Hypothetical Korea-Japan tech tree

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
,
41

Id rather have a full Korean tree
It’s far more feasible than even the Israeli one

North Korea Line
Tier 4:
T-34-85 - 5.7
Type 63 - 6.3
PT-85 - 7.0

Tier 5:
Chonma-Ho I - 8.3 (3BM-3)
Chonma-Ho III - 8.7 (3BM-21)
Chonma-Ho 92 - 9.0 (3BM-28)

Tier 6:
Chonma-Ho 98 - 9.3 (3BM-28)
Chonma-Ho 214 - 9.3 (3BM-28)
Pokpung-Ho I - 9.7 (3BM-36)
Pokpung-Ho III - 10.0 (3BM-36)

Tier 7:
Songun-Ho I - 10.3 (BTA4)
Songun-Ho II - 10.7 (BTA4)
M2020 early - 11.7 (DTC10E-125)
M2020 late - 11.7 (DTC10E-125)

Premium:
Chonma-Ho II - 8.3 (3BM-6)
Pokpung-Ho II - 9.7 (3BM-36)

South Korean Line
Tier 4:
M4A3 76(w) HVSS - 5.7
M26 - 6.3

Tier 5:
M47 - 7.3 (M431)
M48A3K - 8.0 (K241)
M48A5K1 - 8.7 (K270)
M48A5K2 - 8.7 (K270)

Tier 6:
PV-1 - 9.3 (K270)
K1 - 9.7 (K270)
K1E1 - 10.3 (K274)
K1A1 - 10.7 (K276)

Tier 7:
K1E2 - 10.7 (K274N)
K1A2 - 11.3 (K279)
K2 - 11.7 (K279)
K2 PIP - 11.7 (K279N)

Premium:
M48A5KW - 9.3 (K274)
PV-2 - 9.3 (K270)

Anti Air Line
Tier 4:
VTT323-37-2 - 5.0

Tier 5:
VTT323-57-2 - 7.0
K263A3 - 7.7
K-30 Biho - 8.0

Tier 6:
Pongae-2 - 9.3
K-30 Biho SAM - 10.0

Tier 7:
K-31 Chonma - 11.3

IFV / Tank Destroyers
Tier 4:
M36 - 5.7
Tokchon-100 - 6.0
KAFV-90 - 6.3

Tier 5:
Tokchon-122 - 7.0
K9A1 - 7.7
Tokchon-130 - 7.7
k200-MetisM - 8.3

Tier 6:
K21-40 - 9.0
K21-105 - 9.7
AS-21 REDBACK - 10.3

Tier 7:
Jupiter MGS - 11.3

1 Like
42

By your logic, all Taiwanese vehicles should be removed from the China TT and all East German vehicles should be removed from the German TT.
Did the gaijin act like that?
Oh, by the way, the Hungarian TT scheduled to be added to Italy includes Eastern Bloc vehicle?
What is this? : )

1 Like
43

British T-90S haha : )

1 Like
44

Well, basically Gaijin screwed them, cause now adding SK to JP is fully justified. Cause it will make more sense, than HUN to ITA

45

Yes, so there is no problem if Gaijin combines SK and NK.

3 Likes
46

Kinda

47

If the add Korea to Japan(which i think they should) the TT should be renamed “Japan + Korea”

4 Likes
48

I don’t think you, or anyone else who keeps leveraging this accusation at me, knows what “cherry-picking” is. The hypothetical tree includes nearly everything that Korea has made. The only cherry-picking I did was avoiding copy-paste where possible, and I applied the same standard to Japan by not adding in a M8 LAC (used by both Korea and Japan postwar), a T12 GMC or a M3 Stuart (captured by Japan during the war), or a Colonial Panhard (one example found in Japanese hands after the war), and proposing the removal of the Japanese M36B2 and M47 for the same reasons.

The only other missing stuff are Korean vehicles, and also modern Japanese vehicles (i.e. Type 74 SPH), that would be too low in the tree, while also being incredibly modern, and breaking the aesthetic of lower ranks as a result, or ones that would be rather excessive, like the dozen export variants of the K-9s where most wouldn’t actually have any differences in-game; and prototypes that are unnecessary.

5 Likes
49

why? i see so many vehicles are similar to Janpanese TT… its not a good idea to add so many duplicate vehicles… And this tree is even starting from rank IV

50

its a good idea, I don’t mind the developers putting the two flags together diagonally.

51

I think SK should better be added in chinese TT, as their technology and appearance are quite similar. This would also provide a better experience for both players in simulated battles.

52

Stop trolling

53

Not trolling just try to explain :)

54

Here before everything is purged from this very idiotic subtree idea

55

Why should South Korea be in China when there is no military connection whatsover? It’s like saying that Iran should be in Israel or North Korea in the US, it would be illogical like South Korea in Japan. We might as well continetal tech trees with the suggestions some are making.

South Korea should either be in the US (although it would be unnecessary) or should become there own tree with North Korea