After Korea: Which Nation Should Be Considered Next?

Machinery of War Discussion Nations not present in WT
1

With Gaijin officially confirming its plans for a standalone Korean research tree, congratulations to the Korean community! It’s great to see a nation that has been requested for years finally moving toward becoming a full research tree.

This also made me wonder: what should come after Korea?

For a long time, many players believed War Thunder had reached its practical limit for adding new nations. Korea’s announcement suggests that Gaijin is still open to expanding the game with new standalone research trees, which makes this an interesting time to discuss the future.

What Makes a Good Standalone Nation?

In my opinion, any future nation should have:

  • A complete progression from early ranks to top tier.
  • A distinct military identity.
  • Long-term potential for future vehicles.
  • A good balance between indigenous and historically operated equipment.
  • Gameplay that offers something different from the existing tech trees.

My Personal Choice: India

Personally, I believe India should be one of the strongest candidates after Korea.

Over the last decade, India’s defence industry has grown significantly. While India has historically operated British, American, French and Soviet equipment, it also now fields an increasing number of indigenous vehicles, giving it a much stronger identity than in the past.

Some examples include:

  • Arjun Mk1A
  • Tejas Mk1A
  • Prachand
  • Zorawar
  • Pinaka
  • Akash
  • Future programmes such as AMCA, TEDBF, and FRCV

These, combined with India’s historical equipment, could create a complete progression from the early ranks into modern top-tier gameplay.

I also think a standalone Indian tree would represent one of the world’s largest armed forces while bringing a unique mix of British, Soviet, French and indigenous military technology into one progression.

Other Possible Candidates

Of course, India isn’t the only option.

I’ve also seen discussions about:

  • Poland / Central European tree
  • Brazil
  • Other regional concepts

Each has strengths and challenges, and I’m interested in hearing arguments for them as well.

Final Thoughts

This isn’t meant to argue against Korea—in fact, I think Korea is a great addition and I’m looking forward to seeing how Gaijin implements it.

I’m simply interested in discussing what should come next.

If Gaijin continues adding standalone nations after Korea, which nation do you think should be considered next, and why?

Please keep the discussion respectful. I’m looking forward to hearing everyone’s opinions.

2

They did? Why not Poland?!?

1 Like
3

India is a british sub tree sorry lad

image
image1868×1042 124 KB

1 Like
4

Could have sworn a eastern europe tree was considered by gaijin

5

India in War Thunder will be 98% copying the USSR/Britain/France technology, and the unique stuff listed

is extremely weak

1 Like
6

tbh tho if uh united korea does well a united eastern europe could do well again as every country has something unique and modern to add in both ground and air, plus i wanna see the wacky stuff the czechs and pols made

1 Like
7

Poland is a valid candidate as well. I just think India has become a particularly strong contender because of its increasing number of indigenous vehicles and future projects. I’d be interested to hear your case for Poland.

8

due the fact poland puts alot into its miltary when it comes to spending and procurement from other nations

10

I can definitely see a united Central/Eastern European tree working too the Czechs and Poles have some really unique and fun designs. I still personally lean towards India because of its long term indigenous potential, but I’d be happy with either. 😄 Also, my bad for the wrong reply earlier 😂… though you could’ve fit all that into one comment too lol.

11

Saying India would be “98% copy paste” ignores the fact that several existing tech trees also rely on a mix of imported and indigenous equipment. The question isn’t whether every vehicle was designed domestically it’s whether the nation can provide a complete and interesting progression. As for calling India’s indigenous systems extremely weak, that’s just an assertion. You haven’t explained why you think they’re weak, and it doesn’t sound like you’re very familiar with them in the first place. If we’re going to judge potential tech trees, the same standard should apply to every nation.

1 Like
12

At the moment, yes, but subtrees aren’t necessarily permanent. Korea was discussed in relation to other nations for years before Gaijin confirmed plans for a standalone tree. My point is that if Gaijin continues adding standalone nations, I think India has become a strong candidate because of its growing indigenous defence industry.

13

poland

3 Likes
14

I actually know what an Arjun is.
Terrible mobility in the Mk1A version (1,400 horsepower for a 68-ton weight), average in the Mk1 version (1,400 horsepower for 58 tons).
The MK1’s APFSDS is on par with the DM23 for the 105mm L-7, while the MK2’s APFSDS is on par with the Soviet Mango.
It also has composite armor on par with the Leopard 2A4.

This mid tank 10.7-11.0 BR - this good for Britain, and bad for separate tech tree

1 Like
15

They won’t announce something like this for a while

1 Like
16

You’re presenting several estimates as if they’re established facts. The exact protection and ammunition performance of the Arjun aren’t publicly confirmed, so comparisons like it’s just Leopard 2A4 armor or its APFSDS is only DM23/Mango level are largely speculative. Yes, the Mk1A is a heavy tank and mobility is a valid criticism, but that alone doesn’t make it a poor vehicle. More importantly, a standalone tech tree isn’t judged by one MBT. Every nation has vehicles with different strengths and weaknesses. The question is whether India can provide a complete and interesting progression across all ranks, not whether one tank is the strongest in the game.

17

Except were already at the “gaijin confirmed” point with india being UK subtree.

1 Like
18

That’s true for the current state of the game, but Gaijin’s decisions aren’t necessarily permanent. Tech trees have evolved over the years, and my post is about what could happen in the future, not what exists today. If India’s indigenous lineup continues to grow, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to discuss whether it could eventually justify its own standalone tree.

19

We have brochures for his ammunition.
We also know that Germany helped develop the Arjuna turret, so it is very similar to the Leopard 2A4.

India has only T-90S and Arjun as ground vehicles. This TT will end at 11.0

1 Like
20

Theres no precedent for gaijin to backtrack from already confirmed subtree.

Not to mention possible legal issues steming from people investing in britain (buying premium, crews, premium vehicles etc.) in expectance of gaijins promise/statement that future indian additions will come to the UK. Legitimate expectation and all that.

Ergo your “what if” scenario is highly unlikely.

1 Like
21

I think that’s looking at the tree a bit too narrowly. A ground tech tree isn’t built around just two MBTs. It includes light tanks, IFVs, SPAA, tank destroyers and future additions. India already has vehicles like Zorawar, Kestrel/WhAP, NAMICA, BMP-2 variants, Pinaka-based systems, and the FRCV, which is intended to become India’s next-generation MBT beyond the Arjun and T-90. Even if you believe the Arjun belongs around 11.0, that doesn’t automatically mean the entire tree ends there. A tech tree is judged by its overall progression and long-term potential, not by a single tank.