Japan definitely needs more vehicles introduced. But before they do that they need to fix the grind to unlock vehicles. They’re ass them faster than 90% players can unlock them. Once the RP is fixed im all for it!
South Korea and Japan are not allies. It is an ally of the United States, it is wary of the same enemy, it helps for the sake of national interests, but it is not an ally at all
5 Likes
Agree, at this point idc about politics and I just want more shit to grind, give more rank 5 jets to Japan by at least expanding the tree to also load Asian air force in general, even if it means we’re getting Indonesian Lim-5P, Vietnamese and Indonesian MiG 17 and 19, ROKAF F-86, Indian, Indonesian and vietnamese MiG-21, and we may get new jet bomber in form of Indonesian Tu-16 for it.
Good idea overall.
Uhmm….according to what source?
So far im aware both are simply allied to the US and not to each other.
U.S. Security Cooperation With ROK - United States Department of State
1 Like
You claiming things but aren’t validating them with any sources.
The exercises you mentioned are all organized by the US and not by Japan-S.Korea, unless you can proof otherwise by a source.
I don’t know much about the Anglo-South African relations but i doubt that it’s worse then Japan and South Korea unless you can provide otherwise though, beside that they at least had an mutual defence agreement unlike Japan and S.Korea which have non. Here’s is an source that validates that :
3 Likes
So it’s pretty clear then that there isn’t any alliance between Japan-S.Korea as you can’t validate this with an source.
Even then South Korea should have an source of cooperation with Japan right? So far i have found non, neither have i found any sources which mentions anything about an Japan-S.Korean exercise.
So non of your claims would be even valid since there’s no official source of any agreements.
(Also an source on where Japan forbids these agreements, would like to read it myself)
4 Likes
‘The dragon in my garage’
Also, the formula of ‘joint drill = alliance’ seems to fit very well! lol
3 Likes
Now im not even sure if what you said about “Japan forbidding” is true.
Japan-Australia Reciprocal Access Agreement J
Signing of Japan-UK Reciprocal Access Agreement
Explaination??
3 Likes
Make organizing exercises less paperwork intensive. No call to defense in either.
It’s still an defence treaty which allows the stationing of troops on Japanese, British and Australian territory but beside that it clearly shows that Japan does show official defence agreements.
So we can agree that Japan-S.Korea have no official defence agreement and simple are tied to the US, also that both governments try to improve relations doesn’t always mean they friends.
7 Likes
Personally, if Korea is added to the game in some way, I just want South and North Korea to be separate. I don’t want another China/East Germany situation where there are vehicles from both sides of the Iron Curtain in one tree, because it ruins asymmetry present in tech trees.
In my mind it makes more sense for North Korea to be added to China, as they share a lot of technology and similar vehicles (specifically the PRC), and were/are close allies. During the Cold War, which is the timeframe a lot of in-game vehicles are from, China supplied North Korea with much of its arms, such as the A-5/Q-5, J-7s, ZTZ59s, and just general spare parts for the rest of the Soviet-supplied North Korean military.
South Korea as it is could probably be able to be an Israel-style solo tech tree, perhaps with export vehicles thrown in as premium/squadron. While it could fit in the US tree, the US doesn’t have a need for a sub-tree as it already has more than enough that can be added. South Korea on its own has enough from the mid-late Cold War to stand on its own, not to mention all the more modern stuff.
As much as I would like Japan to gain a South Korean subtree, it is understandable that it hasn’t been done. Japan and South Korea kind of don’t like each other, putting it lightly. Players of one side or the other or both would not like having their country with the other in the game, and so it is reasonable that they are playing it safe regarding Korea.
I agree with this idea. However, when I ask this question in the Japanese community (unofficial WIKI forum), many Korean players cite their dislike of the addition to the Japanese tree as the reason, rather than Japanese approval or disapproval or technical disapproval. I feel that there is a lot of speculation and dislike for the Japanese community’s opinion.
I apologize in advance that I am Japanese and this is a machine translation.
1 Like
Line is already kind of blurred.
Unless techtrees somehow end up semi-separated (sub-trees and the like), I don’t think they’ll bother to create a separate techtree starting with rank 5…
hold on, you’re saying that you want to move F-16 out of China tree and move it to SK tree that include Taiwan? move NK to current China tree to reflect the alliance in the area?
Korean subtree within Japanese tree proper makes as much sense as current SAR and India tech in British.
I’d say it should be ok and I’ll accept it.
1 Like
Makes sense in what way?
3 Likes
I’m hoping for a sub-tree system, as I find it offensive to add more of our own trees that are watered down with copy and paste.
(Just to be clear, this is not limited to Korea, but other countries as well.)
I don’t care if it is Japan, the US, or China, I would like to see a sub-tree of unique Korean weapons implemented in some tree somewhere.
However, Gaijin has a strong preference for watering down nations, so I think it will probably be implemented as its own tree, watered down with copy and paste.
If it were to be implemented as its own tree, I feel that North and South Korea should be treated as the same nation. I feel that Gaijin is not thinking deeply about international relations, just as it is treating China and Taiwan as the same nation.
A unified North and South Korea would have more unique vehicles than South Korea alone, so the tree would be more interesting to set up with North Korea.
No. We don’t have any alliance with Japan.
4 Likes
In an ideal world, yes, so that asymmetric gameplay is still a thing. But as is, the ROK and PRC are already in a tree together. Nothing can really done about that now. The best we can do is have the Chinese tree be predominantly Pact-type vehicles and South Korea on its own.