concept has been tossed around but US defence industry subtree could work. vehicles could just be put wherever they should go.
for sake of preserving some uniqueness, i think national subsidiares should be considered part of a nations defence industry. for example, US wouldnt get Ajax through GD-UK and UK wouldnt get M3A4 through BAE Systems Inc (used to be called BAE North America)
French Rafale F4.1 equivalent ?
Can the T-69IIa get its dart so its finally worth playing? Its apds is dowater
Legacy hornet from desert storm battle rating 13.0 (Air AB, RB & SB) ?
similar. I guess the additional pylon was designed from the begining, but something stoped it being functional, like F-15, it’s wing pylon isn’t functional until F-15EX.
when the extra pylon problem fixed , they first used it in India Rafale, which is newly made, then Rafale F4
The OF-40 is Italian, not Emirati.
I’m here to continue my tradition of begging for the Ki-64. I saw the model when it was leaked in 2019… WHERE IS IT?? I’ve literally been doing this since 2019 on every R&R thread… I’ll keep going on (copium)
Where are you guys hearing of a Saudi/UAE tree for USA? I can see Iraq/UAE being used to give America (or Britain!) a Pantsir, Ethiopia/Libya/Serbia being used to give Italy a Pantsir, Algeria being used to give France a Pantsir, but an entire tree?
That’s a whole other ballgame. Not much USA could even get out of it in my opinion, and nothing it couldn’t get without it. Unless you want to give USA Rafale, Eurofighter, Leclerc, Leopard 2A7, pretty much everything every other tech tree has. You know what, throw in Brazilian JAS-39E/F while you’re at it.
I don’t understand any of that. Only gap fillers like a Pantsir, and even that is sketchy and out there.
All the middle eastern stuff makes more sense giving stuff to Britain and sometimes France that they couldn’t get otherwise. Like F-15SA/QA for Britain.
United Arab Republic should be its own tree, but the arab states opposed to unification (namely saudi) should be a US subtree.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!!!
There is no need to find excuses for copypasting Pantsir to other nations, Gaijin’s already announced their intention to implement SAM systems with multiple chassis.
in this situation, we may find USSR TT being behind others. Pantsir type SPAA is not suitable for top environment now, it’s fast but bad mobility, can’t hit close target. even they give a Pantsir-SM with 57E6M, which is faster, but ended with bigger Blind Range.
the others spaa are mainly ARH or IR FNF missiles, with good performance in close range, but there is nothing close in USSR’s possible addition SPAA, unless you want to add a BUK.
I can bet that one of few first system to be added would be Kub.
Which they would also copypaste to Italy and UK via Hungary/Romania and India
not really. KUB or BUK, is middle range missile system, not suitable for the game, they won’t be added.
I don’t think the Eurofighter is necessary, but a Pantsir would be a welcome addition just because of the insane advantage Russian teams get from having that and full air superiority with no competition.
I think vice versa, they are going to concentrate exactly on such systems, making hard times for CAS and after that they will add ARMs.
the problem is , they can’t cause much trouble to CAS, they are middle range SPAA, and not good in close range, much worse than even pantsir. unless you are on a EF2000 hanging high in air in 20km, Buk won’t surpass current SPAA.
as for things like IRIS-T and AMRAAM-SL, they are worse in range and speed than current SPAA, but fnf and auto pilot will give them good ability to deal with close range enemies.
Kub has 4 km minimum range (6 km for the oldest variant)
Buk certainly will, especially more modern variants.
more hand holding for the us
more Soviet vehicles in other tt
