This is an issue, but I’d say it’s more about the poor implementation than subtrees in general. There’s ways to fix this aside from just rejecting subtrees in general.
Subtrees are a great concept in theory, but the way they are implenented now needs major reworks.
On the topic of duplicate vehicles, why are some only present in one country and not also in the country that originally made them?
These are only some of the vehicles that would be trivially easy to copy over to their original nation.
Yk the mig 19S is just a downgrade compared to the Soviet one…
19S is lighter and has an extra gun
More importantly it is a plane not present in USSR/Russia tree, despite them making and using it.
I think with all the problems in WT, duplicate vehicles is the weirdest hill to die on for many people complaining about the game.
Duplicate vehicles, premium and tech tree, encourage building lineups thus combating 1-death leaving, give more variety to the game, premium options that don’t result in important unique vehicles in history being paywalled, flesh-out minor tech trees, fill BR gaps when using minor changes (ex: different missiles/ammunition), and more. The only real problem I have with them is when they don’t make sense for SB or something (ex: shermans for all teams in WW2 scenarios, etc.), which isn’t a duplicate vehicle problem as much as just how they set up the tech trees and the inability to split them for historical matchmaking.
Duplicate vehicles is far from the biggest problem in War Thunder, and is ultimately good for the game, so long as they’re not used to extend the grind by many times or something for already-hard-to-grind nations. I don’t care about how many duplicate vehicles there are, I think every vehicle that existed in history should have a chance to be represented in the game.
And it’s worse. Shrimple as its worse.
What makes you think a lighter fighter is just worse? Two R-3S missiles aren’t much to worry about.
I wouldnt mind if it wasnt something that takes as much extra time as it does, they could implement them as folded vehicles, so the rp and sl coosts would be smaller and actually make people have more vehicles without having to grind the complete techtree to get the lineups
Ar 196 A-5 as well. Germany still doesn’t get a Fighter-Hydroplane in our air TT. Gaijin making the A-3 an event vehicle was already an idiotic decision, the most they can do if give us the A-5 in the TT.
they have the A-3 is there a big difference between them?
Dude the differences i could find is that the A-5 has 1 extra 7.92 in the turret
The A-3 is an event vehicle from 2020. I want the A-5 for the tech tree. Not premium or event. The A-5 is already a premium in the Swedish TT so it’ll be an easy Copy and Paste into the German tech tree.
I get that
Does that mean Finland gets its Finnish vehicles like the KV-1B and the HA-75 out of the German tree?
Answered by Smin and I don’t agree with but no, for the naval aircraft the answer was Germany has more than enough, for Finland to get their vehicles or another version of something like the Hawk, it was the same thing, they have enough.
Actually, early in this topic I’ve advocated for Finland to get the KV-1B in their Tech Tree.
It was more rhetorical given the answer was given by Smin as a no.
I’m all for stuff like B3C (different model from the modified swedish version we have in game) and such to go to Germany but I find gaijins logic of they have enough of this vehicle as a silly quick answer to get players to stop asking
“We’ll do copy and paste, except when the community wants it”
I have no idea what the devs think about or why they do some of these things
Unfortunately will never happen lmao like the ar196
Which sucks, I hate gaijins stance on these things
They should just get them as well IMO