Regardless of all this it still completely goes against your own logic to wish for Czechoslovak vehicles in the German tree, whether you support an independent Czechoslovak tree or not.
There is no German influence over the original vehicles and thus, according to you, they shouldn’t be in the German tree.
And you sat Czechoslovakia wasn’t a thing in WW2: correct.
Slovakia, however, was still a separate entity during WW2. Yes, they had a puppet government, but they weren’t under direct German occupation like Czechia was.
Moreover, Czechoslovakia was an independent country at the time that the Pz.35 and Pz.38 family was existent, other than the NA, recon and Hetzer modifications.
And let’s also not ignore that Czechoslovakia was also an existing entity post war… which is a huge part of the game you seemingly love to ignore.
And hey, considering that Germany wouldn’t have a unique aviation tree beyond rank V according to your logic, what is the point of them being independent too, right? Or how about Japan or Italy? What about France?
It’s not really. I mean in the lack of a Czechoslovak tree where do you see their early vehicles? Britain? Yeah, it’s a option because the same vickers suspension type. Still as with my point on italian and hungarian tanks, their looks are different enough that gives them that unique flavour.
Based on that most czechoslovak early vehicles should stay in German tree. Later ones like the OT thingies should go into the Soviet tree.
But again, I restate, Britain IS an option. You can have the Pz. 35, Pz. 38 moved into premiums/event (in German tree) and the originals with T-whatever names to Britain. Whatever you like, that’s another discussion…
Your point on aesthetics still makes little sense.
You say Swedish low tiers have their own, but a lot of these vehicles are Czechoslovak tanks with different turret.
When India makes a “foreign” hull with a different turret it’s somehow copy paste though?
Things continually fail to add up and the way you ask for vehicles to be implemented, as has been stated a thousand times before, is not and won’t be how War Thunder ever functions.
There’s not A LOT. There’s the TDs and like what, one tank? How’s that a lot?
We have an even more drastic example with HAL Tejas. Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t it inspired by some Mirage thing? Yeah, we find the roots of whatever original vehicle and add it to the nation where its roots are.
The alternative is to make a whole new tech tree for what? One vehicle? (i know you’ll say they’re more but we start the argue cycle from the beginning yet again and again, in circles).
Of the readily available vehicles (so researchable only) in rank I 4/9 vehicles are based on foreign hulls. That’s 44%.
In rank II this is 5/8, so 62%.
In rank III this is 5/11, so 45%.
44+45+62=151
151/3 (ranks you call unique) = average of 50% copy paste or modifications of ‘foreign’ hulls.
Idk about you, but that’s not a small amount for something you look so critically at whether is should be considered unique or not.
that probably includes the copy-paste finnish subtree, no?
The other foreign hulls are what? The czech ones that we don’t have a tree for, so not really copy-paste. They’re copy-paste of the german (czech ones).
Curious about this new Atharva main battle tank India had made. Essentially a T-90S turret mated to a T-72 ‘Ajeya’ hull. It’s not like reinventing the wheel, the vehicle still retains the powerpack of the T-72 ‘Ajeya’. Specs in link.
Edit: Likely to expedite/simplify production and maintenance which would significantly help overall. Also added a picture.
Even if I have it your way, not excluding fin copy-pasta, Sweden early has more unique aesthetic than most chinese early-late mid tree for example. (the only unique chinese thing was the M8 which americans cried so much they didn’t get it even if it’s theirs lol) Or the israeli one until like merkavas.
Prove what? That whatever T-34 gai or whatever chinese have is so utterly original? Give me a break with arguments like these. They’re just like the canadian M4 argument. It’s a literal M4, looks like a M4. Let’s have a tree for it, no?
Cmon, why don’t you join my side. I’m not against the stupid vehicle, let’s have the canadian M4. But not a whole canadian tree for it and some like other 3-4 american lookalike tanks ffs.
And here it shows you don’t do your research. Canada is not a C&P nation even less so if you say lookalikes are, as America is the one that copied some of the Canadian vehicles.
