Sometimes I wonder about how much research people like you have actually done.
3 Likes
Looks at the multiple domestic stuff all higher than 4.7.
2 Likes
My guess, not a lot. looked at the names/wikipedia and called it a day. Not caring to look deeper.
1 Like
That’s what most stop at, unfortunately. I once had a guy that said that Yugoslav ground would have less than Japan.
4 Likes
I’m just looking at the tech tree proposal and am yet to see anything worthwhile spare a couple of Leopard modifications and LAVs. Nothing to justify an entire tech tree.
2 Likes
Israel, China on launch, and the Hungarian and Finnish subtrees should show you how much Gaijin cares about copy and paste. A handful here and there to fill out gaps is not a bad thing.
3 Likes
Except for Canada it would be the vast majority. Most of the Canadian tech tree past 4.7 consists of either technicals or vehicles that were in service in countries already present in-game where they could go instead.
If I had likes I would.
But Yugoslav has plenty. It’s one of three nations I believe have a better reasoning for coming before Canada.
The other two being a Warsaw nation. And I don’t care which either Poland or Czechoslovakia would be fine.
3 Likes
Tis far from the vast majority, and any amount of real looking at the proposed tree would reveal that.
1 Like
Agree to disagree then.
In that image, there are 17 non-Canadian vehicles, and 28 Canadian ones. Your definition of “the vast majority” is quite incorrect.
3 Likes
Aight, das it, no more but Yugoslavia and successors and why it’s the most viable new tree currently below this message
5 Likes
Yes, please. I want to talk about the HARPAS and PASARS-16.
1 Like
My first and likely only post on the proposal is as a sub-tree.
Of course I made that post before I thought of “scatter where necessary” as the alternative option.
Either I’m fine with cause I just want the unique Canadian vehicles.
The tech tree the vehicles go to doesn’t really matter, I just know I wouldn’t use a 2A4M if it was in Britain cause my 8 crew slots are already full, whereas I’d use it for Germany.
@Shay
Israel ground is over 90% unique vehicles, air is mostly copy-paste.
Finland is half unique.
And I don’t remember China launch, largely cause I was busy with other tech trees.
The Canadian ground proposal has more copy-paste than Israeli air has [percentage].
And there is no air proposal in search results to fulfill my personal requirement of it being its own tech tree.
Granted, I’m far less agreeable to copy-paste today than in the past, especially since all ten tech trees in WT largely are unique, whether it’s majority as with Israel, or rather close to majority as with China.
Other copy-paste that would come from a dedicated Canada tech tree:
RAM II, Skink, M113 ADATS, C2 MEXAS… to name the ones off the top of my head.
I was referring to Israeli air.
Not including vehicles outside the tech tree, there are four Finnish vehicles, three of which aren’t in the subtree.
China on launch, if I recall correctly, only had the J-7II, CM11, and ZTZ59D1.
MICA is basically a thrust vectoring AIM-120B, if you will
80km range, so not that long, but not that short either
1 Like
Indeed.
Yugoslavia is one of these best (if not the best option for a new TT).
5 Likes
It would be cool to see Yugoslavia added into the game.
3 Likes
I ignored SPAA as it’s sort of pointless if there’s no meaningful lineup to support in the first place.
You mean those Jeeps with a random recoilless slapped onto it? Meanwhile there’s other nations with actual armoured vehicles. LAVs are pretty cool, but not enough to justify a Canadian tech tree. There are much better additions.
I am counting everything, not just the technicals.
1 Like