I don’t see why people want singapore in china so much and overreact for something that is the completely correct decision on gaijin’s end
Rather the eastern europe tech tree and spliting korea was really disappointing
You have yet to give me a solid reason other than “Japan lacks stuff, so we should just give it random stuff”
Both PRC and ROC have pretty good ties with singapore culturally and economically and putting in japan is like saying we should put china in USSR
If China needs a sufficiently strong MBT, dozens of domestic options are available. Plus, Taiwan’s M1A2T has yet to be added. As for CAS stuff, there’s still quite a lot to be added. What capability exactly do things like the F-15SG add that domestic options like the J-11 and J-16 (and the Su-30MKK/MK2) wouldn’t provide for the TT?
Yet, when asked about it, it seems the vast majority of Singaporean Players have stated unequivocally (and some have said so in this thread) that they’d rather Singapore go elsewhere. Plus, there was also the backlash after the original set of leaks. Might be why people tend to see Japan a better alternative, just saying
7 Likes
Uhh… What?
That is a horrible comparison, Singapore is not a superpower like China, and comparing Japan to USSR is a stretch.
Unlike China, Singapore lacks the amount of vehicles for a dedicated tree, unless it’s a full ASEAN tree which is an option Gaijin lost when they added Thailand as subtree.
What I would compare Singapore too is the Netherlands actually. Like the Netherlands, there seems to be two major options.
- One option for Singapore is Israel, with the strongest technical connection, which should be where Singapore goes as an individual nation instead of a package deal. For the Netherlands that would be Germany, once again with the strongest connection of in this case literally a merged army.
- Another option for Singapore is being placed alongside Thailand in a package deal with other ASEAN nations (here suggested as only founding members to keep it reasonable). This is equivalent to the Netherlands being added in a similar BeNeLux package deal with Belgium.
I’d say both of these are reasonable options. I might have my own bias towards Japan here, but both of these are reasonable and ultimately it’s not on me to decide, but Singaporean players.
8 Likes
I can’t speak for most singaporean players but i don’t know what you mean by vast majority when it seems to be those same 5-10 people
true
I mean if it were up to people from that country to decide there would be no such thing as sub-trees and every nation would be it’s own tech tree lol
If you are saying ASEAN founding nations as a whole China is a much better option because of the huge economic ties, however i think thailand, phillipines and indonesia are better off in japan
Yeah israel is also a great option but i still think china could be a good third alternative
Probably true, but also not what I meant. I mean as in people from that nation should ultimately be the biggest factor in deciding where a subtree is placed based on the given ties that most nations have to many others.
That being said, I’m all for subtrees being more like countries in the first place.
China has huge ecomomic ties with just about everyone. I’d argue that when looking at the only group of nations reasonable for Japan and one of many for China, I’d say Japan comes out as the preferred choice.
I guess if all else fails there’s always the option to Canada split, putting Singapore in multiple trees (like Canadian Skink and M4A5). But once again this is something that really needs a Singaporean opinion.
This is what I have been saying all along. We need all of the 5 founding nations and not separate one out of the other. If we are going to have an ASEAN subtree, it better be the freaking ASEAN - leaving one out will destroy the integrity of its “ASEAN-ness” similar to suggesting Latin American TT but leaving one out like Brazil for instance. Go big or go home.
Now we need to be calm, this is after all just a proposal and I doubt Gaijin even cares much about it. Personally for me, there are some other ways of implementing an ASEAN Tech Tree but realistically and pragmatically speaking - being a subtree for an already existing nation, where one of its members already is an official subtree will give it the largest chance of it being implemented compared to anything else that requires a whole new “nation”. Thailand simply is the door.
Personally what I imagine actually happening is that its not going to be implemented as fully like this knowing Gaijin’s past history of making subtrees but taking sidegrades here and there as premiums from ASEAN would be enough for me. For example, with the F-15J, the F-15SG could be added as a premium sidegrade. If the T-84 Oplot-T comes, then the Malaysian PT-91 Pendekar can be the premium sidegrade. If the Thai T-50TH comes then a sidegrade for the FA-50PH or the Malaysian FA-50M Block 20 could be added or better yet the Harimau MT and Sabrah LT come together in a single update to follow the Type 16 line.
The pattern should be clear to see here. The ASEAN subtree can be best understood more as like a subtree within a subtree. What we can see in this proposal here is simply the greatest extent of its possible implementation.
2 Likes
Eastern Europe tech tree isn’t even a real alliance which confuses me
+1, this would be awesome
2 Likes
Strawman fallacy.
Japan has ties with Singapore, Indonesia, and Thailand as well.
China has Abrams and Type 99A.
@来如雷霆收震怒_罢如江海凝清光
I get the real reason you oppose Japan, but that’s inappropriate.
Japan is also tied with China in CAS.
Japan requires you to use 12.7 for CAS, China you get to play 12.0.
1 Like
1.99A and M1 have low ratings in their respective player groups. In particular, M1 has been added to a huge directional weakness, and 99A’s main armor has been reduced by 200KE. Italy has greatly increased its ground strength after having L2A7 HU, while China needs such an example.
two。 In terms of CAS, Japan has far surpassed China, or any faction has surpassed China in terms of CAS. Japan has 12.7 Gryphon C and the same F16A OCU in CAS as F16C in ground combat, while China’s best CAS is 11.7 JH-7A, which is not even a multi-purpose fighter and does not have any self-defense capability in top combat.
These are my opinions.
Yes I get that but this tree follows the Finland (Scandinavian) thought of implementation. Its not necessarily co-developed.
3 Likes
Im pretty sure the problems with China top tier can be solved with the addition of the J-10B and J-10C variants, plus the addition of the J-15 and J-17. Xiaan H-6 could very well be a top tier bomber.
Thats not even considering the ROCAF with the F-CK-1 and the other block upgrades of the F-16. Please dont say that theres nothing to be added to China Tech Tree.
1 Like
Also why are we talking about the air force in the ground subtree?
At least Gryphon C is no different from other countries. Before EFT and Rafale entered the game, they were the most competitive CAS with F16C. Plus, you’re right from OCU’s point of view, OCU doesn’t even have thermal imaging.
I mean 2 countries that are part of ASEAN
Because if they add a ground subtree they will add an air subtree
I will have to disagree. Philippines would not be able to offer much and Indonesia, while plenty, will still lack some parts particularly with top tier SPAA. Malaysia’s PT-91M Pendekar’s only place is as a premium sidegrade to the Thai T-84 Oplot-T.
1 Like
I agree with you about the Air Force, but there is really nothing to launch MBT in China. The MBT I see most likely to be of great help to China is the Oplot-P, and if it appears in the game, I think it will ease our anxiety to a great extent.
2 Likes