i beg to differ, many SEA countries with the sole exception of thailand either have beef with or do not seem appropriate to be fitted under japan given colonial pasts.
Philippines to Israel is an oversimplification. Not all PH vehicles are Israeli - its only the Sabrah Light Tank and the UT25 turret on the M113 and even then Elbit’s Sabrah concept is an Austrian-Spanish & Finnish Chassis. If you want Israel to have the Sabrah, they should add their own exhibition vehicle that had better capabilities than the PH Army received - including SPIKE ATGMs and APS; plus a bigger caliber for the UT30 (which is 30mm compared to the AFP’s 25mm). The IVECO Guarani also sport the same turret.
As for the UAE, you are insane to suggest adding an Arab nation to Israel.
4 Likes
Philippines to Japan makes the most sense only if Thailand is as well. Once Thailand is added, Philippines could be also added by virtue of SEATO (Which was supposed to be NATO equivalent for Asia) since that was an actual military alliance compared to ASEAN.
The rest of ASEAN could be added as event or premium vehicles for the Japanese TT so actual Japanese & Thai vehicles could be added to the Main Tree.
2 Likes
Israel: Philippines (modern PH AFVs are almost all made in israel)
Using that logic the Philippines is just as viable subtree for Turkey since they use Turkish built Attack Helicopters and IFV’s. Trying to use the manufacturer nation of origin to justify a subtree is fundamentally flawed and cannot be relied on it’s own.
UAE (vehicles too such as Emirati BTR-3, OF-40, and even leclerc, and pantsir on German chassis)
How does that relate to Israel in anyway… Oh wait it doesn’t
i beg to differ, many SEA countries with the sole exception of thailand either have beef with or do not seem appropriate to be fitted under japan given colonial pasts.
- Tries justify why Japan shouldn’t have a [Insert SEA Nation here] subtree by using it’s colonial past
- Fails to mention modern geopolitical context of the Philippines in relation to the greater East Asia Region including Japan as well as military procurement
- Undermines his point by justifying an Arab nation to the Israeli TT. Also does in a terrible way by suggesting vehicles that aren’t even remotely Israeli
Every Arab nation even in nations where the government aren’t hostile towards Israel have the general populace have an overwhelming negative view towards Israel, even more so than SEA nations including the Philippines have towards Japan [It’s not even remotely close].
7 Likes
2 Likes
Here are the last 2 Chilean sub trees for Israel which are the naval and the helicopter trees, so now there are all the complete Chilean sub trees:
3 Likes
Should I add what if sub trees if political sensitivity’s are taken into consideration by Gaijin?
Gaijin never considered political matters. So I dont see any point of doing that
I understand this, some seem to think they do though.
made a bunch of changes based on feedback, let me know what you think.
Could you add Norway as a potential sub tree for Sweden?
1 Like
Sure thing
1 Like
Done! thanks for reminding me to do Sweden. if you have any other suggestions just let me know.
1 Like
India shouldn’t go to Britain, Koreas shouldn’t be United, and Switzerland should be split between Germany and France depending on a case-by-case basis as both very commonly co-develop projects
1 Like
tbf though, theres not much in terms of franceswiss overlap so they can probably ignore those vehicles or just add em to germany cuz why not lol. france got leos anyway.
France getting Leos is no excuse to not give the Franco-Swiss projects (Of which there are many, many of them) to France only.
well either im blind or there rlly arent many franco-swiss projects lol or else the guys who have made prototype trees for Switzerland wouldve added those
There’s pages in here showing all the Franco-Swiss projects, they’re quite detailed and worth a lookover, its pretty evenly split between the 2
Honestly, i don’t think them having french stuff means anything, France has German stuff.
fair and true