I think that was scrapped and incorporated in to the MAX upgrades but infomation is very hard to come by
Sadly that isn’t the case though. Many key and important additions have been added to the Italian side of the tree, with most coming directly from Italian community suggestions. However if you are going to create a very strange criteria that “doesn’t count” key vehicles like the Eurofighter or other international vehicles that were used by Italy, naturally you are going to create a very different picture to the full list of vehicles added.
The Eurofighter is just as significant and important domestically to Italy as it is tk Germany or the UK.
2 Likes
The opinion of the majority doesn’t always align with what’s best.
What I meant by the broken door is the fact that practically everyone has a foreign vehicle (that’s mostly copy paste), and in my honest opinion that simply makes the game boring. The most classic examples are Leopards, but there are others like the M44, the T-80, the M18, maybe even the BMP-1 (SPz and Pbv 501), the ZSU-57-2…
From my perspective, at some point, some trees feel the same as others, sometimes you’re facing vehicles that are identical to yours, and that’s just not right. Does India have interesting vehicles? For sure, the Arjun, for example, would be a good addition, but others like the T-90, T-72M1 and T-72B, BMP-2, etc… I believe we’ve got enough of that, and in this case Britain should not lose its identity, but again, that’s just my honest opinion.
3 Likes
oh my, someone yapping EF is C&P
4 Likes
When the issue is entirely opinion based, the opinion of the masses is the correct option though, whether or not you think that’s best is irrelevant.
The argument is between national uniqueness vs national variety, and national variety benefits most players, it also benefits the devs as they can add more vehicles per update
To be fair, except for the laser warning receiver on the British one and the lack of IRST on the German one it is c&p, just not the unpopular kind of c&p
exactly, people don’t actually have an issue with copy and paste, they just don’t like it when it adds vehicles they personally don’t want, and that’s the issue, too many people on the forum acting like the game should be made to their own specifications
But there are other masses that have practically (if not entirely) the same opinion. Is theirs irrelevant too? If I was the only one thinking like this then I’d be quiet, but we’re talking about an emerging issue that’s already been brought up several times.
It’s your opinion that variety would benefit most players, but again, that would simply make the game boring because every nation would lose its essence. Obviously, subtrees aren’t an issue (South Africa was well implemented, for example). What’s an issue is filling those subtrees with C&P (Hungary and Finland, for example).
2 Likes
I am a bit late to this but I dont get what the issue is. For a long time, Japan didn’t get much of anything. In fact, it was a running joke that you knew a leak list was legit when it didnt have anything for Japan.
So Gaijin comes along, gives it a sub tree that actually fills out the thinest parts of its tree (the middle and upper ranks), and you or others are upset they haven’t added any WW2 planes despite that being the heaviest part of their air tree? And on top of that, Smin has stated that adding the sub tree doesn’t mean Japan is done and that more planes will come when appropriate.
What am I missing here. It sounds like Japan is fine.
6 Likes
The majority of players that I have seen seem to be pro subtree, the SAAF subtree is just a single Gripen that I agree was important, and when unique vehicles can be added from subtrees that is great but with Gaijin focusing on top tier for air they haven’t left themselves room to add many lower tier vehicles, and so the focus has been on vehicles that can be shared across multiple trees.
And when I say tree variety is a benefit to most players, I’m talking about those not on the forum, who can’t play as much and won’t buy their way up to top tier, lots of people can only realistically grind one tree, and without subtrees, picking a tree like the UK means giving up a lot of variety once they do get to top tier. So for those players, having every tree be well varied at every tier is important so as to not dissuade them from grinding nations other than the USSR and USA
Well, there is a difference between c&p being added because the main tree nation actually operated the copy pasted vehicle and the subtree c&p spam we have witnessed over the course of the last year.
I’m sure most people would agree that c&p is perfectly fine when it’s stuff that was historically operated by the main nation of a tree, however many people understandably dislike getting their favourite nation plastered with vehicles that originated from a nation that had little to nothing to do with the main nation.
India is standardising ASRAAM across its entire fleet, they seem to really like the missile, everything is either being upgraded with it or is set for scrapping.
1 Like
Like I said, this last year has been a huge top tier push and so variety has suffered because of it, at least for air anyways, afaik ground has been neglected in favour of air updates, but that is a separate issue, and I’m hoping March is ground focus with just some updated versions of aircraft we already have for air.
and for one Smin has said that subtrees take a back seat, vehicles are added to them when there is seen as a reason for it, but also if we’re going to have subtrees in the game, they deserve to be fleshed out, and C&P is an easy, and time efficient way to do that, I’m not saying I agree with all of it but for the most part it works.
Now when it comes to the MKI, it is India’s primary fighter aircraft, it was the inspiration for the Russian SU-30SM, and it would likely be added to a line in the British tree that has been completed. There are no aircraft that can reasonably come after the Tornado F.3 so what it the harm?
New service requirement for vehicles operated by the Indian armed forces:
Must be capable of carrying and deploying ASRAAM
Failure to comply will result in immediate deconstruction
Arjun with ASRAAMs sounds pretty weird
1 Like
So MAX did happend? I have not seen any Jag that would loo like it underwent MAX.
1 Like
The thing is South Africa is unique as it is small enough to be added as a sub. But due to some very unique circumstances it had to rely on its domestic industry. Typically small nations will buy foreign equipment if they want high quality equipment simply because of the opportunity cost.
But even then South Africa still licensed and imported foreign stuff Centurions for Olifant mk1, Elands, Mirage 3 and F1
3 Likes
I would like to see a little more clarification/justification on why there’s no roadmap for 2025. I feel like the “we are working on many different projects/aspects instead of one or two big projects” is a cop out statement. I guess I can’t see the issue with putting them under broader categories with bulleted points outling key goals like before.
Roadmaps are great for players as it gives a clear picture as to what they can expect coming down the pipeline. The only reason I can see Gaijin breaking away from this is because they don’t want to be held to any goal or promise. We only went back to them after the whole economy backlash so Gaijin could assure players they were working to fix the economy and several other neglected issues.
It just comes across as dodging or decreasing the amout of transparency.
2 Likes
You will most likely disagree with this, but it would be completely fine for a vehicle column to end just like that. If Britain doesn’t have anything that would go in that column after the F.3 then that’s just how it is.
I’ve already mentioned my opinions about the Indian subtree and its mostly Soviet nature and and my reasoning for being against additions like a potential Su-30MKI, MiG-29K or even Rafales and Mirages operated by India multiple times in these threads and from what I can gather from your responses to @Unit_8 you will disagree with my points as well.
1 Like
Last years roadmap didn’t cover vehicle additions which is what most people are whining about here
1 Like