It's time to scrutinize subtrees, current, rumored and future ones

Ever since the South African subtree was announced back in Mid Feb. 2021 there is a massive surge of the introduction of more subtrees to other nations and picking up in pace with the Introduction of the Hungarian subtree and a Benelux subtree rumored for the French TT with little time between them. Certain groups of the playerbase supports subtrees, citing many reasons, two reasons cited that i want to highlight goes somewhere along the lines of “It gives X TT’s new lease of life with Y subtree” and “makes the Host TT better with a subtree”. However recently especially after the introduction of the Hungarian Air Subtree to the Italian Air TT i started to really question, sometimes even doubting the concept of subtrees in WT and how they are implemented. And i come to this conclusion

There is a place for Subtrees in WT and conceptually they aren’t the worse thing however i absolutely do not agree with most of the current picks for subtrees and especially how they are implemented. If we are not careful Subtrees can ruin the game entirely. I’ll explain my reasons on why with the currently implemented and the rumored TT as of Early May 2024.

Here is my verdict on which Subtree is a good pic and which one is not. I’ll be basing these on a few criteria listed below

  1. The Subtree Nation in question needs to have some unique designs and modifications

  2. Copy and Pasting of vehicles operated from the Subtree Nation is allowed however it will be very easily become a massive demerit if it is excessive

  3. The Subtree Nation in question needs to have enough vehicles to make a few lineups possible but not enough to make a full techtree possible

  4. The Subtree Nation and the Host Nation need to have strong and most importantly consistent relationships especially in terms of the military & geopolitical stances

  5. The Host Nation needs to have some development in terms of developing vehicles and weapon systems in the Subtree Nation as well as the procurement of vehicles/weapon systems from the Host nation to the Subtree Nation. However it should not be used on it’s own since that opens up for the argument for Subtree nation to be added to another Host Nation as well as relationships between the Host nation and the Subtree nation is always subject to change even with nations that historically have close bonds together. The inverse and caveat also applies

  6. The Addition of the Subtree Nation shouldn’t cause controversy when added to the Host Nation among the general playerbase from said Subtree Nation. The inverse also applies here too

  7. The Host Nation needs to have a large enough deficit of vehicles and gaps that cannot be filled up even with adding prototypes, foreign vehicles or even unfinished vehicles. In other words if a Host Nation has more than enough vehicles to fill in all 5 lines with no problems at all then a Subtree is not only unnecessary but it can also damage it through bloating it. Larger Techtrees =/= Better Techtrees.

  8. Geography cannot be a factor in here. If your sole argument for the justification of X Subtree to Y Host Nation TT without any other valid points to back it up you have already lost the argument

  9. Historical justifications outside of WT’s timeframe cannot be considered either and like with point seven, if your sole arguement is this one without any other points to compliment it you also automatically lose the argument

  10. Cultural ties can be considered however like with joint vehicle and weapons development/procurement this line of thinking cannot be entirely relied upon since there is way more factors to consider in relation to this point

  11. The addition of the Subtree nation should not impede the addition of domestic and foreign operated designs of the Host Nation

Finally i’ll give the subtrees a “Recommended course of Action” based on my verdict and reasoning. I’ll only be looking at Subtrees that were implemented and the one rumored one for the time being. Though i’ll be judging suggested ones too at a later date though i may tackle it a little differently


Zuid Afrika: No

Reason :


South Africa has more than enough vehicles especially in the Ground and Helicopter branches to make a TT viable. Also adding South Africa to the UK TT on a political/geopolitical basis is questionable at best since most of the vehicles operated by Zuid Afrika that are currently represented are from 1948 onwards when South Africa was doing their own thing and in most cases was shunned by the UK and most of the Commonwealth because reasons. Another thing that i do not like is when the South African Subtree was introduced it addressed the biggest issue that the UK TT is facing, the absence of light tanks and underdeveloped SPAA line. This would be fine except for the longest time Gaijin didn’t add a single British Light tank and SPAA for the longest time. Only very recently adding British built light tanks in the form of the Vickers Mk.11 & Fox AC.

The only redeeming factors is that most of the South African vehicles added to the Subtree were unique or the very least not complete copy n pastes and the British did (on occasion) have some involvement in the development of South Africa’s vehicles and weapons system as well as South Africa procuring the occasional British military vehicle

Recommended course of action: Make Zuid Afrika into a dedicated independent TT with all South African vehicles in the British TT to be hidden with the Exception of South African built vehicle that were actually operated by the British Armed Forces. Vehicles that are co-developed by the British can be researched and/or purchased once a year. If a Subtree is needed in the British TT they will get Australia and/or Canada in it’s place since they were significantly better picks

Finland: Yes in concept, No in implementation

Reason :


I do like the idea of Finland being a subtree since they are geopolitically and militarily very close together, both were neutral countries for most of the 20th century and was neutral until very recently, both see Russia where-ever it’s the Russian Empire, Soviet union or the Russian Federation as an threat on an existential level. Both use vehicles and weapons from each nation and even help develop in each other’s weapons, the XA-180, J-35 & CV90’s are the examples that i could think ontop of my head.

That being said i am not impressed in how Gaijin implemented the Finnish subtree primarily because they overdid the copy and paste stuff with very few unique Finnish designs or modifications and it’s even worse in the Air TT since all of the Unique Finnish aircraft and most of the unique Finnish modifications of Foreign aircraft are either premiums or event vehicles making Copy and Paste the only real option

Recommended course of action: Keep the Finnish Subtree in the Swedish TT while the Finnish Subtree in all branches gets a massive overhaul to address the copy and pasting issue

Hungary: No

Reason :


At first Hungary may be a good fit for Italy since Hungary does use vehicles of Italian origin and even made their own improvements and evolutions of them. Also Hungary and Italy were on the same side from the starting timeframe of WT technological wise* (1900’s-1945*). When digging deeper however there is so many problems to adding an Hungarian Subtree to the Italian TT that it detracts from it way more than it adds.

First point, yes it is true that Hungary used vehicles of Italian origin however they used just as many if not more vehicles of German, Russian, Czech and even Swedish origin and like with the Italian vehicles they also have their own uniquely Hungarian spins to them. Second issue is that most of the Unique Hungarian Designs and modifications were from the timespan from the 1930’s up to 1945, after that there were extremely few Unique Hungarian designs and modifications post WWII which goes to the third point. The rampant Copy and pasting, it was bad enough in the Ground forces where all Hungarian ground vehicles from Tier IV to the KF-41 were all copy and paste with the only real difference being some aesthetic changes. It was even worse in the Helicopter and Air TT’s where they were all copy and paste, the addition of the aircraft of Soviet origin in the Air TT is especially insulting. Fourthly Hungary’s geopolitical stances, after 1945 Hungary fell firmly into the sphere of the Soviets in the form of the Warsaw pact, so adding Cold War Era Hungarian vehicles to Italy, a founding NATO member was already suspect to begin with. Even after the fall of the Soviet union Hungary geopolitically was a wild card among the EU & NATO. Also you cannot justify it with the “common identity” and/or “they see themselves as the same country but with a different government/ideology” excuse like you can with East Germany with it’s Western counterpart, North Korea with it’s Southern counterpart or even Mainland China with Taiwan. Fifthly and finally, Italy has more than enough vehicles in Ground and Air to make 5 lines purely consisting of domestic Italian designs and foreign vehicles that Italy actually operated a possibility so a addition of a Subtree in Italy is pointless

To end it with a final note Hungary is by far the worst implemented Subtree by far to the point it caused more harm to the Italian TT (especially the Air TT) than it helped. The worst part is this can very easily be avoided if Hungary was either it’s own independent TT or paired with Poland and/or Czechoslovakia in a Visegrad TT

Recommended course of action: Make Hungary either it’s own dedicated Independent TT, in the form of a full TT or a reverse Israeli TT since there is very few Unique Hungarian designs post WWII or paired with a Polish or Czecho-Polish TT to make a V4 TT. All Hungarian vehicles will be hidden in the Italian TT, people who already have them or started researching them can still keep them. Hungarian vehicles of Italian design origin can be occasionally opened for research and/or purchase once a year.

Benelux: No

Reason :


This is the rumored one and i’ll going to say i’m not going to have high hopes on this one. Judging by the two previous subtree nations the implementation of the Benelux Subtree would be at best mostly copy and paste with some unique designs and/or variants of foreign vehicles we don’t have in game sprinkled here and there and at worst “Oops all copy n paste” actively damaging the French TT in the process. Also France like Italy has more than enough domestic designs and foreign vehicles that France operates to make 5 lines without a subtree not only possible but imo preferable. France arguably needs a subtree even less than the Italians. Finally yes both the Netherlands and Belgium does use vehicles of French origin and occasionally French firms and technical assistant did aid in the develop of some Belgian and Dutch designs. That being said the Belgians and especially the Dutch in terms of foreign vehicles used way more British and German designs than French ones and secondly the domestically built/designed Dutch and Belgian weapons were built/designed either in house or was built with the assistance of other foreign firms. German and Swedish firms in the case of the Dutch and (strangely) Irish firms in the case of the Belgians.

There is realistically one valid argument in favour of a Benelux subtree in the French TT in contrast to lets say Hungary in the Italian TT in terms of justification. France and the Benelux nations were geopolitically on the same side from the 1920’s until today, all 3 nations were founding NATO members, being on the same side of most if not every war each or all of the three faced in and they do co-operate with each other, only suffering from the occasional hiccup primarily from the French mainly due to the French being the contrarians of Europe.

Recommended course of action: Benelux needs to be a Independent TT, the Netherlands being the Host Nation with Belgium acting as the Subtree

To summarize Subtrees can ruin TT through the following

  1. Excessive Copy and pasting even for Subtree choices i do agree with

  2. It’s doesn’t make sense on a geopolitical level

  3. The choice was too controversial of an option either from large portion of individuals either from the Host nation, Subtree nation or sometimes even both

  4. Denies certain vehicles and weapon systems to other nations especially ones that really need them or worse denies the Host nation of their own domestic vehicles and weapon systems

  5. The Host Nation in question can fill up the gaps with domestic and/or foreign vehicles that the Host nation operated instead of a subtree. Only being added due to apathy, greed and/or ignorance or caving in to certain groups of the playerbase

Those were mainly my opinions and my justifications partially through experience as well as the criteria I lay out.

I want to hear other people’s opinions on this, do you agree with my opinions, agree with my opinions but have different reasoning for it or even disagreeing with me. What’s your stance on Subtree’s as they were implemented as well on a conceptual level and how you’ll tackle subtree’s. Maybe even improving my methodology on a justification of a subtree or a verdict of a existing subtree?


I so agree with you, it is ridiculous to add an under tree in a country that does not need it and especially if it is only to put copied and pasted vehicles, Finland and Hungary do not have brought nothing to the game and unfortunately the addition of Benelux would have the same impact

And even more… like these talkings about Thai sub TT with Chinese exported vehicles to Japan
If a nation have it’s own enough vehicles, then there’s no reason to add a sub tree except adding a nation with many domestic vehicles but still too small to be a major nation
Also, thanks for not regarding Post-1949 ROC vehicles as a sub-tree

1 Like

Problem is Gaijin isn’t actually really bothering with the unique stuff as long as they can get away with copy paste
Idk about Hungary, but Finland has multiple options that has yet to be added and there’s also just a big chance that something will end up in the premium section

same for SA in the UK, seen a few cool vehicles that could be added but for some reason they have yet to be seen

1 Like

I’ve got to say the Hungarian ground subtree was drastically needed, or at least the various vehicle gaps that were fixed by its addition. Having no ‘good’ SPAA from 5.7 (now 6.0…) to 9.7 is just crazy, especially when the R3 itself should be like 5.0 max.

Admittedly, Gaijin should’ve just added Italian vehicles to fix the SPAA gap, but having something sooner is better than nothing (as Gaijin probably wouldn’t have fixed the gap if they couldn’t copy-paste stuff).

I’ve got to say the Hungarian ground subtree was drastically needed, or at least the various vehicle gaps that were fixed by its addition. Having no ‘good’ SPAA from 5.7 (now 6.0…) to 9.7 is just crazy, especially when the R3 itself should be like 5.0 max.

No it there is still plenty of Italian ground vehicles to choose from both in terms of domestically built designs and foreign designs Italy operated

also the R3 can easily moved up to BR 7, it just needs it’s APDS rounds for the autocannon

Which would be a horrible design decision, why should the BR be raised when Gaijin isn’t likely to add more SPAA for Italy (at least for a while)?

Not really. We have the Type-87 (P) which is comparable to the the R3. It does need to be reclassified as a Light Tank and have the stabilised for the gun back however

i would suggest the better way (for future SIM, TT and MM purity) is that the vehicles be hidden from such TT and the players who had such vehicles, have the host nation changed:
ie. if their vehicle was under the italian flag, it shall no longer be under the italian flag but under the new flag and shall play as a vehicle of the new nation in the MM

1 Like

I wrote that down since that’s how Gaijin normally does it though i do like that suggestion too.

1 Like

whole heartedly agree with this, even if the chances of gaijin hearing or implementing this are scarce, this is exactly like the method i proposed of giving certain certain vehicle to different nations:
i think its this one
‘Renovating’ Gaijin’s vehicle addition policy

1 Like

But that still doesn’t address the problem of usable SPAA from 2.7-6.7 (if the R3 is moved to 7.0).

Italy operated M113’s and VCC-1’s with 20mm autocannons that fill that spot very easily

I mean true, but until Gaijin add those vehicles the R3 shouldn’t be moved (which was my point).