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.
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.
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.
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.
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…
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:
So duplicate vehicles are meant to:
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.
Yet we still don’t have the Stu-40 “Sturmi” :(
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.
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
Yep.
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)
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. :/
i am playing the italian Sherman V in 4.0 and its fine (not that i should go there its fine at 3.7)
you have the monstrosity that is a premium
they needed an spaa
the British TT need spaa in the 5.3-8.3 area, besides that they dont have a big gap but still other British stuff are way more important
except the Marmon-Herrington Mk IVF and Humber Armoured Car Mk. IV (2 pdr.) should be added immediately if they are not in game
I am not saying it isn’t fine, but just saying both vehicles were nearly identical, but keeping british one in a higher BR was quite silly to me. Glad that it is fixed now.
Prefer to have Sherman V tho, we used a lot, but Gaijin just declines to give those.
Do you mean the AMX-13 with M24 turret?
What I mean is, France should’ve had regular M24 because they were the biggest export user of M24 Chaffee.
Shouldn’t be Skink because Americans didn’t have any ties with those.
Experimental Canadian-designed SPAA with Brit-Polish-designed ripoff 20mm autocannons, that considered as SPAA for Britain and Canadian forces, eventually cancelled, no american adoption were considered at all.
There was no historic tie to add Skink to the American tech tree except ‘B…but… it has Sherman hull!’
If Skink addition on US TT was fine because nothing but the “hull of Skink was based on American design”.
Then we can claim every 105mm armed American tank because they used 105mm L7, and german can claim they can claim that every 120mm armed Abrams and Chally 3 should be added on german tree because they used 120mm Rh120.
Yes, the American tech tree needed SPAA to fill the gap, but Skink shouldn’t be the one that picked.
it is as hilarious as giving Austrian Light tank with french tech into german tech tree when Argentine isn’t subtree of germans.
yea but from the other side someone would say the Sherman II is more British because it was made in the UK (correct me if i am wrong)
yes
if they add it in the next update France mains will continue crying saying copy paste
as for the skink i dont care much its a mid to bad spaa, i have it in both USA and UK TT, they add it because they were lazy to find or model other spaa for that place so they just put the skink
if it really happens, I understand their reaction, but I might be sad about that. Well, to me, I might be happy if we get M24 Chaffee, P-51 Mustangs with Merlin, or Sherman V since we used those.
I was literally hyped we finally got outdated overdue Washington B.1, except the problem that B-29 sucks in Air Realistics for years.
I am not disaproving addition of C&P itself, I am frustrated the way how Gaijin uses it.
We historically used them, then why not?
and if those can grant extra gameplay style that cannot be achieved from older vehicles that we had, even better.
Forced Skink trade agreement from Gaijin
-Britain gets Ram II (which we had more connection than americans, and legitimately should’ve been in UK TT)
-Americans get Skink(which they had no connection with themselves, and eventually led into extra premium Skink on US TT via WW2-themed package)
-Americans getting skink won’t affect the addition of T77E1 in the same update.
whole trade was frustrating, except for the part that we got Ram II
:(
Because C&P-ing skink was one of the few C&P additions that shouldn’t have happened at all if we consider historic features. :/
should i get it? i am between the Ram II the P-47(USSR) and Talisman for a random tier 5 plane or tank (keep in mind i am rank 4 in UK so it will not help me in my grind the same with the p47
Right, forgot about that fact, it took the US getting a vehclie is has no relation to for one of the 3 operators (Canada, UK, Netherlands) to get it. Another reason not to like the Skink in the US tree. That trade shouldn’t have been needed.
Sadly, Gaijin believes the US order for Ram tanks wasn’t cancelled before they got some, by the incorrect name.
Eh I wasn’t a big fan of Thunderbolts so if I were you I might buy either Talisman or Ram II
So when it comes to not making a premium the ONLY way to access a “historically important” vehicle or new weapon system, wanna talk about the F-14D? The “Super Tomcat” was historically important as not only is it the most widely recognized F-14 variant (since it is THE Top Gun plane.) but it also made major improvements to both the engines and the radar. Not only this but in the game the F-14D gets access to the AIM-54C+. This missile is not just “another variant of the phoenix missile” it is a full on upgrade and a half of the AIM-54C. As stated on the navy’s official aviation website: “AIM-54C+ High Power Phoenix-
Improved variant developed by Hughes for F-14D. Contains internal heaters, which eliminates need for temperature conditioning liquid, high-power Traveling Wave Tube (TWT) transmitter adapted from the AIM-120 AMRAAM, and low-sidelobe antenna. Latest version of RPM substitutes 6 ultra-high-speed computer chips for 45 of earlier, less-capable chips. Full-scale development began in August 1987. First test flight of fully upgraded missile on 14 August 1990 scored a direct hit on a QF-4 drone.” - (https://www.navair.navy.mil/node/12701) the AIM-54C+ not only has more processing power, but internal heaters that help the missile especially in high altitudes, and a higher power radar from the AIM-120. Considering the following I believe it is safe to say the AIM-54C+ is not just way better than the AIM-54C, but a new whole weapons system in general. Do you see what I see? That seems to go against your previous statement of “Our current approach at the high ranks is generally to make premium vehicles useful for progression without making them the only way to access a unique capability, weapon system, or a historically significant vehicle.” I would recommend adding the F-14D to the tech tree because of this.