Switching nation for the swiss Hunter F.58

[nathanclawfish 647]

15 minutes ago, _Iluminas_ said:

and english is a language made up by German Celtic Roman and Nordic so go figure

Aye, which is why its a poor criteria to use for sorting tech trees, which was my point.

[VT_88 342]

Just wait for ChatGPT.

 

The AI will calculate everything.

[Nachtgeist2423@live 27]

1 hour ago, nathanclawfish said:

Except it doesnt, this has literally rewritten a precident that has been going for over 10 years, which is why there is so much backlash.

Except they didn’t. The Phong Kong T-34 was in the Soviet TT up until the Chinese tree was introduced. The MEXAS was put into the German Tree because the MEXAS is a product of Germany that Canada bought to modernize their Leopard 1’s. The Class 3 was built by Henschel Wehrtechnik GmbH as a private venture and entered into the contract program SA was running. Maybe another Squadron vehicle like the M1A1 AIM which was first bought by Australia(Which everyone seems to forget is only part of the commonwealth not subject to the British Parliament.)

[Fa11enPhoenix 1,405]

Something something statistics

Something something algorithm

Something something working as intended

 

[lukeskylicker 69]

As anybody who so much glances at my 'vehicles owned' or post history can tell, I slightly favor British vehicles so, of course, I'm going to say that the British vehicle, sold by the British to the Swiss with predominately British upgrades... probably shouldn't be in the German tree. Ideally it should be in it's own Swiss tree even if that would cause some problems (Swiss basically skipped gen 3 aircraft) but the 58 is a very unique vehicle for a unique country.

 

... but since we're not doing that why is it going to the German tree? France and Italy have as much claim over a Swiss 'subtree' if we're going by the 'muh shared language' argument and have a far more dire need of one. France and Italy both only have 4 lines in Air and Italy only has 4 lines in Ground, while Germany rubs shoulders with the US and USSR for having the most expansive and diverse tech tree for both. There's only one real reason for Swiss vehicles to go to Germany instead of it's own TT or being a sub-tree of France/Italy.

 

More people play Germany than France, Italy, and Britain combined.

[CTCrusader 214]

Since Switzerland is not attached to one tree yet, the rule should be the base of the vehicle (in this case it is a hunter) should go to the tree that made said base vehicle (britain). 

[Hopper909 9]

5 hours ago, Revenesis said:

I think the Hunter is fine where it is now. There have been past events such as Merkava, which has no connection with the US at all but was introduced into the US ground force tech tree. All of these add bits of variety and colors to the gameplay.

 

6 hours ago, Danzig A1@live said:

It's fine where it is tbh.

 

6 hours ago, Kingtiez@live said:

I personally think the Swiss version is fine where it is.

 

6 hours ago, The_True_Top_Cat said:

no

 

6 hours ago, dotEXCEL said:

uhm...

Reveal hidden contents

 

 

6 hours ago, Lord_Prism said:

Hahahaha, No- Sincerely Gaijin 

 

Then give Britain the C2A1 mexas, M1A1 aim, or at the very least the Ram 2

[boomsssboom 0]

i agree with this post

Edited March 8, 2023 by boomsssboom

[Kingtiez@live 606]

1 hour ago, Hopper909 said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then give Britain the C2A1 mexas, M1A1 aim, or at the very least the Ram 2

Sure, but you’re going to have to convince Gaijin to do that. 

[nathanclawfish 647]

5 hours ago, Nachtgeist2423@live said:

Except they didn’t. The Phong Kong T-34 was in the Soviet TT up until the Chinese tree was introduced. The MEXAS was put into the German Tree because the MEXAS is a product of Germany that Canada bought to modernize their Leopard 1’s. The Class 3 was built by Henschel Wehrtechnik GmbH as a private venture and entered into the contract program SA was running. Maybe another Squadron vehicle like the M1A1 AIM which was first bought by Australia(Which everyone seems to forget is only part of the commonwealth not subject to the British Parliament.)

That is literally the precident for why it should be in the british tech tree seem my comment on page one, the rule has always been if the nation is not a tree in game, it goes to the nation the base model has been derived from, this goes back atleast to the grant preorder pack for the american tank tech tree.

[nathanclawfish 647]

5 hours ago, CTCrusader said:

Since Switzerland is not attached to one tree yet, the rule should be the base of the vehicle (in this case it is a hunter) should go to the tree that made said base vehicle (britain). 

That is the precident they have set since literally the grant 1 for ground

3 hours ago, Kingtiez@live said:

Sure, but you’re going to have to convince Gaijin to do that. 

The list is way longer than that, when i get off work tonight i will compile it, but i belive its closer to 10 vehicles that are lanquishing outside of the brit tech tree that should be folderable  

[RuckusAndFun 414]

21 minutes ago, nathanclawfish said:

That is literally the precident for why it should be in the british tech tree seem my comment on page one, the rule has always been if the nation is not a tree in game, it goes to the nation the base model has been derived from, this goes back atleast to the grant preorder pack for the american tank tech tree.

Canadian ADATS - UK TT

Wirraway (Based on the Texan) - UK TT

Italy gets the HS 129 B (Romania), but not the IAR 316B.

Meanwhile, please tell me why there is a random Austrian tank in France's TT.

F-104S TAF, despite being a US plane, and the US already having the M60 AMBT, is in Italy's TT

 

Boarhound - US TT despite UK TT existing

 

So, do go on about the rule....

Edited March 8, 2023 by RuckusAndFun

[Nachtgeist2423@live 27]

16 minutes ago, RuckusAndFun said:

Canadian ADATS - UK TT

Wirraway (Based on the Texan) - UK TT

Italy gets the HS 129 B (Romania), but not the IAR 316B.

Meanwhile, please tell me why there is a random Austrian tank in France's TT.

F-104S TAF, despite being a US plane, and the US already having the M60 AMBT, is in Italy's TT

 

Boarhound - US TT despite UK TT existing

 

So, do go on about the rule....

S-199 is Czechoslovakian as well don’t forget that one. Also the Austrian tank is because much like this post if anything goes to the Germans or Russians the screaming minority call foul. That is why Germany got the Argentinian version of which it truly has no relation to outside of “ lol Nazis”. Even though there is the Patagonia I think the Argentinian army called it that would have made a much better addition for the French tech tree and Germany could have gotten the Austrian light tank.

5 hours ago, Hopper909 said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then give Britain the C2A1 mexas, M1A1 aim, or at the very least the Ram 2

Except the MEXAS was developed and made by a German company and Canada is an independent nation. The M1A1 AIM was produced in the US but Australia was the first nation to order the upgrades then the US did. That is why it was put as a US squadron vehicle because both nations received it.

[RuckusAndFun 414]

1 minute ago, Nachtgeist2423@live said:

S-199 is Czechoslovakian as well don’t forget that one.

That one at least makes some sense, the Israelis used it. 

 

[Nachtgeist2423@live 27]

11 minutes ago, RuckusAndFun said:

That one at least makes some sense, the Israelis used it. 

 

Ah but his argument is it should go to the host country and his “muh precedent” says the Czechoslovakian vehicles go to the USSR tech tree.

[Batwingsix 721]

8 hours ago, Adr_Farling said:

The logic only applies to smaller countries having not enough vehicles to be a stand-alone TT.
Also in case you didn’t notice: Germany, Russia, Japan, China, Italy, Sweden and Israel all done speak English, French or Spanish.

The only country speaking another countries language in game is the USA, which is big enough to be a stand-alone TT, so the logic does not apply here.

 

Also I was talking about culture.

That is true, however Gaijin does not care about the airframe itself. If a vehicles is modified enough, it can be in another TT. Thats for example the reason why the J-7E is in the Chinese TT, not in the Russian.

 

The airframe / Vehicle chassis has always been the basis (outside of a specific nation which is its own standalone nation whom operated it in service, or "captured" vehicle) for what tree it would go in. Your logic would be on par with giving Russia an M1A2 SEP because they put a russian machine gun on the roof. 

 

So far as the J-7E, it is a chinese aircraft in the chinese tech tree. Had it been added prior to the merger of the Chinese server (which was the only one with the chinese nation until the merge) then it would have been added to the soviets (much like the cuban Mig is in the soviet tree).

 

Gaijin upended their own 10 years worth of doing something.

Edited March 8, 2023 by Batwingsix

[Schindibee 2,862]

First of all, let me commit that I may be biased on one hand (Swiss myself, German speaking part), but unbiased at the same time, as it really is much more important and exiting that his aircraft has been implemented at all in WT: I have known the Swiss Hunters from my childhood (a Hunter being actually the very first military aircraft I catually sat in), growing up practically on a Swiss military airfield , family and many friends working for the air force, and I not only got to get to know a few Hunter pilots and ground crew myself, but even had the chance to fly in a Hunter T.68 once.

 

Another important note: even as I am a (voluntary) staff member, all my views expressed here regarding this topic are my own personal opinions, and in no way any public statement by Gaijin, or influenced by them.

 

What rankles to me is the clear, seemingly unwavering assumption that the Hunter Mk.58 would belong into the French tree by the OP. Here I sense a strong bias, and was (correctly) assuming immediately that the OP was actually from the French part of Switzerland.  ;-)

 

But then this is something we observed time and again also whenever we evaluated new aircraft in the last decades: Mirage pilots would lobby strongly for Mirage 2000 and later Rafale, Tiger pilots for the Hornets,...

 

As to close ties with France, I think we really need to look at the era covered by WT, so even mentioning Napoleon or anything even further back seems completely unreasonable.

 

Simple fact is that wherever you put any Swiss vehicle (except in its own tree - which is even more far fetched than an independent  Swedish or Israeli tree), you will get people complaining. And it's also clear that the opinions would be biased a lot depending on the background of the people: Brits would claim any Hunter must be in the UK tree, French that any Mirage (and derivatives) in the French tree, and yes, understandeably also francophone Swiss may be biased towards any Swiss vehicles ending up in the French tree.

 

And we are - small as we are - a culturally and politically diverse bunch which causes bad feelings time and again in our national politics. Theres even a term for this: "Röstigraben", which depicts the virtual boundary between the French speaking cantons and the others, because very often in national votes, the French speaking cantons would vote for the other thing than the German, Italian and Rumantsch speaking parts, understandeably often very frustratinfg for the French speaking Swiss, as they thus often feel to be taken less seriously with their concerns and opinions.

 

The "placmenet in which tree issue" can not really be resolved as - another simple fact - we Swiss as neutral and unaffiliated nation have collected our military equipment form many parts of the world: We've flown German, French and Italian aircraft in WW2, US after the war, quite a few British aircraft and again US and French later, and also on the ground we had a strange mix. Let's just list a few examples:

• Dewoitine D.26/27
• various Moranes
• various Bf-109 variants
• P-51
• T-6 (AT-16)
• Vampire & Venom
• Hunter
• Mirage III (with US avionics and Falcon AAM's, and later Israeli-inspired canards)
• Tiger II
• Hawk
• Bloodhound
• Rapier
• AMX-13
• Centurions
• Leopard II
• ...

Plus add quite a few local designs and projects, like Pz58/68, P-16, N-20 and so on,

 

So where to put us?!?

Anywhere and nowhere...

 

Now some far fetched assumptions:

 

1) assuming the Hunter Mk.58 is a one-off thing, it should most likely belong into the tech tree of its origin, the Brits (just as for example the Austrian Saab-105OE is in the Swedish tree)

 

2) assuming in the future there is a potential for a Swiss sub-tree. the German or Swedish tree would in my view be the best option

 

Why German?

 

Obvious conclusion by many might be that I'm from the german speaking part, but I really stand above this and try to look at it pragmatically.

 

What I see as important is that miltech-wise, politically, geographically and even culturally (sorry VS, VD, NE, FR, JU, TI and GR), were a tad more aligned with Germany than any other nation.

 

Close industrial ties to Germany (even in WW2) existed and exist with Swiss weapons and ammo used by the Germans, German Bf-109's flying for us, later many collaborations (see Gepard, Leopard II). Yes, also with France, but to a lesser extent. We may actually have been closer to the British mil-tech wise with Vampire, Venom, Hawk, Bloodhound, Rapier and Hunter than with the French military industry in the second half of last century.

 

Why Sweden?

 

Where I'd have actually seen Swiss vehicles most would have been in Sweden, forming a group of neutral/unaffiliated nations, and nations also sharing similar or the same imported technology (P-51, Vampire, Hunter, Leopard II, even Centurion), but also native technology which was exchanged between SE and CH. And wit would offer the posisbility for adding also Austria for the cold war era.

 

Also, the German tree is already very full and diverse, whereas the Swedish tree could profit from more "meat" even after the addition of the Finnish sub-tree. But fleshing it out even more and turning it onto a kind of "neutral European countires" with Sweden, Finland, Switzerland and Austria would make sense, no?

 

Placing any imported vehicle of a minor nation into a major nations tree has always been tricky: Turkish M60 derivative in the US tree, sure, but placing a Turkish Starfighter into the Italian tree is already a bit more farfetched but stil understandeable. Or a Finnish Vampire in the Swedish tree. Or the Austrian JaPz.K A2 in the German tree? This would also like now the Swiss Hunter be for reasons of geographcal, cultural and political "closeness".

 

FInally there's the argument of "countries don't even matter so much at all in WT:

Everyone is basically fighting everyone else at some point or another. I play mostly hight tier Air  Sim EC atm, and often fly Swedish aircraft side by side with US and Israeli aircraft agains German, Russian and Japanese planes. So why does the exactl placement of a special vehicle even matter and be the basis fir such heated debate?!?

[Colerend 225]

Best option would be to make a actual Swiss tech tree. 

[Schindibee 2,862]

3 minutes ago, Colerend said:

Best option would be to make a actual Swiss tech tree. 

NOW we're talking the same language, haha!

 

 

[Tunagraph 223]

2 hours ago, Schindibee said:

Where I'd have actually seen Swiss vehicles most would have been in Sweden, forming a group of neutral/unaffiliated nations, and nations also sharing similar or the same imported technology (P-51, Vampire, Hunter, Leopard II, even Centurion), but also native technology which was exchanged between SE and CH. And wit would offer the posisbility for adding also Austria for the cold war era.

 

Also, the German tree is already very full and diverse, whereas the Swedish tree could profit from more "meat" even after the addition of the Finnish sub-tree. But fleshing it out even more and turning it onto a kind of "neutral European countires" with Sweden, Finland, Switzerland and Austria would make sense, no?

Not a bad idea.

[The_True_Top_Cat 29]

11 hours ago, Hopper909 said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then give Britain the C2A1 mexas, M1A1 aim, or at the very least the Ram 2

no

[Silent_Witch 1,452]

2 hours ago, Colerend said:

Best option would be to make a actual Swiss tech tree. 

Ah, I see you're a man of culture as well

[dotEXCEL 5,969]

3 hours ago, Colerend said:

Best option would be to make a actual Swiss tech tree. 

 

3 hours ago, Schindibee said:

NOW we're talking the same language, haha!

 

 

yeah... but lets be real here.
the chances are higher that we get a WW2 / CW groundforces sepertaion in reseach and matchmaker than a standalone tree...

[spacesoldier117 876]

4 hours ago, Schindibee said:

First of all, let me commit that I may be biased on one hand (Swiss myself, German speaking part), but unbiased at the same time, as it really is much more important and exiting that his aircraft has been implemented at all in WT: I have known the Swiss Hunters from my childhood (a Hunter being actually the very first military aircraft I catually sat in), growing up practically on a Swiss military airfield , family and many friends working for the air force, and I not only got to get to know a few Hunter pilots and ground crew myself, but even had the chance to fly in a Hunter T.68 once.

 

Another important note: even as I am a (voluntary) staff member, all my views expressed here regarding this topic are my own personal opinions, and in no way any public statement by Gaijin, or influenced by them.

 

What rankles to me is the clear, seemingly unwavering assumption that the Hunter Mk.58 would belong into the French tree by the OP. Here I sense a strong bias, and was (correctly) assuming immediately that the OP was actually from the French part of Switzerland.  ;-)

 

But then this is something we observed time and again also whenever we evaluated new aircraft in the last decades: Mirage pilots would lobby strongly for Mirage 2000 and later Rafale, Tiger pilots for the Hornets,...

 

As to close ties with France, I think we really need to look at the era covered by WT, so even mentioning Napoleon or anything even further back seems completely unreasonable.

 

Simple fact is that wherever you put any Swiss vehicle (except in its own tree - which is even more far fetched than an independent  Swedish or Israeli tree), you will get people complaining. And it's also clear that the opinions would be biased a lot depending on the background of the people: Brits would claim any Hunter must be in the UK tree, French that any Mirage (and derivatives) in the French tree, and yes, understandeably also francophone Swiss may be biased towards any Swiss vehicles ending up in the French tree.

 

And we are - small as we are - a culturally and politically diverse bunch which causes bad feelings time and again in our national politics. Theres even a term for this: "Röstigraben", which depicts the virtual boundary between the French speaking cantons and the others, because very often in national votes, the French speaking cantons would vote for the other thing than the German, Italian and Rumantsch speaking parts, understandeably often very frustratinfg for the French speaking Swiss, as they thus often feel to be taken less seriously with their concerns and opinions.

 

The "placmenet in which tree issue" can not really be resolved as - another simple fact - we Swiss as neutral and unaffiliated nation have collected our military equipment form many parts of the world: We've flown German, French and Italian aircraft in WW2, US after the war, quite a few British aircraft and again US and French later, and also on the ground we had a strange mix. Let's just list a few examples:

• Dewoitine D.26/27
• various Moranes
• various Bf-109 variants
• P-51
• T-6 (AT-16)
• Vampire & Venom
• Hunter
• Mirage III (with US avionics and Falcon AAM's, and later Israeli-inspired canards)
• Tiger II
• Hawk
• Bloodhound
• Rapier
• AMX-13
• Centurions
• Leopard II
• ...

Plus add quite a few local designs and projects, like Pz58/68, P-16, N-20 and so on,

 

So where to put us?!?

Anywhere and nowhere...

 

Now some far fetched assumptions:

 

1) assuming the Hunter Mk.58 is a one-off thing, it should most likely belong into the tech tree of its origin, the Brits (just as for example the Austrian Saab-105OE is in the Swedish tree)

 

2) assuming in the future there is a potential for a Swiss sub-tree. the German or Swedish tree would in my view be the best option

 

Why German?

 

Obvious conclusion by many might be that I'm from the german speaking part, but I really stand above this and try to look at it pragmatically.

 

What I see as important is that miltech-wise, politically, geographically and even culturally (sorry VS, VD, NE, FR, JU, TI and GR), were a tad more aligned with Germany than any other nation.

 

Close industrial ties to Germany (even in WW2) existed and exist with Swiss weapons and ammo used by the Germans, German Bf-109's flying for us, later many collaborations (see Gepard, Leopard II). Yes, also with France, but to a lesser extent. We may actually have been closer to the British mil-tech wise with Vampire, Venom, Hawk, Bloodhound, Rapier and Hunter than with the French military industry in the second half of last century.

 

Why Sweden?

 

Where I'd have actually seen Swiss vehicles most would have been in Sweden, forming a group of neutral/unaffiliated nations, and nations also sharing similar or the same imported technology (P-51, Vampire, Hunter, Leopard II, even Centurion), but also native technology which was exchanged between SE and CH. And wit would offer the posisbility for adding also Austria for the cold war era.

 

Also, the German tree is already very full and diverse, whereas the Swedish tree could profit from more "meat" even after the addition of the Finnish sub-tree. But fleshing it out even more and turning it onto a kind of "neutral European countires" with Sweden, Finland, Switzerland and Austria would make sense, no?

 

Placing any imported vehicle of a minor nation into a major nations tree has always been tricky: Turkish M60 derivative in the US tree, sure, but placing a Turkish Starfighter into the Italian tree is already a bit more farfetched but stil understandeable. Or a Finnish Vampire in the Swedish tree. Or the Austrian JaPz.K A2 in the German tree? This would also like now the Swiss Hunter be for reasons of geographcal, cultural and political "closeness".

 

FInally there's the argument of "countries don't even matter so much at all in WT:

Everyone is basically fighting everyone else at some point or another. I play mostly hight tier Air  Sim EC atm, and often fly Swedish aircraft side by side with US and Israeli aircraft agains German, Russian and Japanese planes. So why does the exactl placement of a special vehicle even matter and be the basis fir such heated debate?!?

I mean, everyone is biased, I have two friends that are from the italian canton and they would really like to see Swiss vehicles in the ITT.
Does it makes sense tho?
Well you have some cultural ties, some industrial ones but I agree that there are a bit less ties than when compared to the ones Switzerland has with France and Germany.
IF Gaijin were to be devs that actually accounts for balance, Switzerland would aid Italy the most:
MBTs:
-Italy doesn't have any good MBT
-Germany has a never ending stream of Leopards and future protos
-France has Leclercs and future protos
-Switzerland brings to the table a lot of indigenous modified Leopards

SPAAs:
-Italy lmaod out of the chat long time ago and Gaijin keeps uptiering the OTOMATIC just to say we have a top tier SPAA
-Germany has the Flarakrad with the newly improved VT-1
-France has the ITO90 with the newly improved VT-1
-Switzerland could aid the department with the MOWAG Shark mounting the ADATS

Future top tier MBTs featuring the 130mm+:
-Germany has Leopard prototypes featuring the 140mm and Rheinmetall is recently pushing for the 130mm
-France developed Leclerc prototypes with 140mm guns and is now pushing for the Ascalon
-Switzerland has some indigenous Leopards modified with a 140mm gun
-Italy

But of course this would be my explanation on why it would makes sense to have Switzerland in the ITT due to balance and ties.

At the end of day everyone here as their biased opinion but one thing remains true: if Italy doesn't make the cut, France should rather than Germany as the last one is vastly ahead with the vehicle count compared to the two minors(you'd need to unify those two have the equivalent number of vehicles that Germany can field).

 

Edited March 8, 2023 by spacesoldier117

[dotEXCEL 5,969]

4 minutes ago, spacesoldier117 said:

I mean, everyone is biased, I have two friends that are from the italian canton and they would really like to see Swiss vehicles in the ITT.
Does it makes sense tho?
Well you have the some cultural ties, some industrial ones but I agree that there are a bit less ties than when compared to the ones Switzerland has with France and Germany.
IF Gaijin were to be devs that actually accounts for balance, Switzerland would aid Italy the most:
MBTs:
-Italy doesn't have any good MBT
-Germany has a never ending stream of Leopards and future protos
-France has Leclercs and future protos
-Switzerland brings to the table a lot of indigenous modified Leopards

SPAAs:
-Italy lmaod out of the chat long time ago and Gaijin keeps uptiering the OTOMATIC just to say we have a top tier SPAA
-Germany has the Flarakrad with the newly improved VT-1
-France has the ITO90 with the newly improved VT-1
-Switzerland could aid the department with the MOWAG Shark mounting the ADATS

Future top tier MBTs featuring the 130mm+:
-Germany has Leopard prototypes featuring the 140mm and Rheinmetall is recently pushing for the 130mm
-France developed Leclerc prototypes with 140mm guns and is now pushing for the Ascalon
-Switzerland has some indigenous Leopards modified with a 140mm gun
-Italy

But of course this would be my explanation on why it would makes sense to have Switzerland in the ITT due to balance and ties.

At the end of day everyone here as their biased opinion but one thing remains true: if Italy doesn't make the cut, France should rather than Germany as the last one is vastly ahead with the vehicle count compared to the two minors.

 

just saying, the VT-1 was changed by gaijin to stop the complaining about the pantsir
the changes are completly unhistorical and were made imo too as a ''cover-up''
this should be bug-reported.
 

about the VT-1
https://www.thalesgroup.com/sites/default/files/database/d7/asset/document/VT1_brochure.pdf

Edited March 8, 2023 by dotEXCEL