the manufacturer link will only ever be a secondary tie. Theres no link between manufacturer of Leopard 2s and manufacturer of IRIS-T. You need some primary link that would tie them together so they can be deployed in a lineup, otherwise you end up with techtree thats solely leopards 2 and nothing else.
absolutely amazing username good sir
6 Likes
What about North Korea for the USA ?
At this point this could be fun.
and we’re back to serious thread, gotta wait 30 minutes for more memes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
it’s just a simple example, not the whole idea
it’s like coming back partly to the time before Sub TT, usage comes first then technically belonging, last geopolitics
1 Like
VT4’s issue is not about yes/no, but an issue about “when”.
I would assume one situation where Gaijin gives discounts on JP WWII aircrafts on Dec 7/8, the exact day Pearl Harbor got bombed. It’s true that Gaijin is free to give discounts on anything at anytime, but you can’t deny doing like what I said is offensive.
So the problem why Chinese are against to giving VT4 to JP is similar: not the right time to do that. Even delaying it till next main update would be much more acceptable.
2 Likes
Or Egypt to Israel
Or Ukraine to Russia
Or combine Pakistan and India into a TT
Surprised actually this hasn’t happened yet seeing as how high the devs must be to think Singapore to China is a good idea.
5 Likes
I get your angle, I really do. But it simply does not work. Take sweden for example. It uses lot of centurions and leopards 2. Would sweden be stripped of these tanks since theyre technologically related more to the UK and Germany than sweden? Or would you remove sweden alltogether?
There are people on both sides who are wrong
Adding Singapore to China is an awful idea. It has been deemed so each and every time it has been brought up or “leaked”. Please just stick with Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Taiwan as a start.
If the Thai VT4 caused “sensitivity”, then adding Singapore to China would several times that, across an incredibly wide section of the player base.
9 Likes
no, since sweden is already there. usage comes first. the TT still has enough unique vehicles to be a independent tt.
same for someone’s statement about “too many foreign vehicles in China TT”
They deleted my comment a while back about speaking with your wallet too, not surprising unfortunately.
3 Likes
No,bro you are wrong.
They should add captured Leopard 2A4/5/6 ,strv 122,M1A1,M2A2 to Russia. Which is clearly on Soviet tree.
And to add T-84, Leopard 2A4/5/6,Strv 122,M1A1,M1A2,HIMARS,F-16 to Ukraine. Which is clearly also a part of Soviet.
5 Likes
no but the forums were bombarded by angry chinese players for a couple weeks and annoyed everyone else.
so its just historic butthurt.
My childhood home had bullet holes from the war you know. we arent strangers to deep scars from war either.
if they are sticking to that then singapore would not be going to china, it would either not see representation, go to japan or to its old colonial home with britain
T-84 is ukrainian, not russian or soviet. its used by the thai so goes to the thai subtree with japan. as should the thai VT4
1 Like
With some of you, I feel the aggresive misinterpretation of the whole thai VT-4 situation cannot be due to misunderstanding.
Algeria to France lamo
6 Likes
its like the old canadian hornet arguemnts from a few months back but on pervatin
1 Like
Speaking of which, I want to ask Gaijin this: What are your reasons for adding Singapore to Chinese Tree?
The Second World War Alliance?
Cold War Alliance/“Friendly” state?
Or…is there something that you can’t say because it will be judged, Gaijin?
2 Likes