how was that related to economy tho
It’s not, I’m just pointing out as a Singaporean on my thoughts and showing what the vehicles will be added to China if this goes through, the 2nd part response was for his statement.
Edit: Restructured the above post to more correctly fit my point.
I totally agree, its about gear made or in service, I’m so confused as to how economics is involved in that dude’s logic
Or at the very least, military alliance/relationship, like Israel and Singapore for example. We have militaristic ties since 1965 and have continued working alongside them and even sought upgrades from Israel.
6 Likes
And there is no way of reporting moderators or devs that are not doing their job right
There should be something like a community based court that is able to say who should be tossed out of Gaijin
I agree, there are already existing ties or connections between many countries that do not have enough gear on their own, these ties can be used to make composite TTs.
A lot of people would be happy to see an Oceania TT or an ASEAN TT or a TT for the Korean peninsula.
Gimme Bob Semple tank and I’ll bring it to every tier.
Good thing they won’t add it
(sad)
Nah, it’s good because we don’t need more clowns bringing L3s and M22s into high tiers
I could understand low tier howitzers, but not those stupid “meme” tanks
1 Like
You’re over-exaggerating my point. I think it would rather be better for Israel because its one of like almost nothing else they could get, but I don’t understand what the big deal is with over reacting if the nation goes to China. This is the same issue as with every other asian nation being added. Bunch of bull arguing over politics or personal biases. Don’t get me fooled just because you are from there, most subnations haven’t gotten special treatment because of that or even worse they get spread across multiple trees like CA and AU. You think players from those places are happy? Even with my own nation, even though it isnt 100% where I would like it to be (a full tree nation like israel, seriously why did they get special treatment) I’m not going to complain because it’s in the game and relatively where it makes sense and I’m happy enough they added it in the first place.
If something people should be rallying for Gaijin to consider nation additions individually (but this would cut into profit and require much more work so no chance lol)
Those are mostly for the shits and giggles tho, at least they bring those because they’re clowns, not because they don’t have another tank at the same tier
That’s where the difference really comes in when it comes to the mindset between most of the West and Asia, and I’m speaking not just for myself but also for other Asian countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand etc. Us from Southeast Asia has got reasons not to have our equipments be included to China and vocally speaking it is down to modern politics, I will not avoid it. We make that sort of comparison of adding us to China equivalently to adding Ukraine to Russia, where we already do not have very good ties with China politically (except Singapore in terms of economy as you said, but this is where it gets too complicated to discuss).
It is also the same kind of reaction to when Chinese players are realising that the VT4 is getting added to Japan. The sense of strong national pride almost precedes over anything else.
Now I’m not saying that Gaijin shouldn’t add Singapore, if anything I prefer either Singapore be added to Israel as a subtree, or have our equipments be split to the respective country of origin. Unlike the Canadians and Australians where they wish to have their vehicles be together in a certain tech tree so they can enjoy their vehicles in one line up, most of us Singaporeans here do not mind having our vehicles be spread/split across the respective countries, like the Leopard 2SG going to Germany and F-15SG to the US etc, because end of the day Singapore mainly purchases military assets from other countries with a few notable exceptions like the Bionix IFV (wholly made locally) and the Hunter IFV (the hull is made and designed locally but the turret is made by Israel).
11 Likes
Yeah I can see that. It would be good if those feelings could just be curbed though for the sake of the game. Ultimately there isn’t any message about political subservience. Lot of people would just like to get to have their own nation in the game either way. Sure not through something that doesn’t make sense at all, but this is just how gaijin chose to do it despite all the rage.
I mean if Gaijin still choses to go through with their plans then I rather they just not add us ever lol. Outside of a few cool looking variants of the same vehicles, we add almost nothing else other than line up that other countries can easily supplement without us.
But given that even the Chinese community is also rejecting the idea of Singapore subtree going to China based on the Chinese language forum and also the CN websites like Tieba Baidu and Bilibili, continuing this is only going to anger the mainlanders way more since this was supposed to be addressing them in the first place. Gaijin has just somehow managed to anger everyone else along for the ride.
8 Likes
I can’t speak for everyone, but I explained my exact thoughts before. I am not being hypocritical.
2 Likes
In today’s environment, you could probably make a convincing argument that still are. Its better to think of them as “we did sell you these but keeping them air worthy is basically 100% dependent on the US unless you have a strong enough industrial base to handle all the hardware and software support as well as the maintenance.” And most nations don’t. And most nations, or western nations, do this. I have no doubt Germany provides most, if not all, of the feature/equipment support to their export Gepards, Pumas, and Leopards. Makes sense since it still is your technology you don’t want to see go to less-than-ideal entites. This also goes back to US-Taiwan relations are better currently than China-Taiwan relations. The PRC does not service or upkeep ROC F-16s and Mirages. The PRC probably doesn’t like the idea of the ROC even having them.
1 Like
I don’t think you could even make a better argument for ROC aircraft being a sub-tree for the US thinking about it now.
3 Likes
I recall that on the other day one commenter said players from Taiwan didn’t complain much. That’s too far up this thread for me to practically refer to by now, but I’d venture to say that we’d be happy enough to get some representation, as “China” has essentially become a colloquial name for the PRC (the legacy of which is present in this game) just as “Taiwan” has essentially become a colloquial name for the ROC by virtue of where we can effectively exercise our sovereignty.
(Even though without the ROC, for example, the Chinese tech tree would be reduced to like one or two vehicles per Rank for early tiers lol)
The “Thai VT4 for Japan” thing really brought back memories of me playing flight sims with scenarios where USN or USAF would fight export F-16s previously sold to now-hostile countries- I guess that’s why personally I am not adverse to the idea.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again still. Korea and Japan while they still do not see eye to eye, have a far more common adversary and this is a difference between modern politics vs history. One statement I’ll change now from when I said what I said before is that I definitely acknowledge the problematic history the two nations have, but here’s my rebuttal at the end of everything, both countries have in recent years worked alongside more often in joint military exercises and by that I mean they fly their jets alongside each other and observe each other’s performance.
The last time you replied to me sending me screenshots and links of Singapore and China joint military exercises have all been counter-terrorism related, and the point that China wants to make by holding a joint exercise with us is to muddy the criticism of them being brazen in the region. Outside of the two navies holding joint counter-terror exercises and the RSAF army’s infantry holding counter-terrorism training with PLA’s infantry, not once have our tanks or fighters driven/flown alongside each other.
And back to the last screenshot of this message with that last paragraph, it still holds true to this day. Japanese equipment and South Korean equipment, for the purpose of the game, is about as similar as they get and it perfectly goes along with each other. Both uses autoloaders on their MBTs and has adjustable suspensions, both fleet of aircrafts are basically identical with the F-15K and KF-16C offering a wider range of CAS options while the IFVs supplement each other, all to top it off with the M-SAM offering a longer range SAM system and the K-SAM offers the ItO 90m equivalent.
Of course, since you bring it up now, I’d like to offer my apologies to any Korean and Japanese that I might’ve offended since those statements, but logically speaking with my extensive explanation on why I think South Korea would have been a perfect match, it still holds and I still stand by it. It is still a far more reasonable suggestion than putting Singapore to China.
7 Likes