I’m generally in favor, mainly since a combined Founding ASEAN nations (Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia) subtree combined with Japan would bring the nation up to a similar level of potential as the UK tree, which is currently the largest “minor” nation and conveniently a somewhat realistic goal for most nations to achieve through subtrees.
However I also believe the implementation of subtrees in general is currently very flawed. Subtrees are forced within the limited space of shared research tabs and treated more akin to cheap gap fillers for a “main” nation, rather than multiple equal nations supporting eachother. So I hope that a ground-up reworked subtree system could be implemented, not just for Japan, but also for many current subtrees that suffer from the flawed system.
I am not sure about that. Malaysia operates near exclusively western equipment. There is only three exceptions to this in total, the MiG-29N, Su-30MKM and PT-91M. All of these also have western characteristics:
MiG-29N has western Sidewinder missiles integrated
Su-30MKM uses many western avionics as well as strike weapons like the Paveway series
PT-91 is a post-soviet Polish designed tank, Malaysia’s PT-91M variant was bought in 2005, when Poland was not only a member or NATO, but also the EU.
Besides those Malaysia’s equipment includes variants of vehicles like the FV101, MB-339, F-5, F/A-18, BAE Hawk, A-4 and their FA-50M that are currently on order. They very much follow the predominately western equipment of their fellow Founding ASEAN nations.
We really can’t say much more about this on this forum, but my logic for being a Japanese subtree is pretty much that the British tree is full, and while there’s good proposals, an ASEAN tree is unlikely.
Japan+Thailand, Malaysia, Philippines, ROK, Indonesia, etc could be a War Thunder Blue Dragons thing for post WW2 vehicles.
100%. Also, are we really gonna put an F/A-18D, F-15SG, Su-30MKM in the Chinese tree when they’re already gonna get all manner of F-16s and Su-30MKK/MK2 all on their own?
An F/A-18D would be much more meaningful to Japan than China ingame. There are actually F/A-18s stationed in Japan defending it at all times. USMC subtree won’t ever happen, but Japanese tree F/A-18s are not some weird weapon system JSDF would never operate alongside. They do. As time goes on, the likelihood of that happening with specifically Malaysian F/A-18Ds increases as well.
Also, I have no idea how else we get Su-30MKM into the game. One of my main hopes is that Su-30MKI, MKM, MKA, and MKK/MK2 all come into the game and not just in the USSR tree.
Su-30MKI for Britain
Su-30MKM for Britain or Japan
Su-30MKA for France
Su-30MKK/MK2 for China (PLAAF)
Su-30MKK/MK2 for Japan/France (Indonesian AF- France has the Netherlands now)
I personally wouldn’t really agree with the idea of ROK to Japan, I’d much prefer that as a combined Korean tree, or going to US if that isn’t possible due to heavy rejection of this idea from Korean players.
For Japan, the direction I prefer is to go with the Founding ASEAN nations, and build on the early and good relations of ASEAN with Japan to make it a combined ASEAN + Japan tree, while leaving some ASEAN countries more closely aligned with China like Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia for the Chinese tree.
I don’t mind Chinese subtrees. I am just thinking that nations like Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia and maybe Iran and North Korea would be better options here. In fact I was meaning to work on a multi-national subtree concept for China, though I didn’t get too far with that yet as I had other distractions.
Thailand was actually an F/A-18 customer in the late 1990s, buying 4 single seat F/A-18C and 4 twin seat F/A-18D as their new B.Kh.20 fighter aircraft. This all went well, the first payment done and all in production with Thai serials already assigned to the airframes, when the Asian Financial Crisis hit in 1997, and it was clear Thailand couldn’t complete future payments.
The order was cancelled, with an agreement being made that Thailand would be refunded if another export customer was found. But as Kuwait declined, the aircraft were instead all finished as twin seat F/A-18D models and ordered to USMC service without issuing a refund for Thailand.
So I believe a Malaysian F/A-18D could mesh very well with Thai aircraft, maybe even get a semi-historical Thai camo.
Russia also would have an option for a Russian prototype Su-30MKM that could be added independently of where Malaysia ends up.
I’d also add to this list the Russian Su-30SM that’s being added next update, which is another MKI derivative, and an export variant of it, Myanmar’s Su-30SME could be added for China.
While I’d love ROK for Japan for gameplay purposes, I completely agree about the Korean rejection. I’d love to see a combined Korean tree.
I also agree about ASEAN. It gets Japan most of the gaps covered, isn’t as controversial, and gets a bunch of stuff into the game that otherwise wouldn’t fit well. Specifically, I am eyeing F-15SG, Indonesian F-16s, and Malay F/A-18D/Su-30MKM.
And yeah, that’s my point exactly WRT China. They unofficially have Pakistan in the form of premium, squadron, event, etc vehicles. I think they deserve proper subtrees for Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia (skeptical of what those last 3 could really add)
A notable addition I think would be Sri Lanka. There are some interesting aircraft like Kfir, and there are real ties.
Thai F/A-18D is less ridiculous than F-16AJ, and way cooler imo. But a major thing is that I really want a Delta Hornet in the game. Twin seater 4th gens look awesome imo.
Also, to go a little crazy: Venezuelan Su-30MKV for the US
Not as much as Pakistan / Bangladesh, but enough to generally be represented. I’m also mainly trying to work on my own subtree concept to figure out what which nation could offer and what might still be missing both in terms of general gameplay gaps and just compared to other nations in game.
I’m starting with just Pakistan and Bangladesh into the current Chinese tree, but I’ll also make my way through possible Chinese additions and add other nations as they’d be fit, generally focusing on the nations I listed but possibly also looking into further options as needed. Sri Lanka is a good point here too, since there is clear Chinese connection, but also some interesting content that might be good to see.
I should really get back to work on that, because it is a really interesting topic.
Yeah, I wasn’t really a fan of the AJ addition (mainly because it’s not even the AJ but a plane Gaijin made up and gave that name), but I’d like a Thai Hornet, given how far along it was before the Asian Financial Crisis hit. It’s actually even still possible to track the former Thai airframes, only one has been retired so far, but at least two have been converted to F/A-18D (RC) reconnaissance variants.
Image of Thai Hornet "Kh.20-3/42" taken in Thailand. While still in USMC service it did return home at least for a short vacation.
I’d appreciate a Thai Hornet, but if it is instead a Malaysian Hornet (which is actually serviced) I will accept that too, since then there is still the option of giving it a Thai camo to use alongside other Thai vehicles.
I don’t really care about subtrees or what not, in fact, it will be hilarious if CN needs subtrees to save its underperforming top tier ground lineup. I would rather see domestic vehicles get their problems fixed but knowing Gaijin, this will be never. China doesn’t even need subtrees if Gaijin actually spent effort…
I guarantee that at least the Chinese MBTs will never exceed the Russian counterparts in capability, for reasons I will not explicitly state.
Fair, it really seems weird how some Chinese vehicles are implemented. Especially compared to Russian equipment where I always thought the public consensus would say that Chinese generally improved upon the Russian concepts. Meanwhile in game it seems exactly opposite to that.
I still believe Chinese subtrees would be helpful. Not because I’d say China lacks domestic options, honestly I’d say modern day China should be up there with US, even beating out Russia for the most part, but because additional options from other nations can also be an interesting change of pace, and help bring otherwise unrepresented nations to the game.
I am very much for the concept of subtrees as a way to add new, practically independent nations, rather than Gaijins system of gap-filling under a “main” nation, and I believe China could also benefit from that.
Essentially I see the future of subtrees the way I explained it in my suggestion. This goes for any subtree obviously, not just Chinese.
I did say that I think it is for reasons, There is generally an emphasis of “image” projection Gaijin seems to want to do, especially for the Russian side of the WT community, I think that there CN is still viewed not as favorably, since China used to be the biggest customer of Soviet/Russian military hardware and technology while now it has become a competitor through domestic development, and I think that the reality of this fast-paced development is still somewhat difficult to accept, a sort of a “ugly divorce” if you get what I mean.
At least for the context of the game, not going to say which is better for irl effectiveness. if CN military vehicles was modeled accurately, they would be better in some key ways compared to Russian counterparts, especially as they already now have the mobility advantage, but Gaijin doesn’t want to improve survivability or firepower in the context of the MBTs, and even after accepting reports seem especially hesitant on adjusting those factors.
Maybe the VT-5 that is planned this update will actually be a step in the right direction, at least I hope.
Not going to clutter this thread anymore, since I’m already off-topic.
Yes,7.1s reload is incorrect，but Gaijin never considered to fix it.And CN have a lot of vehicles that the game don’t have, such as M1A2T and CM32 ,I really want to see these.
I don’t have any idea what this Type 74 is based upon (bold of me to assume Gaijin has source material on hand I suppose), but I can’t help but think that there was a much better candidate for such an OPFOR model…
I think the assumption that ground is coming to an end is wrong. In the past, subtrees were added to countries that were extremely short of vehicles, but now there are signs that they will be added to normal countries as well. This will slow the growth of the land tree compared to a few years ago, but it will still maintain a certain pace. It is true that the F-2 can be divided into early and late aircraft, but that is the same for other countries. In particular, the 4.5 generation is in desperate need of subtrees.
Ground is at the end of the line, or at least we’re within a couple vehicles of it, and no subtree is going to extend that for Japan by any significant margin.
Most likely, but my friends have seen some photos that I also want to share for this topic.
P.S. I communicate through a translator, I apologize for the crooked translation.
Thanks for the photos, I had not seen the use of a red star for OPFOR purposes before, so at least it’s somewhat legitimate.
I did also remember some use of logs and the extended turret bustle rack, but the tanks in this photo do not have some of the other features from photos you have shared, so I think it’s quite obvious that the Type 74 “Red Star” is an amalgamation of ideas.
