They never stopped adding fake vehicles, it just shifted from “obviously fake” to “made-up specs/variants”
1 Like
Markovnikov’s rule
I eated it, and gaijin decided China needs it so probably going to them
1 Like
Why would they change the trees to not be national? The main trees nation is the name of the tree and the subtrees are part of that tree. Having subtrees doesn’t change the fact that the “Great Britain” tree is the British tree, or that the “France” tree is the French tree, etc…
Also, what title are you gonna give to the individual trees?
Singapore - part of the sinosphere (geographically, culturally, and ethnicity) => goes to different TTs
Pakistan - Indo culture => goes to China
Note:Some degree of geopolitics is involved when it comes to adding a nation, this is unavoidable; That’s the reason the Devs are making a seperate Korea tree rather than having it in China or Japan. Same reason you won’t see India and Pakistan vehicles in one tree.
Culture isn’t factored in when they add subtrees.
1 Like
Yea … Yugoslavia/Turkey/Poland/Brazil should get higher priority.
Me thinks, its coz ASEAN to China was already agreed internally (to appease fanbase or whatevs). It was phase by phase, starting with Singapore (balanced with Thai to JP).
But recent event(s) took things to different direction/outcome. Now they’ve got WiP assets and need to complete the implementation and move on to next assignment(s)/roadmap.
2 Likes
I’m sure some of it is, and Singapore is geographically close to China.
Which was exactly 1 arguable vehicle: F-16AJ.
All others are exact specs as listed in preliminary manuals/final documentation.
most civil discussion in a thread that involves some kind of geopolitics
1 Like
I don’t care about US vehicles being in other trees.
I care about US vehicles being used as spare parts for other trees, while mains of other trees deny any foreign vehicles for the US tree.
1 Like
i mean i just got called an aggressor for a conflict in turkey in 1955- despite being Cypriot. We don’t do external conflicts.
2 Likes
why would USA need foreign vehicles?
yeah just beefing on the inside I guess
unfortunately, that’s the result of making defense products your main export, and before that the lend lease schemes, US mains have no one to blame but the history of the US of A
they also just massively buffed an unbuilt spaa despite it supposedly being “removed”
1 Like
Furthermore, America turns down foreign vehicles at every step of their procurement deals, look at the Leopard 2AV or Namer trials, both rejected despite being a better product
1 Like
what 3 years of nerfing the Merkava does to a mf
2 Likes
They are “the main of other trees denying foreign vehicles for a tech tree.”
Two hypocrisy’s don’t make a right.