they’ve never given a reason besides “adding more options and variety.” Even if they did, Gaijin goes back on statements like that pretty consistently. There’s no pretending going on, the “logic” is just to do whatever seems intuitive at the time. You could add Thailand to Italy and Hungary to Japan, but it feels more intuitive the other way around, right?
The needed rules and logics (no matter if there is any, or not at all) is really the work of a post, a notice or some lines written somewhere trustworthy for players to quote from and end the related argument down the line.
But there is fire out there, fires whether inappropriate for forum or not, and doing nothing awaiting for it to ballast steam itself seems against my personal…logics, and that’s why I made this post, potentially gaining discussions and opinions, as well as precedence for later quoting when we run into something similar in the future, offering a low cost solution to the forum.
I get that, but if the company doesn’t have an actual system, and doesn’t want one, the players aren’t going to be able to come up with an agreeable system, because it won’t be based on the reality of the situation. The reality is that Gaijin does whatever it wants and will change the rules in a heartbeat, if there even are any in the first place. They are not beholden to any justifications that their users come up with.
Just let the flame wars happen. This is a game that makes people angry in a wide variety of ways. People are going to argue regardless. They would argue even if there was a system in place.
It’s not all that complicated. We currently have four types of implementing nations in game:
National Tree; These nations get a national tree under their own name and flag, such as USA, USSR, Germany, etc. Vehicles from these nations are added to their national trees.
Subtrees; These nations get officially placed within another research tree, but have their countries flag and name in the vehicle infocard. A subtree is generally chosen based on a mix of historical connection, gameplay need and player appeal. Once a subtree nation is introduced, all vehicles from that nation that are added go there.
Others; All other nations (with one exception) go wherever Gaijin thinks is appropriate. This could be to a nation that developed a specific vehicle, or to a nation that simply has good relations and a gameplay need for a vehicle.
Canada; The exception. Canada is also not officially placed as a subtree, but stated to be added to both the USA and UK where Gaijin sees it as applicable. The main unique thing is that some (not all) of their vehicles are in both of these trees at the same time.
I don’t necessarily agree with how all of this is handled, and even made a full suggestion about some change I’d like to see, but right now this is how Gaijin operates
Shink :(
And should mention these rules won’t effect to vehicle that already exist in game.
They will be hidden, or just do nothing for a event vehicle, but they won’t be removed.
In this case they should not be consider when arguing with these rules.
EG. Italian planes in Germany TT, USSR ZTQ-62, British Shot’kal, Strv 81 and French planes.