i have many times
2 Likes
Don’t dip your toes in reddit then. The amount of copium from US mains but also most other nations is completely insane. There are quite a lot of bad takes here and there in the forums, but usually most people have reasonable arguments, even if no one completely agrees with each other
3 Likes
Imagine if everybody agree on everything…
… How boring this would be.
1 Like
Italy: purchases F-16A because it’s excellent and exactly what their airforce needed at the time.
Those War Thunder players: WHY ITALY F-16 COPY-PASTE STUPID ITALY WHERE UNIQUE PLEN NO VARIETY
I guess we must begin ordering nations around the world NOT to purchase foregin material and to start developing their own indigenous war machines, because otherwise “their armies are boring in War Thunder” for using “copy-pastes”…
Like, for real…
The truth is, as you said, that, in the past 80 years, few nations have been workhorse manufacturers, while the rest have relied to a lesser or greater degree on purchases of said nations’ products at different historical periods.
Gaijin isn’t to be blamed if Italy didn’t produce a single fighter jet from the 1950s to Eurofighter Typhoon.
Nations in War Thunder represent the war machines that served in said nations’ armies; nations in War Thunder represent armies, not defence industry companies.
Otherwise, tech trees wouldn’t be Italy, Germany or U.S; instead, they would be “Italian defence industry complex, German defence industry complex and U.S defence industry complex”; and believe me, NO ONE except for maybe U.S and Russian mains would like what that would lead to.
Not to mention that most of the nations besides U.S, Russia and Germany would be filled with gaps at different BRs, even entire historical periods, and have worse lineups.
Even 1946-1965 Germany would be screwed, if we went by your anti-“copy-paste” mindset where everything that isn’t domestic = copy-paste.
11 Likes
Very if that answer the question :p
1 Like
Cough
In that case i have no problem with italy getting F16s, sure it broke the originality of the country, but it was in service and no other domestic things were possible.
I got more difficulty seing them getting a Gripen.
2 Likes
I think you completely missed the point of the argument. I don’t think anyone is against Italy receiving f16s if they bought it. However, if every nations start getting subtrees, then it does negatively impact diversity. Why give France f16s ? They never bought it, never intended to and never will. Why give China Mirage 2000 ? It’s something used by Taiwan (which is in a Cold War with mainland China as well, so that makes things even worse imo). Why give SA gripen (and maybe even Indian rafale) to Britain ?
Then, you would argue to me that I should just play what I want and you’d be right.
But the problem at top tier is that it’s always about Meta. Let’s for exemple say that the Meta of the moment is that one fXX American plane. Now, if all countries all have access to that fXX jet along side their own indigenous, unique jets that are simply worse, then the chances are high that a large portion of the player will switch to that specific jet. And then you’d end up in games with 14 fXX against 14fXX with a few other unique vehicles here and there.
The game already wasn’t fun when the Meta was bi-nations (US phantoms against USSR mig 21s lasted for months as one tiny exemple), and it would be even worse if it became a one plane trick.
I understand, this game is based on real life. But, it’s a game. Not a Milsim game. A game game. So imo it should be entertaining to play. I often already find it hard to not find it boring with all the f16s and gripen flying around in a stale team deathmatch game mode, but it would become even worse if that trend went even further in the 1 Meta plane
5 Likes
Well, not the Italian tree is actually Italy + Hungary, and Hungary did use Gripen, so… would not the same logic apply?
2 Likes
Or did Italy get Hungary specifically to get the Gripen. And if they didnt have that need. They could have gotten any number of other (maybe more appropriate) Sub-TT nations (or maybe even no Sub-TT nation at all)
1 Like
And, in order to achieve this, every nation needs to be as competitive as possible in the PvP field; and, when this is not possible with a nation’s indigenous or even service content, it is only natural that we resort to non-indigenous content and even subtrees of other nations.
The issue here is that you are not acknowledging subtrees as the subtrees that they are.
Gaijin didn’t give Italy Gripen; Gaijin gave HUNGARY Gripen. It’s simply that, for structural reasons, Hungary is together with Italy. Same goes for U.K and the S.A vehicles, etc.
The only reason why subtrees are inside main trees is because their nations wouldn’t have even remotely enough content to stand on their own as an independent tree; but being subtrees doesn’t make them any less of a national tree/subtree/branch, don’t take away their credit just for being small and not being able to be on their own!
The alternative is 2-3 nations dominating all others. What’s better for the game; having balance with “less originality”, or having an absolutely mess of an unbalanced situation “but with originality”?
6 Likes
What’s Eremin’s last name? The one who flew the Yak-3
Pretty much this.
What if they added Hungary separately as a small tree? What would the difference be other than another nation’s flag added to the battle score screen?
4 Likes
This is backwards. If Vehicle X is “meta” and “everyone is playing it”, then Vehicle X being in a larger number of nations is objectively superior for player experience.
-
Everyone plays Vehicle X, and are forced to play and thus research/progress only two nations
-
Everyone plays Vehicle X, but are able to pick between seven different nations to work on while doing so
The second option is a direct upgrade.
This is why more diversity within trees will always be more important than diversity between trees.
1 Like
Abrams is much worse than it should be (lower front plate, floating turret), but its no ariete either.
1 Like
Stona seid they couldn’t because they’re is more then 200 Countries and most of them have armys
I think I know the update name.
War thunder : International Confusion
3 Likes
I have a policy of disregarding anything thatguysays to maintain my own sanity.
Eremin.
PS if you mean first name, then Boris.
1 Like
*International Concussion
Going back to what @Morvran said;
Did Italy need a subtree for their air tree ?
I won’t mention the ground tree, it was indeed necessary. But, in the same vein as the UK, that only got the SA ground tree with the exception of the Gripen for the reasons you mentioned.
Considering Italy does use the f16, and their air tree was already pretty good, are they in any need for the Gripen (aka the Meta jet rn)?
And if France get BENELUX, would they also receive Leo 2s ? or f16s ? If so, for what reasons ? A fixed Leclerc can easily contend against the Leo 2A6, and a Mirage 2000 is good enough in the current META. France would not need those.
China, having Taiwanese vehicles, could also receive M2K, has f16s, etc… Are they warranted considering China has it’s own, domestic fighter jet industry (with lots of jets that are licensed built soviet jets, but still somewhat different in their load outs for exemple).
Or Britain. Will they receive the Indian Rafale ? If so, for what reason ? Britain will be able to receive the EF2000 which is similar in performances.
This is my problem with subtrees.
6 Likes