Didn’t they use FEP’s and M1A1 SA’s?
Or did they also use base AIM’s
Does the one in game USES the USA flag or the Australian one ?
So if skins matter then you should be ok for gaijin to reflag the AIM into an USA one and just spray a new coat of paint on it and then we should get the Australian version right ?
1 Like
You can have the “Australian” version when the US tree gets copy-pastes of your and everyone elses vehicles that they purchased/trialed/used.
Stop acting like the Brits are some poor abused minor nation who needs everything in the world, You share practically nothing while having more tanks, Get over it.
32% of the US ground tree is copy-pasted, While they only have the Skink in return which you all threw a fit over them getting, Meanwhile the Brits share what, A few fireflies and a couple reserve tier tanks?
Why all suddenly aggressive, hit a nerve did I ?
I simply asked to show me where gaijin have their set of rules, because US players think this magic rule of all US tech must 100% belong to the US otherwise we’ll have a meltdown.
I just want evidence if you’re not willing to supply the evidence then to me that rule of “It’s a US tank therefore it belong to the US” is just simply a coping mechanism for the purist.
1 Like
More if you count production vehicles and not dead end prototypes
2 Likes
Even those prototypes are not safe anymore, Look at how often they beg for the T14 when they only trialed it, Meanwhile the Americans designed, Build, And trialed it because they where interested in using it too.
Wouldn’t surprise me if they add the Centurion LPT one day where all the Brit mains come out to claim its their tank for using a Centurion hull (despite everything inside being gutted and replaced), The subreddit folks already do.
1 Like
All while acting like the Skink having a Grizzly hull makes it totally different (it’s literally just an M4A1 with different tracks)
1 Like
Still not found me that rule ?
So an 8F built in Swindon still an LMS loco or a GWR one ?
(Well, as point out earlier, it’s the M1A1 AIM, the point still stands) 100%, every other vehicle that the Aussies operate is in the UK tree, so it should join the rest of them.
Doing a number of good things, including having all their stuff together to be used in a line-up together(which is something both the majority of Australian and Canadian players want). Over-ripping the nation apart, which is a bad thing.
1 Like
Company isnt really relevant, just what it is.
It’s like how different factories made the same plane in ww2, yes there were small differences similar to the tracks on the Grizzly and I think the radio set, but it’s still the same thing
Ripping apart = putting vehicles from a country which isn’t a subtree into the most logical place based on what they are
1 Like
Well you say that, there was a story where I think a LNER V2 did go to Swindon for war time repairs and per Swindon tradition they’d put a copper cap on the chimney I don’t know who in the company but when the engine returned they’d had a melt down in the higher ups
Again, that sort of stuff isn’t really relevant. And your story proves my point, it was still the same thing since they were able to repair it. The only difference was a tradition that had nothing to do with the actual engine
Um…
Moving a vehicle would be ripping apart the American tech tree. That’s not my opinion on the matter, that’s just reality.
Britain can still get an M1A2 from Australia.
And they can still get a 2A6 from Canada.
Both of which would be needed over the AIM or the 2A4M if you want to run the F-18s with them.
That’s the argument right?
Put these vehicles in one lineup?
Cause if that’s what you want, you want 12.7s, not 12.0s.
That’s really the main idea is to put everything into one place, a home you might say most of us don’t care if a vehicle exist in both trees like the skink or Ram. But it’s more so with Australia why would you separate 1 lone vehicle away from the rest of them where the main tree that is housing the majority of the Aussie stuff is Britain. Doesn’t really make sense does it
1 Like
But saying that is it funny to see people defend a rule that they thought would fly enough to an official one to only hid once that rule is challenged lol
Mm, jesters to the entire turret which is entirely Canadian designed, produced, tested, and saw combat with British Commonwealth forces
1 Like
Lol. “Moving a vehicle would be ripping apart the American tech tree”
Sure buddy, can I have the Swedish and Israeli Centurions back in the British tree then? Clearly they ripped apart the British tree.
2 Likes
Yeah which is worse,
A.1 vehicle from the US to be placed with ALL of the Australian tech
Or
B. Have at least 6 vehicles from 3 different nations to make an independant one
lol
1 Like