Technically independent by 1931. but the Ram was used by the UK, not the Yanks. (who both did not use the tank and who more often than not took the actions done by the dominions for their own glory.)
Question who deserves a vehicle more?
A.) The nation the USED it?
B.) The nation that DID NOT?
Bruh
What about the Strv 81, an a*s load of Italian props and the Israeli premiums ? Hmmm they were added before their respective trees were added.
Canada is not a tech tree in War Thunder.
Strv 81 & Magach was only hidden when Israel and Sweden were added as tech trees.
Canada’s not added as a tech tree.
So why is the Skink, the big RAM and the ADATS in the British tree then ?
Standards changed for the treatment of new Canadian vehicle additions, that’s it.
Precisely BECAUSE Canada does not have a tree!!
Duh!
Then why is there a unreleased British RAM II still in the files .
For the same reason there are unused files for over 50 other vehicles.
And that reason isn’t known to us because we’re not the devs.
I vote A
We and Canada used the RAM along with the Dutch
No hate at all mate and a complete lack of reading comprehension on your part if you don’t understand any of those points I’ve made.
These responses were in relations to another posters claims. He said if it’s not built by that nation they shouldn’t have it. I used the spitfire as an example of that hypocracy.
F-111C built by America by special order by Australia, never ever used by America and completely unique to Australia as well as heavily modified by us during its time in service using weapon configurations and upgrades never used in an American f-111. Again this was in response to heavy unique modifications that make it eligible.
Aussie Abram’s was again heavily modified with Australian armour, engine improvements, reduced thermal signature, combat equipment, and situational awareness upgrades. That’s a fair bit more then a new aircon.
The majority disagree? Show me the proof of this claim? Other then Germany fan Bois wanting something they never used.
And the harrier hahaha. The claim was made multiple times if it’s a vehicle based off another vehicle it belongs in the tree of the nation first built it. Harrier built by Britain and modified by America. This by his flawed logic would put the harriers in the British tree… I don’t agree with it or suggesting it should be just every time he made a rediculous ruling to disqualify something there was already precedent for it in the American and German trees.
There is so much hypocracy it’s hilarious.
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
Brits complained the Hunter broke the rules and wanted the rules broken for their tree, so they got it.
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.
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
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.
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.