The Israel ground problem

I agree with the first part, however, how many Latin American vehicles could fit in an Israeli TT? 10? fifteen? Many of them would be left out.

I imagine that the best way could be to do a Latin American TT within Israel, but in a separate tab, in the blue water and coast patrol style. That is, separate tech trees, but interchangeable lineups. A unique and very interesting concept to think about.

Sorry, I didn’t understand this. There is currently a Scandinavian TT and one that we could consider a commonwealth TT.

While theres mix of domestic and foreign stuff at lower tiers, both finland and sweden eventually ends up at the same solution - Leopard 2s.

Even at lower tiers there are at max two design concepts (S-tanks vs T-55) clashing.

Let’s talk seriously…
I’m tired of hearing people say that Latin America could not have its own TT based on unusual arguments (many of them from a total lack of knowledge).

Yes, of course, in addition to 5 centuries of culture you want another common “technological” denominator. Tell me first, what do Hungarian vehicles have to do with the Italian TT? End of a meaningless discussion.

3 Likes

It seems to me that here, in this idea, we have something interesting and that fits Israel and its needs. It’s just polishing and improving the idea.

I think you misunderstood that as me saying no to latin america TT.

I understand, it seems fine to me. However, the Swedish TT remains (and will increasingly be) an essentially Scandinavian TT, with Sweden at the forefront.
I think it doesn’t make sense, I apologize if the answer was very direct.

There was a time when there might have been excuses for not having Latin America but not anymore.
There is no realism in the game anymore, no history to worry about. Nobody cares if a Nation or a vehicle saw action in reality.

Flooding the game with a whole load of South American vehicles keeps a huge fanbase happy and is a money earner in premiums so I am sure it will happen. I can’t see any real reason why it couldn’t.

Gaijin have given up on WW2 and any pretense of it history and they have given up on era’s and I have to now so I don’t see the problem with Argentina and Brazil in the game. The big issue would be Latin Americans sharing a tech tree ,its a very broad term.

2 Likes

As i stated yesterday

My only concern with latin america subtree is way it would deal with vehicles such as TAMs that are already in game.

Second concern is that if latin america TT were to be standalone, if it would be able to put down fully functional lineup with AAs and support vehicles as to avoid another another UNLIMITED MAGACH WORKS scenario

It would be better not to leave the topic that calls us here.

Spoiler

Germany has plenty of replacements for the TAMs (there were already Italian vehicles in the German TT and Swedish vehicles in the British TT and all of them were hidden and replaced)

Indeed, I believe that Argentina and Chile would be enough to be within Israel. Maybe with Brazil (I would love to), depending on the design of the technology tree. Elbit also has a defense subsidiary in Brazil, it is called Ares https://ares.ind.br/

But these would have to be in a separate tree but with interchangeable alignments, as I said before (as happens in blue water and coast patrol). It sounds great and fits very well.

Just be the same as the T34/Sherman spam we have already. So not an issue …assuming copy paste is not an issue.

Lets face it, the game broke ranks with immersion and became a museum parade a long time ago.

Israel has too many heavy vehicles and South America has too many light vehicles. In addition to everything mentioned above, this is one of the facts that make the two fit together perfectly. Even on the South American tree it is not necessary to put copies, there are enough unique and fun vehicles without needing more copies.

Yet TAM is marder chasis, and designed by german company. I see the link there.

But!

If original TAM would stay (maybe as a prototype of sorts?) and TAM2C got replaced/renamed by TH-301 (dont know what differences are, learned yesterday this tank exists thanks to @Mahiwew ), or some other similiar solution would be accepted, latin america subtree would have my unconditional support.

As for standalone latin america TT, my point isnt that there cant be copies of same tank at the same rank, but rather if theres enough supporting vehicles to complement them.

Swedish and german top tier is just 4 leopards 2 and russian top tier is T-72, T-72 in trenchcoat and T-80. But all those nations can take other things to their lineups - AAs, light tanks, IFVs, ATGM carriers etc.

I just want to avoid similiar scenarios to where israel at lower BRs just has one thousand and one magachs with shotkal or tiran here and there, because i can imagine that “throwing enough magachs at target and see what sticks” is rather dull form of gameplay.

1 Like

Here we are thinking about the possibility of reinforcing Israel and at the same time finding a way to add Latin American vehicles. This is not a thread to discuss the TAM.

Spoiler

I’m going to clarify some points for you:

  1. In a technology tree the tanks are not modified, they are replaced.
  2. TH-301 is in no way a replacement for TAM 2C, really?

This is not the place to explain these things, I suggest you read something on the subject before giving your opinion freely. Don’t take this the wrong way, I don’t mean it with bad intentions.

Almost like I said that i learned about its existence just yesterday and from my brief look at it, it looks like TAM2C.

If you happen to know what those differences are, would love to listen to the explanation, always keen on learning new things.

Which subject?

Tech tree/subtree introduction and rebalancing?

1 Like

Don’t take this the wrong way, I’m just trying not to derail the thread of “The Israel ground problem”

1 Like

I don’t have the direct link, only the project leader has access to all that for obvious reasons

2 Likes

Ah yes i understand.

1 Like

Latin America has everything necessary to cover all that with unique things that are not present in the game, some people believe that Latin America would just be copy and paste without adding anything new or interesting when that is not the case, or that it does not have what it takes to anti-tank, anti-aircraft, etc., we will give you a surprise, that is why I would ask everyone to wait to see the Latin American tree that is pending approval to draw their conclusions and not rush before

1 Like

Thats why are we having this discussion, no?

Frankly Im no that familiar with LA domestic production. If they can make full lineups with support vehicles while avoiding the magach problem, then they should be added.

Real issue is just the nitty gritty stuff.

A Latin TT is viable, but for any TT to be fun, there has to be a balance between homogeniety and heterogeniety.
Every nation in WT has between half a century and a century of domestic, non-stop vehicle development culminating in a large volume of vehicles that are varied in roles but ultimately doctrinally tied and therefore providing a coherent gameplay experience.
For example all British vehicles are slow and well armored. All French vehicles are fast and lightly armored.
The US seeks balance in the force, USSR/Russia prioritizes raw performance over sophistication. Etc etc.

There is no nation in Latin America that provides that role for the Latin tree, and therefore most vehicles will feel disconnected from one another, ultimately culminating in a TT that while viable - is not really enjoyable or otherwise requiring a high skill level.

It is possible to take any viable and interesting vehicle from anywhere, and put them in either an international TT, or disperse them among multiple trees and not just paired to one tree.