Poland mentioned 🔥🔥🔥
1 Like
Lol
Lmao even
I just realised we never got the passed to the devs for December. I wonder when we will see it.
2 Likes
Give the mods and devs a day to recover from new years eve bruh
1 Like
You do realise they are also British mains who are purist as well same as any other player community but hey let’s demonize the Brits because it’s funny
2 Likes
there is good and bad in eveything.
that how life work.
1 Like
I never said that it was but I’m using Syria to show how Gaijin decides the relevance. Even with real historical ties to France and no bloody independence war, Syria wasn’t even considered for the French tree because that’s not what determines placement.
Yes, and “closest relevant” has consistently meant equipment origin, doctrine, and military lineage, and not colonial history. That’s the entire point you’re not adressing.
Right and thats because the syrian military is mainly Soviet derived. Now apply that same rule to Algeria, whose army was deliberately built away from France and almost entirely around Soviet/Russian platforms (even before the algerian independence, Algerians were already training in the Soviet Union on vehicles from this country, also using their doctrine). France is again irrelevant here (unlike India which was trained, advised, and supplied before and after independence by the british army).
Eastern armies like Czechia, Slovakia etc were built around soviet equipment and doctrines.
Western NATO countries vehicles in other NATO nations trees still make sense though, as these armies have been built around the same doctrines and standards and got close cooperation with each other.
It is. A subtree is just multiple vehicles following the same relevance logic at scale. If the logic doesn’t work for individual vehicles it doesnt magically start working when you bundle them together…
Nothing rules it out only if we ignore every precedent Gaijin has set with the subtrees. In practice Algeria has no doctrinal, technological, political, or developmental continuity with France and a historically hostile relationship on top of that. Its the opposite of a foundation for a subtree.
Edit: That reply ended up longer than intended lol
1 Like
Yeah but still the hate on British mains just really needs to stop now as it’s getting super old
2 Likes
same as the hate on so called bais russia need to stop.
we cant kill the bad, nor have only good, it is our faith to sort things like this, if we cant, why bother living.
It’s silly to think like that. It’s obvious that this will be for the development branch, especially since BVVD himself said that they would appear sooner or later and didn’t mention a world war
Again, if a nation isn’t part of a tree yet (or in other words, doesn’t have a home yet) their vehicles can go wherever Gaijin deems fit. Usually such vehicles end up in the tree of the exporter nation.
This has nothing to do with subtrees.
No, that’s because the T-72 and Su-22 are Soviet vehicles. If Gaijin added a Syrian operated SA 342L Gazelle, that one would most likely have ended up in the French tech tree.
A couple of randomly placed vehicles are not a subtree.
A subtree is a nation that Gaijin has decided to be tied to an existing nations tech tree.
When a nation becomes a subtree, all vehicles of that nation will be added to the host nations tech tree.
Syria, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Austria, Czechia, Argentina, heck even Australia, Canada and New Zealand aren’t subtrees. Gaijin hasn’t tied any of them to a specific tech tree, meaning their vehicles can still go to several tech trees.
What precedent?
2 Likes
Can someone explain to me how the SU-47 can be added but not the EAP?
I’m trying to think of a reason that has nothing to do with Russia, but I can’t come up with anything
6 Likes
They dont place them just arbitrarily, they follow exporter origin because it preserves a tech tree coherence. That same coherence requirement doesnt disappear just because you scale up to a subtree. If anything it becomes stricter and not looser.
It actually does because subtrees arent exempt from the logic used for individual vehicle placement. If the equipment base doesnt align, the subtree becomes incoherent by definition.
Yes and the individual vehicles follow exporter logic, and thats what undermines the French subtree idea further. The Algerian inventory is overwhelmingly Soviet/Russian. A subtree can’t be built on “if they add one French vehicle someday” and still you’re talking about an hypothesis, in any case Syria currently sits in the USSR tree despite how actually close and “friendly” it was to France historically.
I dont disagree there but you’re missing the implication, if a nation’s vehicles scatter across multiple trees due to exporter diversity, that nation is fundamentally unsuitable for a subtree. A subtree needs concentration.
Yes and that tie has always been justified by the military continuity and compatibility and not just any historical association alone… India was trained by the British and are part of the Commonwealth, Malaysians are in ASEAN and got close ties with Japan (and no past grudges), Finland has almost always been a very close ally and partner of Sweden up until today, Belgians and France were close allies before even NATO was a thing, Switzerland is partially supplied by the germans and share a close cultural proximity etc…
The precedent that Gaijin only creates subtrees where there is a clear and consistent equipment lineage with the host nation. Finland-Sweden and Belgium-France (for this one, I personally would rather have an independent Belgian tree) are examples. And Algeria and France is the opposite, the doctrines are incompatible, there is no military alliance/cooperation and there is a very hostile post colonial relationship. And just to be clear it isn’t only me opposing it because it would be disrespectful toward us, but its also because its purely illogical. Speaking from first hand knowledge Algeria today has nothing to do with France militarily, politically, doctrinally or culturally.
I agree that Algeria doesn’t make a lot of sense to pair with France given current relations.
But if we’re talking about precedent, almost all of those things apply to UK/India and guess where Gaijin put India, which is an actual sub tree?
3 Likes
India works and is pretty much very different because even after independence its military stayed basically with the same british doctrine, organization, equipment and strong ties that lasted decades (and they’re also members of the Commonwealth). India even had its own army and equipment (affiliated to the british) during the colonial era. I would still have preferred to see an independent Indian tree though.
Algeria is completely different because before and after independence, the army (then National Liberation Army) was built to avoid France, and soviet/russia-aligned. And I’m speaking both doctrinally and in terms of equipment, but also politically. The soldiers were being trained on soviet vehicles, artillery, aircraft, and other equipments in the USSR while the Algerian guerillas were still fighting.
Its very foundation is Soviet (and kind of Chinese) and in no way French, and that up until today.
Nah, will be Event reward for this year xD
Or to use its service name, Schakal :)
2 Likes
This years Winter event Boxer is probably gonna be a Dutch one for France
If yall could leave a vote please 🙏
1 Like