I can’t find an exact number but apparently it’s “medium range similar to AMRAAM”.
No plans for this currently. As we mentioned in the same CM update, we already have plans for Greece / Cyprus.
Singaporean vehicles if added will go to whatever tree is most applicable. But nothing to speak of right now.
1 Like
One is already up :)
12 Likes
Since there’s been a discussion about “copy-paste,” I want to throw my hat into the ring. IMO, Benelux additions are mostly fine. The biggest issue is that Gaijin has focused almost exclusively on Benelux additions this year.
I think a 65%/35% split between the host nation and subtree would be better. That gives the main nation plenty of domestic content while still allowing the subtree regular attention.
As for “tech-tree uniqueness,” I think it’s often just a dog whistle from people who don’t want Benelux vehicles in the French tree. This seems to be mostly used by a few vocal French players, some of whom have made dozens of Reddit posts and memes complaining about Benelux while also wanting Switzerland added to France instead.
Only wanting Franco-Swiss designs for their subtree also ignores that much of Swiss equipment was German or American. Many supposed “Franco-Swiss co-developments” were also simply Swiss prototype vehicles fitted with French turrets. By that logic, every vehicle with a Cockerill turret could be called a Belgian co-development.
I also think it’s silly to demand that subtree vehicles be completely unique. If we did that, Switzerland would run out of viable additions around the mid-1990s and be reduced to maybe 10 obscure vehicles. The same applies to South Africa, Benelux and other subtrees.
It’s also strange to see French players complain about France being neglected while arguing that another nation’s vehicles should meet requirements like “fill a gap, be unique, be a co-development, and not be redundant.” If those rules were actually applied to subtrees, a huge portion of both existing and potential vehicles wouldn’t qualify. In practice, this would mean those nations would barely be represented, effectively advocating for those subtrees to be neglected instead. As you’d end up excluding a huge amount of equipment these countries actually operated simply because it doesn’t meet some arbitrary standard of uniqueness. A subtree would essentially be forced to pick only obscure prototypes rather than actually representing the equipment that made up that country’s military.
While Main trees can get almost anything without a fuzz long as that nation actually used it, subtrees instead are expected to justify every single addition. If a Swiss, South African, or Benelux vehicle doesn’t fill a specific gap, isn’t completely unique, or isn’t a co-development, some people immediately argue that it shouldn’t be added. Yet those same standards generally aren’t applied to the main nation.
It almost creates a weird player-made hierarchy where some countries are treated as inherently more important or more “deserving” of having their vehicles in-game simply because Gaijin decided to make them main trees. Meanwhile, countries placed into subtrees are expected to jump through several extra hoops just to have vehicles they actually operated represented in-game.
This effectively turns subtrees into glorified hole-fillers, where only a handful of vehicles are considered acceptable while the rest of the nation’s actual equipment is ignored.
Personally, nations should receive all vehicles they actually used, including France and the Benelux. I’d rather see a subtree folder system implemented that doesn’t take spots from the main tree, while still allowing subtrees to properly represent the nations they come from.
3 Likes
Oh, and it’s quite early in the day! May that mean that there could be… another?
Ah alright thanks but i GENUINELY hope the devs reconsider the spilt decision, it not too late to add all sg vehicles to Israel
It is too late bro what you mean. Remember that devs take in feedback and consideration from everyone and only make the necessary changes after getting insane amount of backlash. coughF-14Dcough
1 Like
(at least 2sg,hunter afv and f15sg in 1 tree pls)
3 Likes
I’d be thrilled to get that VAB in game (at 9.7 or 10.0 I figure), and I’m honestly surprised there aren’t more examples of the VAB family in game, given how many different turrets and weapon systems can be mounted on it.
1 Like
So will there be another dev later, after all, this dev was released a bit early
So, it’s either the Rafale or the Block 70.
2 Likes
With VTAS getting radar symbology any hope for JHMCS, TARGO II, Thales Scorpion, and DASH to also finally get their radar symbology?
Even only for Belgium through Cockerill we could have over a dozen VAB vehicles with guns from 25 mm through 90 mm.
Then again, most of the VAB variants we know of were one-off prototypes or exhibition displays with only little information. So they have a lot less worth historically wise than service variants of the VAB. And we’ve already got the single most important one. The Mephisto 😍
But we can definitely hope for more. Don’t forget to support all related suggestions if so. ;)
2 Likes
Cypriot Mephisto when?
Its something thats an ongoing WIP. So its not possible to say all that will as a final list this major
? So that means they are more?
Same could be said for AML variants too I guess, and we’re not exactly drowning in those in game.
Wheeled +French makes the odds of them being added pretty low
1 Like
The same can be said for wheeled + British. The fact we don’t have any of the Saladins, Simbas, Valkyrs, Alvis Piranhas, Land Rovers, Supacats, AECs (in the tech tree), Coventrys, Ferrets, Staghounds (aside from the anti-air) is absolute insanity in my opinion.
2 Likes