You’re list is very good, I would support your idea for BeNeLux as a subtree if it’s being added. As this is has a lot of thought and research put into it.
There’s about 6 prototype Leclercs. France is in no shortage of light vehicles that can be added as well.
I can personally say that I have no interest in copy paste Leopard 2s or F-16s, they’ll only serve to add unnecessary bloat.
But we don’t know if Gaijin even cares about our feedback for this issue. The suspected worst case scenario is that BeNeLux serves to just bring copy-paste and say that’s the solution to the problem they created.
AMX-40 is already in the game.
Mirage 2000 is already in the game.
All the vehicles in the sub-tree don’t replace anything, they augment at most.
@MS_Phantasm
Sub-trees don’t replace equipment in War Thunder, they add.
And the sub-tree is adding.
Sub-trees have never been added to “fill gaps that shouldn’t be there”.
For me the best thing to do for adding this sub tree would have been not to put the planes, because the majority of them are imported planes and for the tanks, to add the unique designs
When I talk about vehicle VARIANTS, what’s not to know, there have been improvement projects for the AMX-30, 32 and 40 whose models are not in the game
In game we have 4 variants of Mirage 2000 out of the 11 existing major variants, I guess that’s not enough? Where are the 2000-N, the 2000-B, the 2000-9, the 2000-E…
That sub-tree proves my point.
Smin already commented on it plenty of times as well.
South Africa added nothing that wasn’t already in the tree or things that had no domestic options.
It added unique vehicles that augmented lineups.
And the Benelux sub-tree is no different. Every vehicle class in the leak list is already in France, or not available to add.
There’s plenty that the UK has that could have been added in place of everything South Africa added.
The only useful gap they filled was with the JAS39.
Did you even read OP’s post?
This is about what BeNeLux can bring if it’s actually thought out and implemented well, while trimming off as much unnecessary fat as possible.
The fact is additions like the Leopard 2 and F-16 are entirely unnecessary.
VFM5 was already added to Britain before Rooikats were.
Olifant Mk2 augmented the already existing Chieftain Mk10.
TTD is a worse Vickers Mk7.
G6 augmented FV4005.
Ratal 90s? Warrior.
And Benelux?
Leopard 2A4 augments AMX-40.
2A6 at most augments Leclercs, and I won’t be getting that one.
F-16? They’ll be the same BRs as the Mirage 2000s that are already added. Well except Mirage 20005F since that’s getting MICA EM.
NF-5A? Mirage 3E is already present and is better.
Leopard 1 Cockerill? AMX-30B2.
Mirage 5BA? IDK what this has, but there are a ton of strike aircraft from 10.0 - 11.3 already. That and it’s also French origin.
Fokker G1? Sounds like a prop, France already has among the best props.
Nothing in the sub-tree is new to France as a vehicle class.
They physically cannot prevent domestic options as the domestic options are already in the tech tree.
The myth that sub-trees prevent domestic options is getting old.
I for one anticipate a 10.3 lineup for France for the first time.
Sure, France has some domestic options for an 11.0 lineup later on, none of these additions are going to create an 11.0 lineup though.
at least they’re not copy pasted, they’re new designs that weren’t in game
but then staying with your idea, since we can add anything in the trees, I would like a Pantsir because Russia and France are on the same continent and an Abrams because the USE and France are on the same planet.
If we start mixing all the trees the game no longer makes sense. Personally I play a lot in simulation and it’s already starting to be hell, when you play an F-16 you face F-16s, the same for the Migs-29 and the F-15. I enjoyed playing France because at least I knew which side I was in,
France already has a Pantsir equivalent.
Also welcome to war games… real militaries have to deal with seeing like-equipment during their training too.
@Richardguy
They’ve done plenty I and ten-thousands have disagreed with, and they’ve changed over 80% of what I and thousands of others correctly critiqued about.
I’ve made stupid critiques and that backfired, or I changed my mind after reflecting on said critiques.
It’s weird how whenever you watch a YouTube video criticizing War Thunder all you hear is slurping though; you should get that checked.
The problem is now that you’re opinion seems poorly informed and you’re just arguing for the sake of it.
Most of what you said is redundant to each other or doesn’t compare.
The Leopard 1 31105 is nowhere near the AMX-30B2.
The NF-5A is arguably the better addition compared to the F-16. It would serve best as a squadron or ge premium.
While there’s no purpose to F-16 or Leopard 2 copy paste. They’re far to redundant to be meaningful additions, which is why we’re so against them as additions.