And 67% of statistics are made up just like this one
Also we gave the Americans specifications and other things to apply to the design of the p51
4 Likes
Yes but if anyone comes in here reading the actually comments he will see some guy defending the Polish tree with stupid arguments and a lot of people against him. Talking about impressions…
1 Like
And a lot of misinformation, where did he get 90% copy & paste from
1 Like
Podhale could be great for a air map, lots of terrain for cover.
Zakopane could also be interesting for ground, would be annoying with all the hills
4 Likes
Good luck getting additions and bugs fixed in it
1 Like
can’t wait to carpet bomb Krupówki for making me pay 10zł for taking a piss in a toilet lol
6 Likes
also nice view
1 Like
First of all, Poland doesn’t have its own main battle tanks or fighter jets. This means the advanced tech tree is mostly copy and paste to get more MiG 29s, F16s, Leopard 2s .
Second, the copy-paste issue with the Chinese tech tree is mostly Gaijin’s fault. A lot of experimental vehicles were submitted and even approved on the forums, but Gaijin never added them to the game. The bottom line is that from BR 8.3 onwards the Chinese tech tree started to show uniqueness.
Flagging your post for insulting over 40mlns of polish people
1 Like
Yes we don’t have any domestic made fighter jets, but guess what? Germany, China, Italy, China, Isreal and UK as well. EF Typhoon is a aircraft designed by Germany, UK, Italy and Spain, so who should take the most credit for that? Is this OG “Uniqe” plane that is not a copy paste of something? It is, but J-10 is for a fact something that resembles a Child of a F-16 with a Mirage, J-11 and J-11B is just SU-27 and SU-27SM from Ali Express, and don’t get me started on the Isreal nothig from there is Domesticly made, technicly it is beacsue its produced there, but did they designed it? no. The whole copy paste argumentations falls apart when you realise that IRL only 5 maybe 6 countries are able to domesticly design, get parts and biult its own plane. The tanks well, if we think about it M1A1/A2 abrams is techicly a copy paste of Leopard 2, since it uses M256 which is slightly upgraded linced version of Rh 120 L/44 and the whole M1 program would probobly lead somewhere else if germans didn’t showed up in 1976 in US with there Leopard 2 prototype. If we keep using the same uselsess argument of "CoPY PaSTe" it will lead nowhere, Gaijin benefits from copy and paste content beacsue it makes there money flow. People hate it? duh? but do they benefit from this? Of course they are, that’s why they keep making copy and paste content. Beacause its easier to change Leopard 2’s crew voice lines and change the icon of the said country, rather than making new vehicles, unless its neccesary.
I said everything here, and we maybe don’t have 101% OG made from domestic parts made tanks, but we do have a ton of vehicles that are modified so heavily it does not reseble the Original, besides the look (sometimes)
There’s only two F-16’s C and D Block 52+ and two Mig-29 UBM and G/M 9.13 and one Leopard 2 - 2PlM1, its a modification of 2A4 which is modification of 2Pl which makes it fire DM53 and 63 which other stuff.
Okay lets break it down:
Chinese T-54AM2
Chinese M113 with TOW-2B and Obj. 120 Taran with 5s autoloader
T-72A/M1 with worse LFP and better APFSDS
T-72B yet the last one has better reverse speed
BMP-3 and BMD-4 baby with engine on front
T-80UD with thermals
Chinese Terminator on T-55 chasis
Chinese mephisto
Chinese Gepard with AHEAD rounds and Chinese Gepard 1A2 (before 1A2 was added)
T-55AMD with T-72 engine (sort of)
But does it mean people don’t play it? No.
I hope you do realise that Polands TT starts with there domestic vehicles, since we managed to make something with our glorious economy holding on duckt tape and zippers before the WWII started, unlike Chinas or Isreals.
1 Like
After reading the whole thread it looks like that there are two contradicting views on a Polish TT:
-
Gaijin itself which has the habit to implement independent nation trees just when they see enough potential for selling a high number of high tier premium vehicles and if they are confident that a large enough amount of players would like to play this nation.
-
Players which want to play certain nations due to either patriotic reasons or because they want to see actual military strength and/or historical relevance honored by having an independent tree. In addition to that a lot of players play nations if they offer unique vehicles which have specific and/or interesting technological innovations which can’t be found somewhere else.
But:
I see also these rather plain naive claims that just a significant number of domestically produced vehicles would justify an own independent nation TT. This makes zero sense - the actual combat power of any nation is determined by a mix of available hardware and available troops ready and trained to use them.
Asking for a separate Polish TT:
From my pov Poland is (like Turkey, India, both Koreas…) a very strong regional power and if wt would have a way higher emphasis on immersion (currently = non-existent) there is no doubt that an independent tree would be the logical consequence.
But Poland shows also that gaijin’s lack of immersion and keeping this outdated nation concept has serious drawbacks.
I mean it is obvious that this whole nation concept makes no sense if players have to face & fight their own nation in mixed RB matches (i exclude SBs from this view as they are niche modes) or slightly modified/different opponents from countries which would have fought on their team.
In addition Poland has a rather problematic/troublesome history (regarding wanted or unwanted alliances) and would have either fought with or against Nato - same as East Germany.
In other words:
- Without creating realistic combat scenarios based on time brackets (like NATO vs WP up to 1992) the game offers little to zero immersion. Gaijin’s BR concept with “time travelling” vehicles kills not only immersion - it kills also the option of creating such time brackets.
- The Idea of nations should also reflect political realities and actual military might / strength.
I see this fleshing out of totally irrelevant (=after 1992, based on actual combat power) nations like Germany, UK, Sweden or France with subtrees as somehow comprehensible as they have a WW 2 legacy (except SWE) but it
If you try to count available and combat ready MBTs of these nations you might agree that without own nukes (France & UK) or nuclear sharing via Nato (at least Germany, not sure about SWE) those nations play no role based on actual combat power of their conventional armies and exist either based on WW 2 legacy or a significant number of premium options (like SWE).
Well I guess times chage.
Redemption arc?
1 Like
+1 would be awesome if they made it so Poland is a main nation and the sub tech tree would be ukraine
2 Likes
Interesting points. From your perspective, any NATO main battle tank in the game is a copy of the Leopard II, ignoring their differences in armour, engines and ammunition.
and
and here is what I said:
then I started to try to understadn your “uniqnes” explenation by saying:
and what you refered here
is refrence to:
that was an exaggeration to show the absurdity of your argument on the basis of which you wanted to say that the Chinese ZTZ99 (for example) is a Unique vehicle, when in fact it has many features of the T-72, but also has many features that distinguish it from its Soviet cousin. The same goes for the PT-91 compared to the T-72 or T-90, it’s not the same, even though they have common features.
As well
My whole idea of making this TT was:
- put as many OG vehicles as possible, that was suppoe to be in production or they at least have working prototype
- try not to relly on Copy-Paste unless is neccesary, and if you know what heppen between 1939 and 1989 you would know it was very hard to squeeze something “Uniqe”
- Make grind not too long, not too short, and as enterntaining as possible (assuming you have fun playing this game lol)
So again, please at least read the topic:
beacsue everything is said here as well in SS atached bellow the Topic start (the BR’s are old keep that in mind)
1 Like
Bro, saying the Chinese Type 96 and 99 are just T-72 copies is like saying the M1 Abrams is a copy of the Leopard 2 — it just doesn’t work that way.
Yeah, China’s early tanks were based on Soviet stuff — the Type 59 was basically a T-54A. But from there, China went its own way. You’ve got the Type 69, 79, 80, 85, 88, 90… all these were steps leading to the 96 and 99. That’s like decades of development, not just slapping some parts together and calling it a day.
Also, China never really used T-72s (same the F16) in the first place. They didn’t license-produce them like India did, and they weren’t part of the standard PLA lineup. They just got a few for testing, and that’s it. You can’t determine copying by the fact that they both have a rotating turret/duck wing.
The T-72 is built for something totally different too — it’s designed for mass production and fast armored pushes. Meanwhile, the Type 96 and especially the 99 are heavier, taller, and focus more on fire control systems. Just lokk at WT wiki and the description is clear.
Meanwhile, if you want to talk about “copying,” let’s look at Poland’s PT-91. It’s a modernization of the T-55. The hull, turret layout, suspension system, and many structural elements are inherited directly from the T-72 design. The PT-91 introduced some new techniques but only the update from fire control and reactive armor.
Same can be said about the PT-91, the tank was modified to defend Polish territory, with key upgrades to situational awareness, mobility, protection and fire control systems.
You could simplify the same thing about Chinese tanks but alright, let’s not forget the upgraded cannon, engine, LWS, transmission, suspension etc.