and t90s is russian vechicle used by india in british tree so it should be in soviet tt right somehow its not so aim can be in british with their logic
1 Like
Brits complained the Hunter broke the rules and wanted the rules broken for their tree, so they got it.
1 Like
So where can I find the issues with the Heavy tanks? If they’re underperforming then I’m curious as to what specifically is wrong.
This hole thread is a mess of some claiming things when these countries are not even as an (Sub)Tree in-game.
Sure, Gaijin has added some vehicles which some don’t got any claim on like the Hunter and T-90 being in the wrong Tree but you all acting like they can’t make awful decisions at times.
In my opinion, Canada, Australia and etc should be introduced first as Sub Trees for the UK and add first their own unique (indigenous) machines after that add these foreign vehicles where the UK remains to lack and leave the rest out for future needs to avoid Copy n Paste.
For now place these vehicles should based on the country they originated and vehicles that have been indigenously build by Canada, Australia and etc in the UK Tree.
1 Like
-
when did he even say that? he said that the leo and the Abrams are where they should be because that’s the nations that built them. Doesn’t mean that nations who used a vehicle shouldn’t have that vehicle
-
The f111C was still built by the US, Nor is it even unique. It’s a mix of different f111s that lead to mildly longer wings and bit more weight as the only in game difference. That “heavy modification” was just converting some of the f111s to recon aircraft using a design that was sold to them from the US. Taking pictures isn’t a game mechanic so it has no place in the game
-
The Ausie Abrams is an M1A1 AIM with the DU inserts changed for tungsten. No idea where you’re getting the engine stuff from. The “Ausie amour” is a different thing from 2021 where they are buying m1a1 hulls to upgrade to spev3 standard Abrams, not the same tank we have in game. The situational awareness upgrades are from the US, it was apart of the AIM program which is where Australia got it’s aims.
-
[Development] Squadron vehicles: Hunter F.58 - News - War Thunder
[Development] Squadron vehicles: T-90 Bhishma - News - War Thunder
Those are the devblogs for the hunter and the bishma, The top comments are all complaining about it’s placement. “Germany fan Bois wanting something they never used.” pretty ironic considering that’s what this entire thread is
- There’s a difference between a vehicle being in a nation that did not make it and has no connection to it and a vehicle that nation actively used. Probably something you already know. But for Australia which isn’t a playable nation there’s no reason to copy more vehicles around. A lot different from Japan whose air force till this day is largely made up of American planes and is a playable nation in the game. Those planes are a part of Japanese military history. An Abrams is not a part of British military history.
I don’t know how you can point out flaws in others logic when you can’t even follow it properly.
This whole time you been largely repeating yourself saying things that have already been argued against with your best response being to misinterpret it and work from there.
1 Like
1 Like
That is kinda the point of the thread. At least that was always my main interpretation for the point of this thread. There are so many Australian vehicles in the British TT already, that not making them offiical sub TTs by this point is kinda crazy. Especially as they picked South Africa over Australia or Canada for some reason and now it seems they’ve concluded that India is a better fit than either of them now as well.
Just always feels like when it comes to awful decisions its only ever Britain, or at least a vast majority of the time anyway.
5 Likes
Watch gaijin pull the norway card on us and claim aussie vehicles to be reserved for use as premium and event vehicles only
Still be better than the “We’ll add Aussie vehicles to any nation we feel like”. It would certainly be a step in the right direction
1 Like
It literally is. There are Australian vehicles in the game which can be played. Australia = playable.
They don’t have their own tech tree. That doesn’t mean non-playable.
But it did, so GJN has set a precedent that clearly doesn’t align with your beliefs.
The devs have said that once a nation is added to a tree, they try to keep vehicles of that nation within that tree. The Australian AIM going to the US tree was the exception, most likely because they didn’t want to upset the US mains/give the UK mains something nice.
6 Likes
T-90S was built by India. Never served in the Soviet military nor by an ex-Soviet like Ukraine or Russia.
It was designed for export.
This rule has been in the game for years, long before Hunter.
Hunter made more people realize the rule is there.
@SlowHandClap
Thanks for the backup.
However you contradicted yourself:
It can’t be an exception if there’s no tree.
- “They don’t have their own tech tree” that’s literally exactly what i mean. No one else has had a problem getting that. Playable nations/Gaming nations, the nations that are on the tabs on the bottom of the homescreen
- The Mexas and AIM predate both of those things, that would make the hunter and exception to the precedent already set. Or does history only begin when it’s most convenient for you?
If that was the case then any Canadian ground vehicles should be in the US tree as that’s where Canada was added first but i doubt you’d be okay with that. The AIM isn’t an exception to anything, the recent decisions by gaijin were the exceptions and were disliked. Honestly incredible how much brit mains will do to not play British vehicles, except play a different tech tree.
Germany never wanted the hunter, we would habe prefered the alpha jet or heck the argentinian pucara or hows it called, gajin was just to lazy to make a new model and gave us copy paste grab and everyone started blaming germany
3 Likes
australia as a nation isnt in the game, the abrams those can be found in the us tree
I was referencing that was what the people here are doing for Britain, hence the whole ironic part after quoting him
I’ve already said that, that wasn’t the point there it’s a reply, the original comment is needed for context
Then you should say that instead of saying “non-playable nation”.
Mexas yes, but the Brits had the Canadian ADATS in the same year that the Mexas was added. Two years before the AIM was added.
You say the Swiss hunter is the exception, but they literally just added a squadron T-90 to the British tree, so that dispels that.
I know you’re just baiting to get a rise from UK players, but I’ll give you a serious answer.
I play other nations - I have top tier air for US, UK, and Russia, and I have top tier ground for UK and Russia. Is it too much to ask that the vehicles from my nation be represented properly though? They are famed in real life for their survivability, but in game they have all the drawbacks of heavy army without any of the real benefits due to inaccuracies with how things have been modelled by GJN.
No one blames Germany for GJN decisions lmao.
The fact that no one wanted it doesn’t change the fact that GJN have set a precedent by making that decision.
You guys need to stop viewing this game and its balancing as a nation vs nation war, and instead more of a contest with GJN to make the game as fun/balanced as possible. Like it’s not enough for the three major nations to have it much better than everyone else, they also want to make it as painful as possible to play the minor nations too lol…
There really aren’t any rules on this stuff as gajin have gone both ways with this stuff
1 Like
-
No one else has had a problem with that
-
The Adats was due to the fact that the British didn’t have a top tier Sam and didn’t have any they could get, a lot diffrent from another mbt when the Brit’s have a bunch already
The t90 and the hunter are both exceptions, the t90 is even newer than the hunter still and was also a disliked addition. If anything it was an attempt to please the people that make threads like this
So you want British tanks to be represented properly by begging for non British tanks? amazing
If gaijin chooses not to model something like the way you want it thats not something anyone here has control over, nor is it fixed by adding random tanks to their tree.