separating Britain wont magically increase content added to the game.
All current issues will persist anyway and wont speed solving them.
6 Likes
Ahah, you rightfully placed the Spit IX in br3, something devs canât even do correctly 
2 Likes
that was typo, i meant to write âifâ instead of âasâ
No, the plane is good at BR II absolutely balanced they should keep it that way its the perfect BR II plane 
:
Donât touch my spitfire from BR II I just made the absolutely broken build combined with 2 lightingâs.
Good stuff!
I am planning on making a video series on how I would implement a Commonwealth tree, and there are some similar ideas here to it.
3 Likes
Yet another YouTuber desperate to push anti-player nonsense into the game? Because thatâs exactly what seperate British/Italian trees are.
Nice.
Maybe one day youâll make it to CM.
This is a weird statement. How would separate trees be a bad thing from the playerâs perspective? Players are given more gear to grind for, and the Commonwealth could just matchmake together with the US tree in most or all conflicts.
I donât understand what the need is to say things like âYet another YouTuber desperate to push anti-player nonsense into the gameâ. Itâs inflammatory and unproductive.
2 Likes
Acting like it couldnât be added to already existing USA (western allies) tree.
While a new tech tree would make it impossible to have combined lineups, or combine the original legacy British stuff with the new ones.
It would also mean a lot of copypasted stuff. And devaluing all the current premium squads, as they would remain in the original faction.
What is needed on the contrary is proper intengration of minor nations to already existing tech tree.
Which is slowly happening with the recent ability to change nationalities of soldiers. (I have no idea why something like this would be developed if the developers were planning to add separate tech trees for these nations right afterwards).
I apologize for the saltiness. Itâs just annoying to have the exact same discussion every time someone new brings up the idea of new unnecessary tech trees.
Plus:
2 Likes
War Thunder also had combined tech trees when it released 13 years ago, due to a lack of overall content. I think most would agree that it would be strange if the German and Italian tree were still combined, and Chinese vehicles were still premiums in the Soviet tree. Unless you have legacy equipment that is now unobtainable, new players cannot combine nations into lineups, unless minor nations have a branch within the tree (such as Finland in Sweden, Thailand in Japan etc). I believe nations that have enough equipment to have their own tree should have their own tree. That way, factions can have more of an identity, and make sense in theatres where only one of the two major factions within a combined tree were present. Perhaps a separate game mode with combined troops could be added in the future, if that is an important feature for you?
I think the nationality change feature aligns with the potential for splitting trees. The feature, just like separating trees, gives you the ability to make lineups feature a singular nation. Another benefit of splitting up nations is that the amount of filler in trees can be reduced. Look at the Axis tree and how much of the SMG line could be streamlined by separating the more prominently Italian weapons from the tree. If a player really wants something like a Beretta M38A for a German soldier, make it a premium squad for a Germany tree, but give it to the Italian tree as standard. Obviously, we can still be intelligent about it in some specific cases if a weapon is from one nationality, but was used by another (such as a Volkssturm Carcano in 7.92mm, or a Beretta M38/44).
I see the tech tree separation as an important step in the long-term health of Enlisted. If the game wants to continue to stay alive and bring new and interesting content to existing trees, the bloat (even with foldering) in the existing axis and allies trees would make grinding to top tier incredible slow and frustrating. It also gives the option to expand to new theatres and divide up matchmaking if the population of the game increases (which is what the players, developers and Gaijin want, unless Iâm missing something).
Perhaps we disagree on some of these points fundamentally, which is fine, but lets not throw insults if we canât come to an agreement, respectfully disagree, and move on. Thatâs the adult thing to do.
3 Likes
Btw.
Nationality in customization options means. In the future, if slightly reworked, certain unique nationalities could only be allowed in certain specific campaign presets (just like we have outfits restricted to certain presets) . And if MM places you in a different map that wouldnât correlate with your unique nationality. The default main nationality would automatically replace it.
So you dont really need separate tech trees just to prevent the Brits being in the Ardennes or the Chinese being in Tunisia.
War thunder is prime example of why several unnecessary tech trees filled with copypasted content is not something that players are benefiting from.
Itâs much better to do what WT did with Britain/sounth Africa or Sweeden/Finland.
Thatâs whatâs beneficial to players. Seperate tech trees are just totally artificial restrictions. And thereâs nothing you can benefit from.
2 Likes
because in warthunder a germamn tank can fight an italian tank, or a japanese tank
a us tank can fight a uk or ussr tank meaning adding faction does no add qâs and divide the player base.
yes uk and italty can fight alongside germany or us but the point of a separate uk tech tree would be to fight in battles that us was not involved thus uk only qâs thus creating separate qs and splitting the player base.
and yes copy paste like the american grant, stuart and shermans and thompsons at least only add ânewâ items like the sherman firefly or use the lee a uk modified grant.
Eheh Iâm a hardcore TeaBoo (Commonwealth main), and Canadian everyone here knows it. So to finally get my beloved IX, piloted in part by Canadians, letâs say Iâm overjoyedâŚ
But, Iâm not a russian Soviet main ( commieboo ): I do not need unfair advantages to have fun and perform, thereâs no way such a powerful plane should be br2 (it could work well in br4, no joke)
Itâs probably the craziest BR offense Iâve seen to date, and it favours my preferred faction.
1 Like
Enjoy it while it lasts 
I just wish I could combine it with the Hurricane.
1 Like
I feel bad for Axis. And Japan, poor Zero will get chasedâŚ
Well not exactly:
The Zero lets say its a little secret but it overperforming in this game in altitudes that should not be performing Or if I say more correctly the cap of 5300 makes the Zero perform even in highest altitudes in game not as badly as in war thunder since there you can go much higher. And Japan has good AA in the TT but Germany will suffer the most from this Spitfire. Since in low altitude you can dog fight it in Zero and win just like against all other US planes so really not much changes for Japan in BR II in BR III its bigger problem since you cant dog fight it with Ki 100 that good. And if you gonna engage in vertical combat there is much better planes like the lighting that has two engines so for Zero players they will feel the least this plane impact however the Ki-100 well they will suffer against it.
5,3km?
Nobody ever fly that high (in Enlisted), I stay at 2km and most enemies just pass right under me without noticing (itâs also safe to pass over carriers while having a lil altitude buffer, you explode at 1,499km)
Donât get me wrong, I love the Zero so much I use it even in br5 (well, the flame tank one). Itâs seriously great.
But, it lack speed.
New Spit IX got both speed and maneuverability, in the hands of a decent pilot, I wonder what the enemies will be able to do
Like you said, I will shamelessly abuse the IX before they uptier it to br3 or 4, though, eheheh
1 Like
Yeah but as Zero Player you donât care that much will you fight a lighting or the new Spitfire is the same thing to you if it doesnât engage in a dog fight or you donât surprise him its game over.
The Zero is a noob plane its loved by the noobs and hated by the vets since its a plane that needs you enemy to make a mistake. Its the best plane to learn to be a pilot and the plane you donât wanna play after you learn.
Gasp! Shame on you Emperor!
I still love it because itâs fun. Also one of the few planes who can counter the lead indicator handicap thanks to itâs high maneuverability: so easy to mislead enemy pilots with it, even if they spotted you and come charging face to face, a lil sway left, right, then bank and dive then get on your enemyâs 6 and savor his frustration eheheh.
But I just love being able to repair all the time with carriers.
Ki-100,Ki-61-Otsu Kai and Ki-84-Ko are the most fun planes to play with Japan the Zero is very boring plane. The moment you face a good pilot like Atari for an instance that is good P-51D-5 player you will realize what Iâm talking about
With a Zero really there is nothing you can do against him. Even with Ki-100 you will realize the limists of this planes thatâs why I hope one day they move Otsu Kai to BR III. And if you have the bad luck to be with Zero on New Georgia its really absolutely pointless.