Yep. Also RIP Canada, British India and New Zealand. We do have one Australian squad now, but they are missing slouch hats/digger hats. Plus the Owen gun squad is still bizarrely American???
1 Like
There never was disagreement on this fact, no one has disagreed on this fact I dont believe. The priority sure, but the inclusion no.
The main problem with your approach is that it alienates a large majority of the playerbase, who want both italian and german, or british and US line ups.
Also no, folders are very apparent, maybe argue for a mandatory tutorial for using the research UI I suppose if you think they are that hidden.
And of course if they add more British weapons, you will need to rejig the tech tree to be a bit more logical, Instead of having 3 BAs that are shockingly similar that are all mandatory researchs, you foldered them together, and now the player can pick, do I want this obscure BA(Which some do, myself included) or do I jsut keep pushing forward to the thing that really interests me the player such as the Garand?
This is absolutely a better option to keep the menus more compact and less esoteric. Than attempting to sort through both trees to find the right weapons and squads you want. Especially if you want a lineup that might be based on a certain battle where both forces worked in parallel or certain units in the battle used their allies weaponry.
Taking the agency away from the player is nearly always a bad idea.
I agree and taking into account Britain was in the war from the start in 1st of September 1939 until the end in 2nd of September 1945, 6 years and the USA only from December 7th 1941 only 3 and a half years it’s completely unfair and unjustified how they are neglecting Britain and the commonwealth ,they have more than enough war designs and material to have a full British TT without the need to include any lend lease designs.
3 Likes
By the way have you noticed that in game when you select the TT icons on top of the screen it’s written USSR, USA, GERMANY, JAPAN, there is no Allies or Axis anywhere which makes quit clear Britain and Italy should not even be there at all.
1 Like
its inconsistent. On the End Game screen it says “United Axis” for example
2 Likes
italy cry for this too
1 Like
Because there’s no point in adding British tanks. US tanks will basically always be superior just because of ammunition.
British ground TT in WT is one of the worst, especially considering the WW2 only.
Plus Brits were only part of one faction in a single campaign back then. They never were a unique full faction.
So it’s quite obvious why there’s way more of US content.
Likely beeing reserved for an independent faction should they decide to add them.
Even though an independent faction was not publicly planned they might still want the option of adding them in the future but so far there was no need/ free manpower to put it onto a scedule.
2 Likes
They refuse to add common vehicles like the M3 gun motor carriage and Bell P-39 Airacobra.
1 Like
Developers have said that they have no intention of separating the UK from the US tech tree. As for the addition of more British tanks, we don’t know they haven’t said anything about it so far. In fact the only factions getting new shit as of late has been Germany and the USSR
1 Like
But do they really not want that or just had no spare manpower to work on an entire faction?
Maybe they just put the idea on ice for maybe in a few years when the game has grown a bit more stable playerwise.
1 Like
Valentine and Matilda absolutely should be TT - just like firefly
2 Likes
Its quite devastating having the majority of the most iconic vehicles “standard issue” being premium 
…
Or lendlease
3 Likes
So you are telling me that an M3 stuart is going to be superior than a Churchill MKVII, Challenger or Comet just because of its ammunition. War thunder is not an infantry game therefore the HE rounds are pretty useless and in Enlisted that is not the case, plus solid shot is effective in Enlisted against tanks as the Firefly already shows.
1 Like
Is that confirmed , taht GBritain doesn´t get an own tree? Do you have a link for that.
In fact GBritain would be the easiest tree to add - you dont even have to split the playerbase as GBritain
would still play on the same maps as USA.
For Italy it would be a little tougher as they dont have Tier 4 or 5 equipment .(except if you just stop at Tier 3)
2 Likes
^this^
In War Thunder British tanks suck, I agree. But the great thing about Enlisted is we get a better chance at using tanks for what they were designed for. Like the M4A3 in WT sucks (especially due to uptiers) but in Enlisted is really good as an infantry support tank.
British tanks were designed around a doctrine of infantry support, hence the slow speed so infantry could keep up. Id like a Mathilda tank in game, partly because its what Australians used, but also it would be quite good I think.
Heavily armoured and has cannon and machine gun for anti infantry which is the main thing tanks do in Enlisted. I have read the autobiography of German panzer commander Hans Von Luck where he mentions how powerful the Mathilda tanks were in the early days of the desert war, unless the Germans could get their 88s to the front.
The same goes for the Churchill and others. The Cromwell and Comet are also quite capable tanks.
It is true British tanks are slow, but in Enlisted that doesnt matter, I can barely get above 15km/h in most maps due to the terrain and all the junk one has to dodge.
Also, why shouldnt British tanks be added but other content is fine? Lots of people would like British tanks in game. If we went with your logic we would never add anything new to Enlisted.
2 Likes
Which is why you won’t see them.
LOL?? Why wouldnt they put them in an infantry-based game as infantry support? What’s the difference here then between an M4A2 and a Mathilda tank?
1 Like
Then there is little point for dev to separate them anyway.