This brought me straight to The Cod Mine Man’s latest video…
Gaijin, this is great.
1 Like
Staying silent is better than lying.
3 Likes
That’s the problem. Three trees lead the pack in terms of non domestic and copy-paste additions: Japan, France, and Sweden.
Japan, and to a lesser extent, Sweden, Make sense, because they have a smaller pool (though not none) of domestic designs left.
France is missing hundreds of domestic designs, so it’s silly that we see that minor tree options, and especially copy-paste ones, that explicitly don’t address gaps in the French tree are being added under the guise of filling gaps.
Subtrees should, first and foremost, augment trees by filling their weaknesses and being a way to showcase truly unique designs from minor trees. If subtrees are just an excuse for every country on the planet to be able to field all other vehicles, then we might as well not have trees to begin with.
You’re also ignoring the fact that a majority of people play trees in order to play the vehicles from said tree. The truth is, once subtrees are added in, the rate of domestic designs getting added plummets which is why this topic was made to begin with: because people are tired of unique trees getting diluted by F-16s/Leopard 2s/M44s/M109s and other vehicles that aren’t being put there to fill gaps and show off what makes the tree unique, but instead as additions of expediency.
2 Likes
So is a nation like the UK, which’s primary sub-tree brought one addition, that wasn’t a Churchill on wheels (the Gripen C). A sub-tree, once you take off the rose-tinted glasses, only existed to nerf the UK, as seen with vehicles like the Fox.
The one piece of advice for ZA vehicles I got: if you have no more crew slots for the line-up, it’s the first to go.
And this is the biggest issue with sub-trees. They aren’t allowed to be a nation; by others, they should never have representation. At that point, why have sub-trees, if they are to only exist for one, maybe two additions, heck, why take advantage of the only thing War Thunder does best, compared to every other game that is the same 3 nations (US, Germany, USSR).
A vehicle with historic importance to the nation, if not the host nation, should never come to the game, prototypes only. And this rejection of vehicles with historic importance to the operator can be seen in this update clearly, with the desire to have a nation’s last MBT be replaced with a one-off or a private prototype.
The big reason people celebrated the sub-tree systium as becuse it let more nations, with fewer vehclies could, be added, giving them representation.
And your skiping the fact that there are just as many playing a nation just because of a sub-nation. But I guess I must stop grinding France, or buying premiums for the tree, just because I shouldn’t only play it for the sub-tree (as the only reason I started to grind the Franch tree was for BeNeLux).
And it’s not just me, I’ve talked to those who only did the UK tree, because India & South Africa became subtrees
Yet people celebrated when the US got 2 Skinks despite not being connected to the project. Rejecting it without testing, it entered service with Canada & the UK only.
They are only sick of the US, and Germany have their mass exported vehicles represented as mass export vehicles. “Minor nations” can have there vehclie shared between 17 trees and no one cares. Or they have domestic vehicles claimed as C&P if they get them because another nation, like the US, used them.
3 Likes
This thread exists because the issue it two folded:
People are sick of Gaijin doing what they said after years of complaints on why these X operators get a vehicle, yet Y nation, who also used it, didn’t get it, so rather than having those complaints, they give all operators who used a vehicle (who have a home) it at the same time (or in a close time frame).
And at the same time, people have forgotten what variants are, despite 90% of War Thunder being made of them, as seen with vehicles who put side by side are clearly not a 1-1 C&P of each other.
M4A1:
75mm gun
Cast hull
Continental R-975
Crew 5
Ram II (75)
75mm gun
Cast hull
Continental R-975
Crew 5
Let’s put it this way: if you didn’t know what each tank was, this reads as if I just told you that same tank twice. This is the issue with playing the same = C&P route. Domestic vehicles to other nations, like the Canadian Ram II, will end up being called C&P, because they play as a more aggressive Sherman.
3 Likes
US mains celebrated actually having something at that BR finally after the community poo-pooed the idea of leaving the XM800T there without the APDS belts.
Id give the skink back if it meant we got something stronger, something like a Sub-I-II, BTR-ZD, or R3-T20. The skink is very mediocre.
There are plenty of options which i would fully support to replace the skink, for example:
5 Likes
???
The XM800T was nowhere near 5.3, nor is it an SPAA.
I find the Skink far usable(and like it as a far better AA than the Bosvark), but it really should have been one of the countless US SPAA options. Over one whose connection to it is weak. “It used US parts, or the blueprint of the vehicle it was mounted on was designed by the US first.” As the only connection it had to the US was that the US designed the Sherman. Built on a Canadian variant (Grizzly), for a Canadian-British requirement, using Polish guns.
Lots of lists from around the time (even those I can’t find one, tho to be fair it has been well over a year, nearly two years), since it was added.
Sadly, this was a case of misinformation, and a bit of “even the smallish connection means I should get it,” certain nations mainly believe. Even if everything else about the vehicle links to another nation. So people cried, and Gaijin listened.
3 Likes
Capability gap discussion aside, South Africa is infinitely more unique than the BeNeLux subtree. Arguably the least unique addition is the Eland, as the elements that make it unique from the AML 90 don’t show their advantages (mostly just leading to a slight increase in weight).
If those fewer vehicles were unique I might agree with you, but, seeing the 20th F16/Hawker Hunter/Leopard 2/Spitfire/F-104 isn’t something to be celebrated.
I agree that the US should have gotten a domestic SPAA option, and I have extra thoughts on the Hell pack (BR mismatch was a poor decision) but you’re not acknowledging WHY people celebrated the skinks: They filled a longstanding gap in the US tree.
Should it have been a domestic US design? Yes, but the US was SPAA starved for SPAA options between the M42 and M163. Can you honestly point to a single BeNeLux addition that comes any where close to providing the same utility as the Skink does in the US tree?
2 Likes
Im pretty sure that the R3-T20 was designed to be a troop transport, not an OP SPAA.
My philosophy is that even if a nation uses it, they should only have domestically produced vehicles unless there are no other options.
That said, as others have pointed out, the minor nations are receiving additions they didnt even need from major nations, so if we are going to go hard with the copy-paste, gaijin should spread the love to the major nations.
5 Likes
This is a disingenuous argument. You and I both know well that the Copy-Paste argument are raised at things like the M44, Leopard 1a5BE (especially in it’s current configuration without MECAR ammo), OSA, and Dutch Leopard 2a4
If the Dutch Ram II (75) was added it would be the most unique BeNeLux ground addition, and anyone with eyes is aware it’s not an M4a1.
3 Likes
Uninrocially, it’s the first vehicle in the sub-tree I’d call fun. The “C&P” vehicles being the best in a sub-tree kinda show you there is more to just being unique.
When something addition makes a tree worse and adds more reasons not to grind a tree to a tree, to the point people tell you not to grind. It’s not a good addition.
This is the issue, C&P, even when it adds fuel to claims like all domestic Canadian vehicles are domestic to the US. It only furthers the US claim on stuff it has no claim on.
I can’t look at something as a good thing when it makes up history, fuels problematic claims, and is the only reason why my nation couldn’t get the one thing it’s been asking for, for years.
I can point to every sub-tree vehicle as it does the exact same thing.
The Ram II is in-game, and so is the OQF 75mm gun. So C&P, as it is a variant and variants are C&P, as seen with the 1A5BE.
It can’t be unique as every part of it exists in the game. This is the type of argument C&Ps are nowadays. I’ve seen people call the Mosquitoes the UK got a few updates ago, C&P, just because they are more Mosquitoes.
C&P doesn’t exist for 3 nations, the US, Germany, and Russia, despite 90% of their tree being C&P(varints).
At the end of the day, there is no one definition of what a C&P vehicle is, everything from being a true 1-1 C&P of the model, to vehicles of the same family. Yet at the same time, if Germany got a Leo that would be “C&P” in another tree, yet it isn’t in there, it is double standers. After all, if it’s a lazy add in one nation, it must be just as lazy in the other.
It’s why a vehicle can play the same and be a variant. As not every variant (even those used by the makers can have changes as small as MGs and side skirts) completely changes the vehicle.
5 Likes
I am honestly wondering
Why can’t we have P-51 Mustangs with a Merlin engine when we operated and did some parts of the development, since it might not have been born at all if we hadn’t asked North American Aviation to build a C&P Kittyhawk ripoff?
When Gaijin just gave American Tech Tree two Skink because of nothing but ‘Hull of Skink was Sherman’. But they didn’t operate at all.
When Gaijin gave American Spitty because the USAAF operated it.
When the American tech tree got the Ram II first.
When the community considers C&P is bad.
Sometimes I think the community is opposed to any C&P additions for minor nations when major nations already have the advantage of it.
Because they already got theirs.
The major problem of C&P is caused by Gaijin, that adding those in the worst way possible
But there are minor problems from the part of the community that act like rules are not applied to them, but only apply to minor nations.
2 Likes
I believe the community’s problem with C&P is more likely the grind. They (me included in some occasions) are just bored to grind for a third or fifth time the same vehicle (or practically same) .
I pretty sure that , if for example you grind F-84G in one nation could be available in all nations , or the F-16s get categorized by some standards and have the same effect (for example you take radar/airframe the same… armament is added in the mods anyway, they will have to grind it for every plane on its own) .
Then no one would even care about C&Ps , except maybe people that are too much into historical MMs which the game doesn’t really have here and years anyway. (That being said , i’d love a historical mode…but for now it isn’t really in game).
The main issue with the community is that C&Ps most likely work as roadblocks .
I don’t think it’s about uniqueness that much…
1 Like
I know that back in the day when subtrees were new I decided to focus on the Japanese tree in part because I liked the Thai subtree suggestion on the old forum and was excited to see Thai vehicles added in the future.
To be fair here, it’s also that Gaijin seems to prefer filling their trees with vehicles they know are exported to other nations. To some extent thins makes sense, they are generally the more notable vehicles in history, but it also leads people to feel like their tech isn’t unique enough.
But oftentimes unique prototypes and other non-exported vehicles will end up as premiums because “there’s enough to fill the tree already”, which seems like a massive mismanagement. For the events it makes them more desirable, sure, but it does the exact opposite to the techtrees themselves.
The only reason Gaijin probably don’t notice is because even with this it’s impossible to not have the most well known and popular militaries be the most played options for their name alone. Most casual players won’t even look at what’s in the techtrees, they want Abrams, that’s American, so they know what to play.
Also the grind for people that already played a vehicle, but that’s an easy fix:
3 Likes
So duplicate vehicles are meant to:
- fill gameplay gaps,
- improve lineups,
- include smaller nations that couldn’t support their own tree,
- while keeping historically important or unique vehicles in the research tree whenever possible.
Most of Finland’s domestic or significant vehicles for Swedens TT ended up as premiums or event vehicles, while the research tree is mainly Soviet, British or German imports that were simply used by Finland.
So instead of Finland’s domestic industry being what builds the subtree, it’s Finland’s imported equipment only in the TT except the: B-239 Brewster, BT-42, ItPsV Leopard, T-55M + CV9030Fin that are unique vehicle variants to the nation
Also says that adding duplicate vehicles doesn’t replace unique vehicles and that those unique vehicles will still come later.
That is hopefully true as the current state of finland Researchable Tech-Tree is not that great.
Many players need a heavy tank for sweden finland was a great chance at it was instead used as a premium tank…
Now all sweden has left to hope for a Heavy tank is the “Emil”
Also, Finnish and German players demand more StuGs lol
In June 1944 the Finnish StuGs went into hard battles against the large scale Soviet offensive. During these battles they destroyed numerous T-34-76s, T-34-85s, ISU-152s and even IS-2s. The experience from these battles resulted in several Finnish protection upgrades.
- reinforced concrete on the front
- additional armour around the driver’s position
- spare track armour
- log protection on the hull sides
- extra deflector plates around the commander’s cupola
- relocated storage equipment
Yet we still don’t have the Stu-40 “Sturmi” :(
7 Likes
There’s tons of issues, I covered some above.
-
Expectation: Gaijin announces sub-tree. All the players are excited to see that nations unique vehicles, what they’re known for. In reality Gaijin have used the latest sub-tree’s as excuses for top tier copy-paste. Here’s your Leopard’s and Abrams.
-
Premiums: Linking to the above Gaijin eventually do add the unique vehicles but as premiums, then continue to double down with tech tree copy-paste.
-
Selective copy-paste: Gaijin adds a sub-tree but isn’t willing to copy an existing vehicle into the new sub-tree because they gave them out as BP/Reward/Gift vehicles years ago. On the other side, they give them to some operators but not all. Why does France, Italy, and China get the Sherman V but Britain doesn’t? Britain received over 7000 of them.
-
Forgotten: They remove attention away from the actual host nation. How long as it been since the last domestic French vehicle? Where’s all the British WW2 armoured cars?
-
Removes Uniqueness: If every tree has a Sherman, a Stuart/Chaffee/Bulldog, M10/M18/M36, etc then it just dilutes the tech trees. Why play the US tree when nearly every other nation has their vehicles?
-
Removes immersion: We use to have a nation based matchmaker and it was great. Allies vs Axis, NATO vs Warsaw, etc. Was it always balanced? Not always. Some nations lacked certain things at each BR bracket. Now they removed that and continued copy-pasting US vehicles into other trees both sides are fighting the same vehicles constantly. It’s even ruined Sim.
-
Increases the grind: Self explanatory. Gaijin say they’re “filling gaps” but what gaps does the M44 or M55 even fill? SPG’s are just terrible tank destroyers and takes room away from domestic equipment. It’s just more RP to get to the next vehicle.
I find it crazy as a long time War Thunder player we went from “we hate captured vehicles” where we didn’t want Allied vehicles in Axis tech-trees and vice-versa to where we are today. Almost feels like a different game.
11 Likes
Finland was the Second Sub-tree added and look at it, all its special vehicles are just premiums, so them saying its to save domenstic vehicles for later is bs
8 Likes
Yep.
7 Likes
because Britain already has a 3.7 Sherman (there is no space in the TT)
not a priority, way more important stuff need to be added
oo yea of course the American TT with 146 vehicles loses all its purpose because you can find 10 of there tanks in other TTs, and its not like the USA is the biggest arms exported in the world since WW2
its better for realistic battles
yea you should not be able to spawn Taiwanese tanks with China or the m24 in Italy or Japan that they got them after the war, only captured tanks should be able to spawn
its 20k rp and usually they are foldered and they are pretty funny and playable (big HE goes booom)
4 Likes
Which it was stuck overtiered(ofc compared to counteparts i means) because of silly APCR which nobody uses mainly, while other nations’ M4A1 sat on 3.3BR (They are now sharing the same BR because they nerfed M4A1)
Also, the French and we used the M24 Chaffee. We literally gave them a nickname, and French were one of the biggest operators if we exclude USA, but Gaijin just decided to say no about these.
About places in the tech tree, we had no equivalent of M24 untill the moment Crommy got overdue 75mm APHE.
if A nation can get C&P vehicles that could represent their military history, nation B also should be able to do that.
But Gaijin just keep acting illogical and has no standards about it
USA can grab A6M2 or Spitfire LF Mk.IX because they used or captured.
USA can get skink because nothing but skink used canadian licenced sherman Grizzly, even though they have no ties with those.
But Brits cannot get Mustang with Merlin even though we participate in it
And we have zero captured vehicles when other nations have few in their tech tree.
And we took decades to get Ram II, which fits better for us than the American tree, and cost giving ‘two Skinks’ as price, via forced trade by Gaijin.
And the community usually gives a big no when we ask for any kind of copy-paste vehicle. Quite frustrating.
With Mustang standards, I believe that we cannot grab F-35 because nothing but ‘Copy-paste is bad and American players will dislike the addition’.
Everything has higher priority than adding something to british tech tree.
Especially when it is the WW2 era. :/
5 Likes