Before I am assaulted by commenters who have only read the title, let me explain what I fully mean. Sure, the concept of Lend-Lease vehicles in WWII orientated tiers makes sense at a glance–it’s historical, it provides more diversity, etc. Yet it does not make sense to have allies share vehicles when, more often than not, they are placed on opposing teams (I think that we can all agree that the majority of players don’t play Sim, where teams are structured historically)
The Spitfire Mk IXc is the latest example of such a vehicle–another cash grab from Gaijin that will 1. Add a powerful plane to an already great tree; 2. lead to more chaos within battles.
If the whole impetus of these additions is a historical precedent, then the battles that these planes participate in should follow the same precedent.
I understand that some people find this a fun addition, especially newer players who see it as a chance to play a different vehicle without leaving the confines of the main nation they’ve been grinding, yet this is another repercussion of Lend-Lease vehicles.
For the most part, each tree is distinct and iconic in its own way, even as history progresses. Germany is home to the Tiger Tank Series, The Turm III, and Marder IFV, for instance, while Britain is known for the Churchill Series, the Fox, and the Challenger Series. Each tree should, and does (Again, for the most part) provide a different experience. If they don’t, then there is no real reason for playing that Tech Tree other than some patriotic calling or the desire to be “different” than the majority of the player base.
I feel that I should also clarify that I have nothing against sub-trees, where it does make sense seeing that it adds diversity without stealing a vehicle from another, distinct tree.
I perfectly agree and that is why I hate the addition of Benelux: it offered nothing besides Copy-Paste vehicles into France. It was unnecessary and was just a pitiful excuse of a “major update”
Gaijin has fumbled subtrees so hard. Hungary, Finland, and BeNeLux all have too many extremely similar vehicles, despite having plenty of options to choose from (especially BeNeLux).
I think that “copy paste” is fine if the vehicle offers a different experience/capabilities compared to the one from the parent tree. The Mirage 5BA, F-16A (at 13.0), Mig-19S, and lots of other vehicles are taken from one tree, but they offer a different experience compared to the other ones. Most of high tier Germany is like that, and it’s quite good.
You’re missing the point here. Restricting vehicles to one country, when they were used by many, is always arbitrary and baseless. War Thunder nation tech trees are made with a respect for the national history. They are not made from the various and arbitrary player-fabricated standards that exist due to the vocal minority of players like you.
Many vehicles were much more important to another country than the country in which they were designed. Many were modified, painted, and maintained by those aforementioned foreign users. In a multitude of cases, Gaijin copy-pastes the exact same vehicle where there could have been national variants added - this causes many players to incorrectly assume an negatively biased stance on the adding of similar vehicles in tech trees over-all. Whereas it is only Gaijin to blame.
In any case, tech trees are not made less unique by the addition of additional vehicles they have also used, no matter if they are foreign in origin or not. If you are disappointed in the “lack of a unique experience” (paraphrased), maybe you should look beyond your stereotypes and appreciate the cultural and historic context of these countless vehicles.
Your argument misses the mark entirely. The inclusion of Lend-Lease vehicles in War Thunder tech trees is not just a matter of historical usage—it fundamentally undermines the integrity of gameplay and the distinct identities of national tech trees. You claim that restricting vehicles to one country is arbitrary, but what’s truly arbitrary is forcing foreign vehicles into tech trees under the guise of “respecting history” while battles themselves ignore historical matchups. If historical precedent is the justification, then battles should follow that precedent. Otherwise, this is nothing more than cherry-picking history to justify chaotic gameplay.
You argue that foreign-used vehicles were modified and maintained by other nations, but these superficial changes do not redefine the vehicle’s core identity. War Thunder tech trees are meant to showcase the technological advancements of each nation, not to serve as a catch-all for vehicles that happened to be borrowed. Germany’s Tiger tanks, Britain’s Churchill series, and America’s Shermans are iconic for a reason—they represent the unique military philosophies of their respective nations. Diluting these trees with borrowed vehicles erodes that uniqueness and turns tech trees into a bland mishmash.
Finally, dismissing player concerns as “arbitrary and baseless” is both condescending and wrong. Players value the distinct experiences offered by national tech trees, and the addition of Lend-Lease vehicles disrupts that. If you’re so focused on cultural and historical context, perhaps you should consider the cultural and historical significance of preserving the unique identities of these tech trees.
There are times it does make sense, and I think the Finnish tree is a decent example. Yes, it was primarily copy/paste, and there was no reason to give them copies of their high tier Leopards when analogues already existed in the tree. But it gave the low/mid tier something they desperately needed, and that was versitility.
Prior to their introduction, from around 2.7 to 7.7, the Swedish tree consisted of nothing but paper armored snipers with poor gun handling. This made the grind exceptionally unpleasant, especially when you were placed on a city map (Like, ironically, Sweden). Additionally, grinding out Rank V required using a lineup consisting of the very mid Strv 74, the Bkan, and the Lvkv 42. That was all you got. Adding the Finnish mediums to the tree bolstered their lineup options in their weaker tiers, and gave them options for the large proportion of maps they could do nothing on otherwise.
Gaijin apparently learned completely the wrong lesson from this, however, as exemplified by the Hungarian and BeNeLux subtrees, which were 99% copy paste and gave almost nothing those base trees really needed. Italy and France didn’t need Leopard 2s, they needed their indigenous MBTs to be buffed to the state that they are useable again.
If you hadnt mentioned it i would have brought up the LF mkIXc as it is the best spitfire for a dogfight and its conveniently the most common one to be put into other trees, as premium.
for most lend least I’m very much for its addition, soviet Valentyn and Churchills. shermans and mustangs but the money hungry gatekeeping of certain vehicles like the lee and grant are obnoxious
the lack of lend lease hides a part of that nations history.
subtrees shouldn’t be a way to shoehorn in vehicles that dilute a tech trees identity I agree there. India being nothing but commieslop in the British tree and BeNeLux being nothing but British aircraft C&P and leo 2 spam is damaging to a tree
I think this also applies to different nations and subtrees. Each nation should should be unique.
Copy pastes should only be allowed when there are no domestic vehicles that are available at that BR. Not because it’s the easy way out and to make a quick buck.
This is the opinion of all time. Ah yes, “core identity” of a vehicle. Is this some uniquely American concept which I have not learned about?
M60 with “superficial changes”
You seem to have a very twisted view of “identity”. No matter the topic, you seem to believe that sharing things ruins identity. A so very individualistic (possibly even “selfish”) view of all issues.
Saying “Identity is determined exclusively by uniqueness” is no different than “being different for the sake of being different”. Why?
Lastly, you have a conflict of interest. You mainly play the British tech tree, which has less copy-paste compared to most others. Given you haven’t declared this conflict of interest in any of your posts so far, it is not unlikely that you were deliberately hiding it. Even so, your main post betrays your motivation: you are angry at Israel receiving a Spitfire.
Your intention is to restrict access to others; a man on a high horse who wants to kick others down. But even independent of your bias, your arguments are shaky.
Lend lease vehicles aren’t exclusive to one tree, their usage is historical, gameplay never changes when they’re added. The mindset in thinking this is a issue is beyond me and yes I’ve read the post.
Historical precedent is meaningless if the battles themselves aren’t historically structured. Allies fighting against their own vehicles is a direct consequence of this lazy implementation, making matchups messy and immersion-breaking. If you’re going to argue that their inclusion is justified by history, then battles should reflect that same history—but they don’t. This effects gameplay a great deal.
Well, it’s not just a Lend-Lease problem. With the proliferation of lend-lease vehicles, telling a low tier American Tree from a low tier British Tree would increasingly become more difficult.
There is no doubt that this homogenous composition would be accurate, as allied nations on both sides of the front lines had a sort of potluck of materiel. I’m sure you could find heaps of precedents and records when exactly this happened.
Yet, keep in mind there are reasons some details are omitted for gameplay reasons, like how the tank barrels have no collision.
A new mode with true historical lineups based on maps would be the only solution to your issue, cuz the current ARB is not historical even if you remove all lend-lease vehicles, e.g. why would Japanese vehicles fly alongside German ones in an European map?
What I said previously referenced the double-standard historical shtick of lend-lease vehicles. I’m perfectly fine fighting the US as Britain in a low tier ground RB. But smudging a foreign plane into another tree under the pretense of historical precedence, when the game’s matchmaking is not historical, makes no sense. Other than that I’m down any day to squad up with my German main friends and smoke some Americans.
