I know I’m late, but I’d say if I want a Rafale of Su-30 in general that’s a good point. But this point ends being good as soon as I want specifically a Rafale EH or Su-30MKI. At that point the standard variants of these aircraft just aren’t what I’m looking for anymore, and these would need to be added as separate aircraft.
Now you could say to add them to France and Russia respectively, but that brings up another issue entirely. Now I can play Indian vehicles, but I will be forced to complete multiple full trees, just to get two aircraft of a desired nation. And even after that it wouldn’t be possible to play an Indian lineup that has both.
So yeah, if I want a Rafale I play France, if I want an Su-30 I play Russia, but if I specifically want Indian aircraft I’ll need these specific vehicles in an India (sub)tree.
Play Germany for it’s Leo’s,
Play the US for it’s F-16s.
But where can I play it’s unique things that have nothing to do with the main 10, then it’s a question of why add so many nations that have C&P things and so we right back at the start again.
I would say you also incur the opposite problem: Example, if I can play France and get Leopards AND Leclercs, why would I then go back and play Germany?
Scorpion 90 i can see working but doesn’t the 76mm Scorpion only have HESH? If so thats going to be pretty hard to balance unless they buff HESH which I doubt they will.
Then there’s an inconsistency, in reality the IRIS-T and SLS missiles are the same, while they might differ because one is air launched and one is ground launched they should still have the same parameters when discussing G limits.
And that did not apply in case of Report 2, the missile specified in the source is an air launched IRIS-T, not an SLS, so by this logic it shouldn’t have applied to the SLS.
Usually that would be for unique lineups and vehicles Germany has to offer.
For example the combination of Leopards and Leclercs for France is still different from the German selection of different Leopard variants and the IRIS-T SLM, and there are plenty of vehicles that aren’t exported, including unique variants of well known vehicles like the Leopard, but also entirely new vehicles.
Generally I’d say having an option you don’t want is always the lesser evil compared to wanting an option you can’t have.
But the IRIS-T SLS is literally an IRIS-T, it just got an PC Update to allow the ground launch, they are literally the Same Missiles, just after the Software Update,
You could also take an IRIS-T SLS, and strap it on an Plane again, since there was nothing else changed on it outside of the Software Update
And what happens to lineup argument when stuff like ARB and ASB (for the most part I think people use the same vehicle from my limited experience) comes into question? Then its just fully pointless
WT is built around two things. Line-ups and nations.
Nations: In War Thunder, a nation being added is the nation itself(e.g., their army, navy, air force, and everything they used) and not their MIC, defence industry, etc.
Line-ups: all but 1 mode have line-ups. And in turn, line-ups are what make every nation stand out; even the two most similar line-ups have some differences.
However, these two points, which make up a big part of WT’s identity, have become controversial, all due to the current sub-tree system, which clashes with it. It also comes with issues; if you put lots of nations in the same tree, hence why I barely agree with a tree made up of 3 nations(and not at all with those made with more)
