Out of curiosity how does naval fair? I know about the MTBs, Oberon and Victoria classes (Iirc wasn’t there a Fiji aswell?) but I’m not that well read on the Canadian navy
Bit harder to tell, but it looks like the British win. I think they’re outnumbered by even Canadian designs.
1 Like
I would rather enjoy HMCS Ontario (Formerly HMS Minotaur) as a new light cruiser for the British TT
2 Likes
Yeah, I may be wrong but I think the only (combat) jets we’ve used that were actually built in the US were the F-2H, F-101, and F-18. Canadair’s license-built jets were all distinct variants of the F-86, F-5 and F-104 and I think adding in them into the US tree would be a total waste. They’d all just be lost in a sea of others in an air tree that absolutely doesn’t need any support or gap filling.
I don’t know what the answer is for Canada, and realistically I’m not even sure any of this actually matters because surely these points have been raised before and it’s gone nowhere.
At the end of the day this comes down to two points for me.
-I just want to play our stuff in one place.
-The US tree should not be that place.
That’s about all I can really speak to personally.
4 Likes
The tanks were a massive con for Australia. Our home would have been served better by Challengers, Leopards (we already had Leo 1s, and really should have just gone with Leo 2s), or any other option. We were sold this rubbish by Americans because it would improve our relations, ignoring our friendship with the UK or Germany, or France. American interference ruined our equipment.
The only reason we’re replacing our tigers and taipans for American equipment is because we didn’t bother to fund the maintenance and now we’re getting gear that is just strictly worse for our needs.
2 Likes
If only we (Australia) were so lucky.
India was under control of Britain for a far longer time compared to the US, tbf.
To be fair, it wouldn’t be a win to those who want to have strictly Canadian line-ups along with seeing Canada’s flag on the roster.
Though the latter can be said for a lot of other nations, but that’s part of some folks’ logic about all of this.
Just because I didn’t mention them doesn’t mean I didn’t ignore them - I didn’t, but there was also little relevance to bring them up as Canada also has plenty of joint programs with other nations, as well. They don’t just run US-based hardware for their purposes, after all.
And again, I cleanly stated why USA should never be a subtree to Britain, so don’t pretend to just gloss right over that. My logic on this whole thing is both consistent and sound.
Haha, no. Absolutely not due to the extremely heated political nature and history between those two nations.
Gaijin won’t touch that with even a 30 foot pole.
What could this possibly mean?
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
i was quite surprised australia didnt go with the leopard 2 considering the ADFs love for leopard 1. Backhand deals and corruption can really be something.
bait
2 Likes
He’s right the CR2 sucks. Proprietary ammo and gun, extremely heavy, meh mobility, complicated suspension
you guys conna continue this bitching with CR3?
no heavier than a merkava, over rough european terrain (where it was built for) its no slower than an abrams or leopard.
its not a variable height hydrogas so isnt much worse to maintain than torsion bar
direct lineage from chieftain, done good for a 60 year old gun platform. swiching over to the smoothbore soon though
2 Likes
I think people also take Gaijins modeling as Gospel
2 Likes
Gaijin isn’t likely to make it a Sub-Tree. They seem to have made the agreement that. When adding anything Canadian. One tree will have it before the other for a certain period of time before it comes to the other tree.
Ex: The Ram and Skink. Meaning it’s getting special treatment as the US and UK both assisted Canada’s development. Though the US in WW2 helped heavily after the UK requested, thanks to monetary incentives.
considering almost every single tank in WT is way too fast compared to its real life counterpart they really should do the research first. as far as i know only the scimitar, tiger 2 and maus are even close to being accurate in their mobility
Yep, let alone Britain favouring a mobile bunker at the cost of a little mobility. Just because a single 303 can one shot a CR2 in game doesnt mean it can IRL
1 Like