They only be added if gajin thinks we need another mbt over a ifv
So years away most likely
+1
1 Like
hard to argue, since it terms of uniqueness israel does have their pythoons as well , as well as other things
I support an united alpine tree it’s such a great concept
1 Like
isn’t the only totally unique think the Merkava
Armaments wise Israel has some cool things, but don’t forget where Oerlikon originates from either.
Airframe wise Switzerland does it better I’d say.
Depends on your definition, but Eitan also very much fits this category.
There are some others but I find Israeli naming a bit confusing.
I just remembered the 80mm rockets on the Israeli Spit those rocket were like a nuke
1 Like
like i said pythons, in the game propably mostly the merkava yes, but we are missing bunch of stuff like their light tanks as well quick example sabrah ascod which looks like a 11.3 light
They are always mentioned as a unit when gaijin discusses their armament potential, so there 's no reason to talk abt them as if they’re separate regarding the decisions being made of them - that would contradict the evidence we have on that topic.
This is GB 's researchable Air Rank 7:
Two 10.0 strike aircraft, and two 11.0 fighters. Especially now that Rank differences are ordered by max/min BR 's( w/in individual techtrees ), it 's easy to see why gaijin is adamant in not wanting the Phantoms to increase - moving one of them out would be losing half of the fighters in this Rank, and a quarter of the Rank in total.
We have no indications of any fighter aircraft being developed for this specific part of the techtree, which would allow the BR of one of the Phantom 's to be reviewed. So there 's no cause to believe that their situation will change.
that seems to be a theme of many trees
1 Like
honestly, those should be the focus of the next few patches, since mbts mostly are done either way if we dont want another power creep
Next Up 152mm T14
2 Likes
I can’t wait for Gaijin to expand the British li- oh.
Agree with you.
Nobody considers this aspect of a TT in their analysis.
As I said a while ago. A new nation is not only about its military development. It’s just as important to know if that new nation will attract new players and be profitable.
Substrees do not seek to be profitable in themselves, they also seek to repower existing TTs.
I think that from now on we will see many more sub trees than independent Nations. And I think that independent nations will not be focused only on their technological development, but also on how popular they may be for being massive nations or for having participated in war conflicts.
Where are just at the end of MBTs for lots of thing period. Yes the big three have some left however where to you go after add a Technology Desmtrater for a vehicle under development? Uhhh- nowhere.
Hopefully they focus on the unique older stuff and BR decompression. Basically everything that is not MBTs.
1 Like
With how sub-trees are structured currently I am doubtful.
There is too little space for the host nations to cope with such continuous expansion.
1 Like
here you go Oman CR2
You guys are getting this topic locked again with your discussion about new trees/subtrees with no hints in the next update
As if that is such a devastating occurance.
1 Like