I’m sorry I missed the moment India was a subtree of the UK. AFAIK, the subtree is SA. Indian vehicles are merely event/one time vehicles as of now.
Sadly Gaijin has confirmed that India is a subtree for Britain.
1 Like
4 premium vehicle and 1 researchable vehicle from indian to great britain in dev server
You’re welcome.
1 Like
I mean yes but I feel Britain would be better off as a host for Commonwealth. While India is/was part of the Commonwealth (idk their current relations), the difference in tech between Britain, Canada, AUS/NZ, South Africa, and India just feels like… offputting. All the aforementioned countries share similar tech because its mostly based off of the same things, like the CAC Sabre, Spitfire, Buccaneer, etc. India, for better or worse, did not have that ethos past the ~1960s. At that point they started getting equipment from the USSR, and so diverged from the rest of the Commonwealth. And for that reason, that divergence, I would rather them be in a separate tree where their Eastern tech doesn’t take the spotlight from the British, or Commonwealth at large, tree’s inherent Western tech.
In my eyes its like when they added the T-90S to Britain way back. People said “yay India” but also said “why is there a T-90 in the British tree instead of a new Challenger?” All the Commonwealth (UK/SA/AUS/NZ/CA) vehicles have similar roots, but the vehicles that India would possess at the top, their “reason for playing,” is different. And since the top tier is ultimately the goal, I think that it would be better to have them split, lest the focus of the tree be too muddled.
4 Likes
Gaijin should rethink India being a sub tree, add Australia or Canada instead, India is such an odd choice.
1 Like
That’s basically what I’ve been trying to argue for a long time, but it seems people just stamp me off as a India-hater now.
I really don’t see how all these subtrees are supposed to help their host nations when all they do is muddle them up with incompatible stuff (T-90, Bison, Osa, etc in British tree) or even completely overshadow the host nations signature vehicles (Ariete < Leo 2A7HU; Leclercs < NL Leos; Tornados and Harriers < Gripens, and possibly Sukhois, MiGs and Mirages; etc)
1 Like
Why exactly is it an odd choice? It has far more unique vehicles to be added to WT vs either of those? Canada has the odd interesting/random thing, but much of its tech is also based on the US and Germany, which gaijin have already effectively placed it with for the most part.
So I once again ask, why is it an odd choice?
I mean literally Indias first domestic production tank and most the equipment they used in their wars/skirmishing with Pakistan was British equipment but lets forget that lol.
India did a pretty good “3rd way” route and did its best to attempt to lead that route.
Also “instead of a new challenger?” at a time the UK had like 6 Challengers if not more, lol. IDK about others, but at that point I was already sick to death of more Challengers xD
Because Britain is a western nation and a NATO member using exclusively western equipment and India doesn’t fit that at all.
1 Like
Play another nation then?!?
1 Like
But Canada or Australia though? Which would be heavily more copy-paste and whatever they do have that could go to the UK, could anyway still?
I do? But maybe I want something a bit different in the UK lineup too, lol.
1 Like
I’m not saying Canada and Australia should be a subtree for Britain, their current status as support nations for the US, Germany and Britain is fine. What I’m saying is that Britain doesn’t need India and shouldn’t have gotten India. India should have their own tech tree.
If India can’t get its own tech tree, then Britain shouldn’t be receiving their soviet equipment, only the equipment that is based on British equipment. Indias French-based equipment should go to France and their Soviet-based equipment should go to the USSR tree.
If Britain doesn’t have anything else to offer, then well, that’s just how it is.
Same goes for the USA with their Abrams and Germany with their Leos.
1 Like
The other guy did though, thats why I was asking them, why specifically those lol. That originally wasnt aimed your way there xD
And yeah, I would love an India style TT like Israel, sadly not what we got, so gotta work with what we got.
It’s not that it’s copy paste, it’s that it is thematic. The theme of the British tree currently is Western. It would be muddled with a bunch of Eastern high end tanks like the T-72 or T-90, BMP, etc.
Just because it can be put in the British tree doesn’t mean it should. For example, just because the British captured T-72s in Iraq during Operation Granby, does not mean that the T-72 should go into the tree. Just because America operated MiG-29s and MiG-23s does not mean that those planes should be added to America. Just because there is an F-15 at the Imperial War Museum does not mean the F-15 should be added to the British tree. All of these things serve to further reduce the asymmetric gameplay that RELIES on Eastern and Western equipment being tree-separated, or, for that matter, equipment being separated.
Picture, if you will, cooking. A tech tree can be the final product, and it varies in quality based on the ingredients provided. For example, all American stuff is just “one” ingredient. It defines the dish. Adding something else, such as the cases of Israel and Japan, enhances the flavor of the dish and works well because the ingredients (vehicles) mesh together.
For Britain, everything in the tree now stems from the same design ethos. If not the same, then very similar. The same or very similar ingredients. Adding India, specifically top tier India, is taking a chunk out of the USSR/Russia, which in this example is an ingredient that absolutely does not mesh well with the “British” ones, and throwing it into the British pot. It may momentarily make the dish better but after a long time you will start to notice that the ingredients just don’t fit together at all. The T-72 and Challenger 1 were designed around very different doctrines, and play substantially differently. Same with the Centurion and T-55.
And so you end up with a concoction of whatever you wanted to put into the pot, but it by its very nature not anything specific. And because it is not anything specific, it is not good. There is no reason to enjoy playing this tree when some other tree has the same thing but better, and there’s no chance for you in your tree to ever get that thing or get to fight alongside that thing.
It collapses motivation to try something new because you already have something that’s similar enough. It makes it so you won’t play another tree to try and see how it feels to play against what you normally play, because you can just play the thing from the other tree in your lineup and not leave your comfort zone. If playing all the trees feels the same, what’s the point in playing more than one? What’s the point in playing any of them at all, if they’re all the same?
1 Like
See all you are arguing whether this or that country should be in the British tech tree for whatever reasons, meanwhile I’m just happy I don’t have to grind either the US or USSR for their airframes, it’s also why I have top tier air for China xD
1 Like
Until you want to play something that they didn’t export to any of the subtree nations, like the Su-24, Yak-141 or the F-14
That like is literally highlighting my issue with it lmao
2 Likes
I don’t really care about those airframes…