Unless of course you’d want to play those other nations in particular, want the exclusive lineup options and variants or the many non-exported vehicles of the various nations.
For example a Czech F-35A is not the same as a US F-35C and also can’t be used with most of the vehicles the US top tier lineup would have, or a Ukrainian MiG-29 would have different loadout options from the ones found in the Russian ones.
Though I would agree that the way current subtrees are implemented works actively against this uniqueness, like how all Gripens have identical loadouts rather than unique nation-specific ones.
100% agree, space is far too limited the way subtrees are done right now.
I think we are at a point where the next sub should be added differently than to what we had before.
It’s time for gaijin to stop seeing Air =air and ground = ground when it comes to subs, as the current take makes the sub on par with their parent nation.
I don’t really see a need or good reason to add another tree, when there is so much left across all eras and types for the rest of the trees. Adding eastern Europe tree, even if there is some unique stuff, is still going to have a ton of copy paste and very similar vehicle variants. Sure the lineups will be different but what would the point of other trees top tiers be if you can get T-72, Leo 2, Abrams, and K2 in one tree.
If they just fleshed out all existing trees there would be more unique additions than adding a new one
That’s the thing though, people don’t want new nations but at the same time subs are growing up to the point of interfering with the nations we already have, so you have to ask what’s the next stage ?
While some nations could definitely do with subtrees (Israel and Sweden), some vehicles just wouldn’t fit in an existing tree without scattering a nations unique mods and vehicles across multiple trees.
Then the issue comes of fitting them in. How do we decide what vehicle goes in. Keep in mind that there are five lines, each only having three vehicle/folder slots per line.
I’d rather wait for domestic options for the main trees to be added and work be done on newer trees.
Submarines, carriers, bombers, missile ships, interceptors, prototypes and projects, the 5th generation, peak MBT’s, aircraft, tanks, and ships across the board, gamemode additions and changes
That’s exactly what I mean though. Top tier isn’t just “T-72, Leo 2, Abrams, K2”, and even past that not every T-72, Leo 2, Abrams or K2 is even the same.
Between completely new vehicles, unique variants, lineups and specific national militaries otherwise not represented there is a lot of point to other nations both as subtrees (if Gaijin improve the implementation) and completely new trees.
When we just don’t add nations, there’s still the obvious question of “How do I play X nation at all?”. Maybe some vehicles, generally the less interesting unaltered vehicles, can be substituted with user camos, but even then you’re missing the most important parts of your lineups and the ability to make proper lineups. This is even still an issue with current subtrees, so it’s no wonder people want new nations.
my thing with sub trees are they are good for nations that have massive gaps and need help filling those gaps, like sweden and japan, I don’t think france or the UK should have gotten sub trees they are some of the biggest arms producers in Europe with a wide variety of tanks that could be added instead of looking for a sub to fix an issue that doesn’t exist
the thing is why play any other tree, sure you get slight different variants but Poland for example operates some of the best variants of said tanks so the argument could be made of “you get more of these tanks if you play the original or you can play this tree that has one of every nations best tank”