Israel has more unique ground vehicles than China currently, and China has two nations’ worth of vehicles.
This is all the copy-paste in Israel’s ground tech tree:
This is all the unique aircraft in Israel’s tech tree. + Spitfire MkIXc & Sakeen.
From different airframes to different loadouts.
Nesher is still copy and paste of Mirage 5F iirc…
It has just different loadouts.
Here 's some real news: War Thunder Mobile has ended it 's Open Beta !
A reminder: the GJN account you use for WT is also the one you can use w/ WTM - that 's probably why both games having shared login rewards was on the Roadmap.
From the devblog:
" But wait, there’s more! All players who log into War Thunder Mobile within the next two weeks - until August 29th - will receive a Rank I ship and a Raink I tank platoon in unique camouflages as a gift!
Those gifts are the M4A4(FR) platoon, consisting of the M4A4, AMX-13(FL11), ARL-44(ACL-1), and CCKW 353 AA. All featuring a special camoflage:
And the Fletcher-class, USS Nicholas(DD-449). She was the US navy ship who earned the most battle awards of the 20th century, and one of the longest-serving of her class - I’m a little surprised she 's not represented in a later ASW refit, since WTM already features playable submarines:
There 's also a reminder that they’re going to be adding further types of vehicles - w/ the shared evidence of developments for Naval vehicles we’ve seen between the games it 's wise to keep an eye on it.
Russia is already getting alot of cold war vessels because the ww2 ships arent comparable they are pretty bad so i thought they could also add the submarines cuz the ww2 soviet subs are the worst.
Average russian main everyone
I never thought I’d be accused of “lying like a slut”, but I guess there’s a first time for everything.
So…Devblog season can start any day now right?
Someone said that here? Seriously people saying such things to others have no place on this forum. What happened to moderation? Never encountered such things before here. How low this community has sunk.
don’t use slurs in the forum
Clearly you are asking too much…/s
China shouldn’t be its own tree either, imho. In my “folder” idea, the PRC stuff goes in the “Warsaw Pact” folder, and the Taiwan stuff goes in the “Anglo” one. So that doesn’t say much about Israel in terms of internal consistency.
LOL! There is not enough room in ANY tech tree for Chinese equipment OR Israeli equipment.
And sub-trees can augment both if needed, which for China won’t be. Cause Chinese air rivals USA.
In-fact, there are more unique gen 4 jets from China than USA.
Reread the post I wrote above where I explained the idea. We’re not talking about merging trees, but foldering them. Therefore, size isn’t an issue, and trees within a folder can be as big or as small as you like; the player gets to pick and choose what to field.
To a degree this happens already with some trees in game, and it doesn’t cause any issue: Germsn 1.3 has up to 11 ground vehicles to choose from, so something is going to be let out, especially if you bring planes too. That just means more player choice though.
Also not needed.
It actually reduces player choice of variety to face.
Eh, that is your subjective position. Mine is that the current system comes with plenty of downsides, because you can’t only add the unique Chinese stuff: you need to give them viable lineups at all BRs. And that means copypaste.
Instead of cloning the IS-2, just let the Chinese player “borrow” the Soviet IS-2 for their lineup (which they could do because Soviet and PRC would be in the same folder).
Fewer “arcade like” situations where Chinese IS-2 are shooting at Soviet IS-2. Fewer downtiered modern vehicles to fill lineup holes (cough cough Sweden). And a much simpler calculation for the matchmaker, which enables very granular decompression.
China’s ground for BRs is complete.
It’s all just domestic stuff from now on.
And air as I said they have more variety of jets than USA will ever see in War Thunder.
We can get ANY of 5+ different jets for 12.0/12.3 next major for China.
We can get 2, maybe 3 for USA, and the 3rd is an F-16.
The other 2 are F-18 & F-15.
Also, this isn’t a historical battles simulator nor ever claimed to be.
We’re playing war games, which means sometimes it’s identical equipment facing each other, cause that’s what most war games are.
And no, there’s no need to borrow anything.
You say “from now on” as if the early stuff it’s going away, and I don’t really understand why. That’s what’s implied by “you can’t just add domestic stuff if you want them to be viable at every BR”. Yes, at several BRs, Chinese stuff is very abundant. At other BRs, it is not. My argument is that it doesn’t need to be. At those BRs where domestic production is insufficient to support a full lineup, you can mix and match; or you can copypaste and undertier. Both are game design options to tackle the issue. They come with different upsides and downsides. I believe the mix and match method to be superior, and I’ve explained the reason why.
Also, no, this isn’t about realism. Gameplay always comes first, realism second, and in many ways I think players of WT fail to realise just how misplaced the emphasis on realism is/can be. This is more about the identity of GRB and GAB being distinct. At this point it’s a daily and near universal occurrence to see Shermans on both teams, or M18s on both teams, or T-34s on both teams. At that point, why are we still bothering with nation-based match-making still?
This isn’t a rhetorical question. Having to account for the many possible combinations of countries is already a strain on the matchmaker, as everyone who’s ever queued up in a squad of three or four that were playing certain combinations can attest. There needs to be an upside to justify the downside. Fully copying the arcade system would benefit the matchmaker while getting you effectively the same mixed battles we’re currently getting in GRB. Do either one or the other.
IRL China bought all those vehicles.
And gameplay only comes before realism in field repair.
Everything else not really.
Shermans & T-34s on both teams is realistic for nation based matchmaking.
Razer, I agree with almost everything you say in almost every thread I’ve seen in this forum, and therefore I know that you know better than this.
Yes, IRL China bought all these vehicles. How would they maintain them in the event of a break-up with the Soviets during WW2? Where would they get the replacement parts and logistical supply chain for their IS-2s, if they were using them to fight the Soviets?
You can legitimately believe that the ability for Soviet and Chinese IS-2s to fight one another on the battlefield is good for gameplay and balance, but it’s definitely not a realism argument.
Similarly, there are many areas of this game where gameplay correctly comes before realism, beyond just field repairs. A few examples off the top of my head:
Do you think it’s realistic for Nazi Germany and Israel to jointly deploy, sustain and operate Tiger IIs and M-51s in the Korean mountains to… fight the Brits? I’m certainly glad all maps are open to all factions, hell, 38th Parallel is one of my favourite maps for long-range sniping with WW2 tanks, but the scenario is a little… outlandish.
Even if you look at it from a pure wargaming perspective and therefore as an exercise: then where’s the infantry? Why are we sending heavy armour into Sun City with no infantry support? That would be suicidally insane. Not that I’m against infantry being added to the game, for me the more combined arms the better, but the average WT match looks like a wargaming exercise only in the most superficial way, the map construction of caps primarily. The rest doesn’t really make much sense.
Is it realistic that there can be four Maus tanks in one team, when no Maus ever fought in battle, and the one complete specimen we have, is in fact not one specimen, but a turret and a hull being produced separately and then mated by the Russians - the turret itself an early prototype iteration that had already been discontinued in favour of a new design choice? I’m happy I get to roll out in my Maus any time I want, it’s one of my favourite tanks in game. Here, too, gameplay (having fun in the Maus) comes before realism.
There’s more, and more, and more.
We turn turrets at maximum theoretical speed even when giving the engine full beams. This is not realistic, but it makes gameplay a lot more intuitive.
Likewise, we don’t have to worry, like IRL WW2 tankers did, about how a turret would actually move - giving it full speed at the beginning of the rotation, then slowing down to make it come to a halt at the desired angle. This would make weakspot/pixel hunting much more difficult, as well as hitting a moving target.
We have an autoloading Sturmtiger with a rate of fire much higher than IRL, and truth be told all tank reload times in-game are fiddled with as a soft balancing mechanism, which is again not realistic, but arguably good for gameplay.
Artillery, which is a major tank killer in reality, is basically nothing like the real thing in game.
I stand by my position that while WT’s attention to real-life elements is commendable, gameplay is the first priority. That’s why you can rest assured, if I propose a different tree system, it’s not because I want to see “a historical battles simulator”. That would be interesting to see done elsewhere, but WT isn’t the game for it, imho. I mean, I even argue quite openly for performance-based matchmaking of vehicles as opposed to the historical matchmaking some people demand, precisely because I agree with you that War Thunder isn’t a simulator of IRL battles.
My arguments are subjective, may be wrong, may be right, but they’re usually motivated by my thoughts on gameplay and balance. Not really in trying to recreate a WW2 simulator experience or something like that.
Bro wrote a whole story 💀
Honestly, China has enough domestic technology even for low tiers, but for some reason it is not in the game yet. I will give some examples.
Also for ground we have some domestic vehicles but also upgrades of foreign designs:
Type-70-I 122mm self-propelled howitzer
Type 70 MRL
M10 GMC with 105mm Type 91 field gun.
Chi Ha SPG
