So, in your POV, every exported vehicle should be modified to be ‘unique’
Such as…
-Changing some features (M109 variants which give similar gameplay with slight differnce on machine gun.), or even removing it(Finnish F-18C which is Finished, or Finnish PzIVJ which removed anti-air MG34)
-changes ammo belt (from P-51D-20 to J26)
-or limit some ammunition, which technically could IRL (M61 APCBC-HE on QF Mk. V, APDS limitation of British Firefly, AIM-7F of F-4JUK, or AIM-120 of JAS39C SAAF, as an example)
Right?
Sounds a bit more like ‘you guys shouldn’t have superior vehicles than us’, no matter how you paid us.
and maybe THAT is what ‘tech-tree uniqueness’ truly means to YOU.
I honestly don’t think rationalising a big problem with only ‘racism’ is a good sight for seeing the problem.
If we suggest you join the Greatest-Commonwealth-Tech-Tree and be a sub-tree of UK… I don’t think that is a better tech tree…
I think we’re on different pages on what the word “unique” means.
The Ro’em is a unique modification.
The Achilles is a unique modification.
The M4A4 however, is not.
Two of those have a modification which changes the way the vehicle is played. One of those is just a slight nerf that really has no meaningful effect.
Yes, the word “racism” oversimplifies it, however the main idea is not lost. That is, combining the Asian trees would lead to very angry Asian players all around due to societal tensions between Asian nations (and even between territories within the same nation).
You are completely missing the point of combining trees. Britain is a decently fleshed out tree, and does not need copy paste. Britain has continued developing new weaponry through the post-war period. There is 0 reason for US to be a joint tree with UK.
Japan and China, however, were both stunted as far as military technology goes during post-war (heck, even pre-war for China) and thus lack the number of real-world vehicles to properly flesh out their trees.
Nice defence, quite impressive.
I agree with your point on Achilles.
I am a bit wondering about the effectiveness of the chimaera-ish 155mm version of Priest wannabee with HVSS chassis in gameplay-wise, it would act as a sidegrade version of M44, which acts a bit inferior on the gameplay side. Uniqueness? yes. Worthful to play? unsure about it unless it gets significantly lower BR than M109.
And, if Ro’em gets significantly lower BR than the current reserve-ish M51, there would be another problem, which it cannot form a solid deck because there are lacks of vehicles at israel tech tree under 6.0BR. We might need another vehicle to fill the empty rank 1~3 gap of israel TT if we want to see ro’em, and if we consider the history of IDF, the lower ranks of israel TT will smells bit similar to the current Chinese TT’s low ranks, if it happens.
If we push Ro’em, you will eventually end up with more C&P vehicles. I am fine to see them, but I am a bit wondering if you can accept it.
Also, about the Japanese tech tree, which was origianl topic of this, there aren’t many ‘truly unique vehicles which also fit gameplay-worthy’ left in the WW2 era, and you also know there are not much dometic vehicles left for them in the post-war.
I agree that reshuffling priorities of adding sub-tree vehicles is needed for Gaijin (Which is never gonna happen). A more unique-ish vehicle is better, but we also need those C&P ones, either.
If we completely dismiss the C&P cards from this game, with your stances, minor nations will run out of vehicles real quick.
This part was the main idea of why I counterargued with the silly idea of the UK-US combined TT.
Their history is even more complicated than we do. no matter how we want to combine it or not. Combining JP-CN-Thai is never gonna happen, invalid idea.
I don’t reckon that I completely missed the point, but well, I admit that I partially mistook the idea.
Which is filled with non-meta vehicles. Loves those beauties, but hates them on the gameplay side.
Vampire, Sea Venom, Meteor and such.
I disagree. I think we need a bit of copied vehicles which can reflect our heritage and Lend-lease support from west.
Yes. There is zero reason for US to be a joint tree with UK.
Just like how CN cannot be a joint tree with JP.
I really don’t think mixing nations with controversal way can be a solution to solve the copy-paste problem. Maybe they would have a bit less c&p vehicles than now, but not that much better if we think about revenue.
Also, this cannot happen unless you change the history with some fancy blue phone box or car built of fancy stainless steel.
Agreed, but also the US lacks a US Stingray and instead just got the Thai model. Thailand configured it according to their needs. Just because it’s the only mass produced variant doesn’t suddenly make it a stock production configuration.
Only the M551 Stingray and the Stingray AGS were offered to the US military, but never the base Stingray. It would’ve made more sense to add both of these rather than adding a foreign operated tank.
The US could’ve also instead gotten either of the two prototypes, the first one being more distinct with the old cooling system, and the second representing the actual intended standard production configuration before the Thai order.
In an ideal world, Ro’em would be 4.0 whilst M44 (and most other HE slingers) would be higher. Not that players want a Ro’em for its combat effectiveness anyways.
If you saw the rank 1-3 Israeli TT suggestion, the majority of the vehicles would be unique modifications. The Half Track would also get a chance to shine.
Copy and paste is not the issue. I’m perfectly fine with vehicles like, the Italy M24 and M4 being added as they’re necessary to fill proper lineups.
The issue comes when 90% of the tech tree is copy paste, like Japan’s ground tree and China’s air tree.
Kinda Gajin’s fault tho :/
If it’s joint venture vehicles like the M22 or Cannonstang, then I agree. But if it’s just adding random BS cause the nation bought it at some point, then no.
In an ideal world, only in an ideal.
I reckon that both Ro’em and M44 maintain 4.0BR, and Israeli users suffer thanks to an inferior vehicle in the same BR if we think about F-16 Netz or the initial version of Sholef before it gets buffed.
Still, there would be some direct C&P vehicles which will be added to keep up the gameplay effectiveness, if it happens. And well, extension of the Israeli tech tree itself isn’t clear though
Gaijin probably just fills low ranks in the way which you dislike, or even there could be a chance of full neglect, just as we brits got about the SA sub-tree in air branches.
Hmm… seems you shifted your stance slightly. But well, Addition of Thailand subtree itself was designed to fill proper lineup.
Gaijin just choosed to give worse option than better though.
As you know, Gaijin’s taste is a bit… unique. Isn’t it?
This is a clear oversimplificating about japanese ground part.
There are 80 total vehicles in japanese ground tech tree, and if we exclude all of the premium/event/squadron vehicles, there are 64 ground vehicles exists.
And there are only 9 C&P vehicles in the ground branch.
-M16 MGMC
-M24
-M19A1
-M44
-M4A3 76(W)
-M41A1
-M47
-M163(Thai)
-M60A3 TTS(Thai).
‘9 out of 64 isn’t 90% of the tech tree is copy-slopped’.
And some of them are required to fill the gap.
About the Chinese air branch…
The Qing were literally doomed thanks to Two-empires-on-islands. so, there were no options to fill lower ranks without copy-pasted vehicles, unless Gaijin debunk the low ranks just as they did on the Israeli tech tree.
Necessary to fill the proper lineup, as you claimed.
Then Please hand over fancy mustangs with merlins along with P-400 to us.
If we didn’t order those from you, those weren’t born at all.
Well, I know the USAAF used P-400 in combat, because we didn’t received much of those, then the USAAF armed with those leftovers.
A bit similar to the US Stingray case, they changed the autocannon because we ordered it, and Congress didn’t want us to have 37mm, AFAIK. The only difference is that, unlike the Stingray case, we failed to get P-400 of our own.
This isn’t ‘just adding random bs cause we bought it at some point’.
Well, we wouldn’t argue at all if Gaijin were a bit more concerned about adding Thailand vehicles with some unique modifications.
It got moved down last BR update I believe. It’s still overtiered, but its atleast same BR as the U.S. one.
There were plenty of other options to fill gaps, both with Thai vehicles and with non-Thai subtress that could have potentially been added. The Thailand tree was just simply laziness.
Also M36.
That’s more than most nations, but even worse, most of those were added at BRs that didn’t even need em.
The M163 was completely unnecessary. The Stingray and M60A3 TTS were both added when Japan already had five other 9.0/9.3s
6.3 and 6.7 are already pretty saturated making the M41A1 useless.
The M16 is literally one of two 2.7s.
the M44, M19A1, and M42 are the only Jap 4.0s in the tree.
The M24 is the only 3.7 in the tree.
The only additions that actually helped fill out a lineup are the M36 and M4A3.
F-16A… 4th gen armed with 6x All-aspect missiles are overtiered…?
I disagree. It is undertiered instead, but not her fault but more a compression fault. Just like how F-15A became 12.7BR. Powercreeps created compression to send them lower. Two wrong made third wrong disguised as right.
But well, this topic isn’t about F-16, so let me explain why I mentioned Netz.
You also know that Netz stayed higher BR than F-16A for months, right?
Just like that, I reckon that Gaijin will stick Ro’em in the same BR of M44 if Ro’em got added.
Same role, same BR, worse gameplay opportunity, with extra weeks to take care of. Just how Netz ot Sholef V1 did.
I agree with the current lineup of Thailand subtree is filled with laziness thanks to Gaijin which has ‘unique’ taste.
But ‘plenty of other options’ without proving feels a bit void.
Wooden add-on armour for M60A3 TTS which @MAUSWAFFE mentioned would be a good idea.
AFAIK, JGSDF’s M36 had only M36 which has a modified original hull with driver MG. with the cost of removing one of the APCR for MG compared to the US TT counterpart M36B2.
Not that much unique gameplay-wise though.
Why? There wasn’t any 7BR-ish SPAA exist in the Japanese tech tree. You told us that C&P for filling the gap is fine, weren’t you?
If we need to tell adding her was unnecessary. The only reason would be “should’ve M163A1 TVADS instead of M163”.
M60A3 needs adjusting with extra features but disagrees with Stingray. Stingray’s main operator is Thailand, not the USA. If we consider your theories support your gatekeeping, we need to remove Stingray(US) instead of the real one.
Because, with your takes, with your simulated POV, I cannot see the role of Stingray’s role in US TT. /s.
Oh, don’t forget that M24/M41A1(JGSDF) is one of the few light tanks which can scout in their TT.
By the way, in Arcade battle, M24 could be used for forming a 3.3 lineup over there. Just saying.
More trustworthy SPAA compared to domestic 20mm ones.
Again, oversimplifying, hyperbole…
I reckon that at least M24 and M41A1, and M163 are helpful to fill a lineup.
From 14%(15.6% if we include M36) to 90% is an unjustifiable level of hyperbole unless you want to frame japanese ground tech tree as landfill.
“It’s arithmetic!”
No? I mean the vehicles produced because of British debt and order.
By the British Purchasing Commission.
It takes two to tango. But it seems you want to assassinate the partners instead of tango.
It was completely necessary to give the 7.3 and 7.7 lineups a capable SPAA to replace the terrible SUB-II-2. It fills a gap.
The Stingray
Is Thai and not American.
and M60A3 TTS
Is literally the only legitimate complaint out of any of these.
The M24 is the only 3.7 in the tree.
And it’s the only light tank until 6.3. It fills the gap of a light vehicle with scouting, which can only be done with the M24 (3.7) or the M41A3 (6.3) until domestic Japanese light vehicles are added at 6.7 with the Type 60 SPRG.
the M44, M19A1, and M42 are the only Jap 4.0s in the tree.
Yeah. And they’re the best SPAAs and TDs available for the 4.3 Chi-Nu II and 4.7 Chi-To lineups. Again, filling a gap, unless you want players to be stuck with the 3.0 So-Ki or 2.7 M16, or the 3.3 Na-To.
6.3 and 6.7 are already pretty saturated making the M41A1 useless.
Except that it’s their only light vehicle capable of scouting for the 6.3 lineup.
The only additions that actually helped fill out a lineup are the M36 and M4A3.
No they aren’t. By your standards they didn’t fill a gap until the Chi-Ri got ridiculously overtiered to 5.7 due to a reload adjustment.
Probably, ‘Fight for the rights of the USA and War Thunder’
I mean… ‘Unique America’ maybe.
That might be why he is so consist on shifting the points.
He decorates his logic like icing on a cake, but the truth is, he just doesn’t want American equipment going to other countries like Britain or Japan.
Yeah, if their congress didn’t embargo the 37mm, P-400 wouldn’t born at all… ROFL
Whats wrong with wanting trees to maintain a sliver of uniqueness?
Do you want more British equipment in the USA tree?
Because they purchased quite a lot from them.
Just keep following his logic. He constantly shifts the stance for gatekeep US built vehicles from customers.
This part itself isn’t wrong. but problem is, some random radicals like him exist for using it as strong gatekeeping tools.
Rules for thee, not for me type of arguing.
He said he is fine to see some C&P, which needs to fill the gap.
Meanwhile, he also disagrees about the vehicles M163(Thai), M24/M41A1(JGSDF), which was placed to fill the gap.
If he really wanted to keep maintaining uniqueness and fight against C&P
He shouldn’t have disagreed about Stingray Tank with Thai.
Because Stingray was designed to export, saved by the Thai and neglected by the US Congress.
Thailand has legitimate cause compared to the US. Just like how P-400 does, but even worse.
At least, P-400 was handed to the USAAF and used to fight against the IJNAS, unlike Stingray, which was never adopted.
I don’t care about adding our vehicles to your tech-tree, because you paid the tax money to us. right?
If our vehicles could add a variety of gameplay, then sure.
What I’m really pissed off about is his double standards.
Why not? It wouldn’t interfere with sim battles and if they used them, sure. Though, I’m not sure what equipment you’re referring to as the exchanges were mostly to Britain rather than the other way around.
Just to name a few from memory.
They used the Tracked Rapier in their air bases in Turkey.
90ish Fireflies of multiple models.
Built the turrets and internal components for around 1000 early model Churchill’s and purchased a few complete ones for testing.
Multiple early models of the Spitfire (Not including the LF already in game)
12 Centurions for testing, Mostly Mk3’s with at least 1 being a Mk5. (Mk5 was gutted for use as a LPT testbed)
One of the Mk3 Cent’s was also dressed as a Abrams to be used as a movie prop.
Hawk (Though their version is slightly different to the ones in game), Though this one is more of a licensed copy than an import.
Not a vehicle but they also imported a bunch of Starstreak missiles which where tested on a few platforms, Probably the most well known being the Avenger Humvee.
Hey I’m American and like American tanks and feel patriotic for my country and all that jazz, but I don’t create some weird American superiority double standard bullshit because of it. So…
The M4A3 Firefly would be a cool event vehicle. The British never converted any M4A3 for the Fireflies, it’s a uniquely American vehicle rather than a British one.
Aside from the ones which were just used for testing, I don’t see why any of them shouldn’t be added.
If it gets added it shouldn’t be an event considering it was actually used, 2 army groups where equipped with them for a year, And only a bit over half where the A3 model.
They could make the other models an event, But the A3 should be TT.
There were only 80 to 90 converted and no photographs or service records of the M4A3 Fireflies actually remain. Their service was so entirely unremarkable that there is no concrete answer as to what even happened to them and no record of their combat usage.
It’s a perfect event vehicle and none of them should be tech tree.
