There are failures for the vast majority of nations in game that is not unique to any one faction and I desire them all to be fixed regardless of what I play
Japan can get VT4 and T-84 after getting Thailand, these are two top tanks, so I don’t think Japan is missing top tanks. Well, maybe the VT4 isn’t so good (haha, if the VT4 does make it into the Japan tech tree I expect their reaction), and as for low-level vehicles like the Japan TT, the Southeast Asian countries I mentioned earlier can be added. Soviet-style equipment can enrich its gameplay. But if we join the real political relationship, Indonesia will never enter the Chinese TT, and I know this very well. As for Singapore, he may go to United Kingdom/Israel/China, after all, Singapore will also be visa-free to China this year… I’ve talked too much about politics, sorry.
Yes, whether it is China, Israel, or United Kingdom, France, it should be reasonably repaired
3 Likes
What do you think of the VIDAR (K9 Thunder from South Korea) in the swedish tree
As far as I know, that’s Norway (or is it Sweden?). I don’t remember) purchased a foreign trade vehicle, what happened to me?
Yeah Norway purchased them from South Korea but would you add at K2 black panther also from South Korea to wherever Poland ends up since Poland purchased those
1 Like
If it is a foreign trade vehicle, I think it is normal for a vehicle from one country to enter another country without adding sub-lines.
1 Like
This was only meant to be an example. I don’t know which tanls just every nation has, or what nations players would want to see their vehicles in the Chinese tree.
What I meant to say was that I undestand the need for vehicles that China has currently. Though this can just as easily be solved by fixing Chinese vehicles, Gaijin seems to be slow to do so.
I fully believe their complaints to be justified, their tanks need to be fixed, and a lot of their technology, especially SAM, needs to be added.
Just because I don’t agree with Indonesia and Singapore in the Chinese tree does not mean I want to dismiss their complaints. Instead I would be willing to help look for alternative solutions.
True, for Japan the issue lies mainly in support vehicles, anti aircraft systems and in their barren air tree.
I believe west/NATO leaning ASEAN countries would complete the Japanese techtree, making it comparable to France or Britain (including their respective subtrees) in potential.
Meanwhile China can get their ASEAN allies (Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia) alongside their other allies (Pakistan, Bangladesh, North Korea, Iran), this would easily elevate potential to levels of other superpowers like the USSR and USA. North Korea and Iran both have their high tier tank options, the ROC will receive M1A2T in the future. In addition Chinese vehicles need to be implemented with their correct capabilities. I have also seen some of the current Chinese tank developments and they look very promising.
This would keep both trees relatively thematically concise, bring them up to the standards of other trees and hopefully fix issues domestic vehicles cannot fix.
What about joint venture vehicles like the Cadillac “Jaguar” prototype proposed as an upgrade to China’s type 59
Unfortunately, most of the Chinese community (not on this forum, but on baidu tieba etc.) have already given up hope. It has been more than two years since the addition of ZTZ99A and over hundreds of bug reports that have detailed inaccuracies have been reported, only to be met with “not a bug,” or when we report on better APFSDS rounds for Chinese tanks, say that its “classified information” when it is not, and close the report/forum post. In fact, there are ways in which the ZTZ99A got WEAKER after bug reporting.
Of course, there are some that are like me that don’t really support the addition of too many tech trees, because even if the domestic vehicles that are added are horrible and are inaccurate, I’m playing Chinese TT for Chinese vehicles mainly. But there are also CN players that don’t have time to play other TTs other than China, since they are hard at work or studying constantly, and they do not have good experience so when they see that Leopard may be added to CN TT, they are open to it. It’s not really a political thing, it’s just some CN players treat the Chinese TT with an “whatever” attitude and “anything goes”
6 Likes
Yeah, Gaijin do like to just pick and choose what they change or how they implement things. Though I believe giving up will not make them change anything, just tell them what they are doing is accepted, which should not be.
I don’t want to go too far off topic now, but I made a suggestion for a system to rework subtrees in a way that they don’t interfere with the original nation. It still retains the shared lineups, but effectively has separate trees for all nations in a folder. Give it a read if you want, and maybe if you see ways to improve it I’d always like to hear those as well.
I understand that, I used to play all nations at first, but currently I don’t have the time for that either and mostly play only one. I hope I’ll have more time soon, since there is a lot in other trees that interests me.
I also understand being open to Leopards in the Chinese tree, as a concept I don’t even think I would mind it myself. I just don’t agree to Singapore and Indonesia in particular entering the Chinese tree. I do support other options for bringing western MBTs into the Chinese tree, such as the ROC M1A2T, or potential other nations options, since I am sure there are some.
I still believe though that China not only has enough domestic options, but also subtree options that adding Singapore or Indonesia is not necessary for the Chinese tree. I listed earlier Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, North Korea and Iran, and I am sure there are other candidates I missed.
Over half the tank is green lol
3 Likes
Worse than T-80 even. I have no idea why Gaijin think this is accurate.
If I had to make one choice, I would choose China, because the main basis is the Type 59, like the F-14A IRIAF, but as far as I know, China and the United States each have a different prototype, so the answer to this question is obvious.
1 Like
I know of the prototype that Cadillac built I didn’t know that China also built their own prototype that’s very cool
1 Like
Thank you for your vision and help with the Chinese TT, but we really don’t seem to have much choice, and Singapore is almost the only country I can think of that can complement the top queue and have friendly relations with China.
It may seem like a good idea to make a separate country folder, but as long as you can get into the same queue, the bickering won’t stop. I used to think that ASEAN would become an independent TT, but it seems that Gaijin intends to split it up between the Chinese TT and the Japan TT, which inevitably leads to a situation where both TTs have both Western and Russian-style equipment. The Chinese Leopard 2SG is a bit strange (although most of my compatriots are not against it, and even have some expectations), and the Japan flanker is also strange (SU-30MKM from Malaysia), both of which seem to cause heated discussions. I’m curious how Gaijin will handle these issues.
Sadly, the prototype was forgotten in a dilapidated warehouse, and recent photos show that the prototype is not in good condition.
That thing now only has a worn-out chassis, you know, the turrets are made by United States. The parts of the Jaguar I were disassembled and fitted to the Jaguar II, so only the chassis remained in China.
I was able to find the location of the Cadillac gage prototype on Google Street view at 255 stone rode, Slidell Louisiana sitting next to a regular type 59
1 Like