Still better choices than South Africa and India if that is the main deciding factor for Sub-TTs, like Canada or Australia or New Zealand for example.
I still reckon that 99% of their reasoning for putting India in Britain was just so they could bodge our tree with soviet additions instead of actually fixing the vehicles that need fixing or adding the unique native stuff that would only come to our tree
But the Jordan Challenger Falcon would have been so much better than the T-90.
And yet its not entirely out of place. Unlike India being in Israel.
Issue not unique to India. No need to look further than France getting Leo2s instead of Leclerc fix.
UK and India is even more out of place
and you want to make that issue worse?
so should we add France to Germany because Germany installed a pro German puppet state called Vichy France? Britain did the same to India but with the British Raj and over 200 years
Because?
How i want to make that issue worse? I simply stated what Gaijin already did. Im not calling for anything new.
You cannot in good faith compare these two situations. One was act of agression against estabilished country which resulted in unlawful occupation. Second one was simply result of colonisation.
Besides India, to my knowledge, joined Commonwealth in 1947 willingly.
France had a much bigger skill issue with Germany than India did with the British, India was in a civil war with the Maratha rebellion and the Mughals had already been on a decline due to external and internal factors. If the Mughals were at their prime the British would have started speaking Urdu.
The newest episode of Marvels “What if…?” sounds lit. I love sci-fi!
“If the Mughals were at their prime the British would have started speaking Urdu.”
— uses the literary device called hypothetical conditional or more precisely, counterfactual conditional.
In short:
The literary device is a counterfactual conditional.
Other devices you could also argue are lightly present:
Would you like me to give you a few famous examples of counterfactual conditionals from literature or famous speeches too? They can help you spot them faster! 📖.
I understood what you said perfectly.
But they werent, hence they got colonized, thus creating the historical connection between India and UK, and its useless to base any argument about India vehicle placement within WT on hypothethical scenario where India never lost to the Brits.
But a historical connection isn’t enough, there needs to be a cultural, political, and military connection, and Canada + Australia are way better choices for that.
Mughals was more of a Persian led Muslim speaking nation rather than a Indian nation like you’ve mentioned, faking history is pretty harmful.
It’s comparable to saying that the Mongols were a Iraqi nation because they held territory there
The first leader of the Mughals had Turco-Mongol lineage and the offical language of the Mughals was Persian not Urdu.
They were therefore closer to Iran, Central Asia, Mongolia and Pakistan rather to India
Thats funny since you think India in Israel, despite not sharing any of the aforementioned, is less out of place than India in UK.
Because Israel and India have a close Military and Political relationship
Maybe the first leaders but they still cared about India’s economic development
Most of their territory was in India and they assimilated with Indians.
Israel and India have such military treaty that if india is attacked israel will deploy its troops to india or vice versa?
Does India have that with the UK? No, what I’m saying is that they both have mutually close relationship and would make more sense than Britain because colonising a nation doesn’t entitle you to that nation’s vehicles.
Once again, Israel is India’s second largest Military Partner behind Russia. Israel has come to India’s aid several times and was vital to their victory in several Indo-Pakistan wars.
The Blogs: Battles India fought with Israeli support | Arunansh B Goswami | The Times of Israel
How Israel helped India during the Kargil war - India Today
What is out of place is putting India in their Colonizer’s tech tree rather than with their actual Military Partner.
India will not be a Stand-Alone Tech Tree because nations like Japan and Israel are already strained for additions due to Gaijin stretching themselves thin. It would be more beneficial to the game to combine Israel and India as they use each other’s technology and are also, again, Military Partners.
I am not asking to have pre-indian independence vehicles added to Israel such as the Vickers; however, Indian vehicles during the wars where Israel played a key role in aiding India in their victory and beyond should be within Israel. It is healthier for the game.
Again. Nearly no sub-tree in this game has this condition. Current Additions to Britain, such as Jordan, South Africa, and the few Indian Vehicles they have, would not fit this requirement.
If India were to end up in a war, it would be Israel that aids them, not Britain. Objectively speaking, this is not a guess. Not only has this happened several times in the past during Indo-Pakistan wars, but the inverse is also true as India is currently aiding Israel at this very moment.
It is impossible to deny that they are close allies based on Historical precedent.
Cool story, doesn’t change the fact that India was still a part of the British Empire. Ireland is represented in the British tree, and we are independent from the Crown. God forbid India (who has historically been a part of the British Empire) be a part of… the tech tree that makes up their military history, moreso than a country that is barely legitimate in the first place.
India is in the British tech tree, and unless Gaijin feels like giving us British players those Indian tanks that we unlocked for free in the Indian tree, I say no deal. I got my Strela, my Osa, my MiG and the Curry T-90 by hard work in the British tree, I’m not unlocking it again.