I’m interested to hear what you all think about where each subtree currently is and what you would change (placement and vehicles)
Also feel free to talk about what nations you want to see attached to existing ones.
2 Likes
The only issue i have with subtrees besides Switzerland is that western nations get soviet vehicles and eastern nations get nato vehicles.
But it’s way too late to change that.
3 Likes
This is probably not what the question is about, but I’d change the way subtrees are implemented.
https://forum.warthunder.com/t/subtree-rework-nation-folders/114067
I feel like in the current system the original nation loses out space foe domestic vehicles, while subtree nations still often don’t get the space they need and have many of their significant and unique vehicles either not added at all or limited to premiums, with a reworked system these issues could be fixed.
For specific nations, I’d say these are somewhat likely and agreed on. Things like all the other Nordic nations (Denmark, Iceland, Norway) being placed with Sweden, the less controversial options for China (Bangladesh, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Pakistan) and Japan (Indonesia, Philippines), and the often suggested Chile placed with Israel.
And there’s also options that could go multiple ways or are a bit more controversial.
The Koreas could be a shared tree, but if that isn’t possible might end up as subtrees for USA and China respectively.
Malaysia and Singapore could also be added to Japan to complete a founding ASEAN nations theme, but for Singapore Israel is another option that might even be more popular with Singaporean players specifically.
For China there’s also some more option of export customers like Algeria, Nigeria and Sri Lanka, though these might be a bit distant.
Other LATAM nations could possibly join Chile in being placed with Israel, but at the same time LATAM is another popular independent tree concept.
Past that I’d also say that I personally don’t want to see more Czech content for the USSR tree, since I feel like that could and should be done much better in a Czech tree, possible together with other nations like Slovakia or even Poland.
4 Likes
Would love to see Ukraine getting introduced into the Soviet tech tree and receiving Abrams and Leopards…Imagine the forums on that one
Quite an interesting map proposal.
You could make an argument for the Baltics in Sweden as the Nordic/Scandinavian and Baltic countries have increased defence cooperation since the collapse of the USSR (Finland and Estonia especially had a history as they had a defence pact before Estonia was annexed). They could give a few light tanks/ifvs, a shorad, some coastal options and a few T1 planes, none of which are soviet.
There are some definite hard to add countries, Sudan has a few unique ground units but several different suppliers. So I’m wondering how gajin will try to implement them (IF they try).
Cities would burn judging on the L-39 thread (I still think an independent tree would’ve been best)
Whats going on with the L-39?
Went to USSR as a premium and there was a few back and forth comments on wether Czechoslovakia should be a USSR subtree or independent.
It’s cooled down, but a Ukrainian sub tree would be much more controversial (regardless if your focussing on vehicles or current/historical events).
Some of the current placements make sense, others don’t. But of course it all depends on what each person sees as the point of subtrees. Some argue the role of subtrees is primarily to bolster existing nations with new lineups and vehicles, others would say it’s a way to get unique vehicles into the game that wouldn’t otherwise, some would say both apply. For me, the second option is more important.
Japan getting Thailand and Sweden getting Finland (and Denmark/Norway even though they aren’t subtrees) makes sense. These work well and are a natural fit, plus give needed vehicles to their respective tech trees.
South Africa going to Great Britain is… okay. If you had to pick just one nation to group them with, then yeah, GBR makes sense. But I think they would be better off as an independent nation (like Israel) and GBR should get Australia and Canada as actual subtrees.
Hungary is fine but almost everything about it seems like wasted potential. The air subtree is just copy and paste, the ground subtree is cool and adds needed vehicles to Italy, on the other hand. Its placement with Italy follows the “minor axis” rationale, but I think Hungary would have also worked as a component of a Visegrad tech tree down the line.
India should have been an independent tech tree like Israel, full stop. They’ve got lots of unique domestic vehicles and domestic modifications of imports, they have plenty of options for both air and ground too. It really feels like Gaijin made India into GBR’s subtree just because it would be easy to copy-and-paste some Soviet vehicles in there. But now we’ve got the worst of both worlds. We’re only now starting to get some of the really unique Indian vehicles like the Marut… but I think it would be so much more interesting in its own tree.
2 Likes
It’s kinda 50/50 for me. On one half, it’s adds barely anything new while neglecting unique vehicles and generating spats between nation mains.
One there other hand, if it’s a unique variant (not in game) or the only option to fill a gap I can excuse it.
Also I agree the Swiss tree placement was poor, it imo should’ve been with Austria as a independent tree as naval is shown not to be needed.
On one hand it gave a ton of new variants and vehicles (the most of any subtree). On another, it delayed quite a few UK light vehicles and as you mention, Australia and Canada (plus maybe tag along New Zealand) made more sense.
This. Only the ww2 Hungarian tanks were used in good effect. Aircraft? Copy paste throughout. Cold War ground? Soviet copy paste for most of it and none of the Hungarian mods/vehicles from that era. Naval forces? Nada. Zip. V4 should’ve been the destination for Hungary while Spain and Romania could be Italian subtrees.
Either that or a subtree for Israel to bulk lineups (there is case point as they have worked militarily together and they both use a large mix of east, west and original vehicles (I only want equipment from both sides that are unique to them, not pure copy paste)). Either way is way better than the event/premium fodder it’s relegated to.
1 Like
I could kind of understand the reasoning, however pairing these two together is certainly not a wise move if you were aiming for a calm audience due to the 2022 invasion. So far the only other ex USSR country that is present in the USSR tree is Kazakhstan (unless I’m missing something) which wasn’t invaded by Russia post soviet collapse.
Some can slip through the cracks by being given to existing trees. UK might possibly be able to get the AB-13 via Jordan as it was a trialed vehicle.
Additionally, Thailand operates T-84TH and Btr-3K so they could go to Japan if needed.
If need be the VAB MK3 with the sich module can go to France and Germany can recive the Leopard 2A4V while America can get the M1A1 SA UKR. The UK could also receive the gravehawk.
I would prefer if Ukraine has a larger role though as there are plenty of vehicles to add and would ideally avoid a Poland/Spain/Canada/Australia situation where it’s split across trees.
If coalition trees were a thing I would wager Ukraine going to either Czechoslovakia or Turkey as Ukraine has cooparated in development with both Czechia and Turkey (ifrc, both countries worked with Ukraine to develop domestic rocket engines for military use)(And Ukraine operates several vehicles from both with Czechia supplying Mi-24Vs, T-72s, BVP-1 and Turkey TB2 drones and building multiple corvettes which would be largest ships in the navy unless the Ukraina or Volodymyr Velykyi are completed).
It’s a reach, however pairing Ukraine and Czechoslovakia, with other eastern/central European countries due to most being collaborative in defense.
Turkey is a much further reach but can be argued for due to cooperation and acting as a foil with modernised eastern equipment Vs Turkey with mostly western equipment.
Huh?
The ONLY logical reason why Ukr wont be put into USSR tree is the obvious one. Regarding cooperation in the sense you are talking about is only viable in the last few years, before that Ukr and RU worked together extensively since both were part of the USSR
“Possibly the German tree would be acceptable with the Western player base, and fitting due to the past Germany and current Ukrainian politics.”
Well take a guess what he is talking about… tho imo that has nothing to do with any of the topics atm