4 Likes
Honestly you as a suggestion moderator I find your wording horrible, people are going to mistake you as an actual staff and stir even more problems up.
12 Likes
If the tree is going to just be copy+paste vehicles, then I’d prefer Singapore just not be added at all. Not that they don’t have unique vehicles, but I just lack the faith in Gajin to give this subtree any significant effort, just like with the Finnish and BeNeLux subtrees.
If this isn’t the case, then I’m split between Japan and just going by nation of origin per vehicle.
The former makes sense if Gajin wants to make Japan the de facto ASEAN tree. Japan also doesn’t have as many indigenous vehicles left to add, so the addition of Singapore would be more impactful gameplay wise.
The latter option is the least offensive and would mean that Singaporean vehicles aren’t occupying spaces in the TT that could be filled by native vehicles.
On a related note, China and Israel both have plenty of native vehicles left to add in the higher BRs, so adding Singapore to either would be a cop-out from genuinely fleshing out either tree with their own vehicles.
1 Like
Incorrect, Israel has very little left especially in light tanks which they desperately need.
3 Likes
Personally, I prefer it to be in Japan along with the other ASEAN countries, but if not, my second option would be to have it in Israel along with Chile. This way, Singapore is responsible for covering the missing spaces in the high ranges and Chile is responsible for the middle and low ranges, thus allowing Israel to have a complete tree with two countries that have close ties with it.
This is what a possible subtree for Chile and Singapore could look like if Gaijin implements it.
8 Likes
EDIT: Please also see my post below detailing relations between Singapore and Israel:
Original Post, relations between Singapore and Japan and/or China:
I do not really care either way, however your statement is false: Foreign relations of Singapore - Wikipedia
Trade agreement with Japan since 2002, but none with China: (That I can see here anyway. I am obviously not an expert. Just showing what I found on Wikipedia)
Second, under the “Diplomatic relations” section: Foreign relations of Singapore - Wikipedia
They have had diplomatic relations with Japan since 1966:
But only have had diplomatic relations with China since 1990:
Again, I do not have strong feeling either way, but the numerous posters claiming that Singapore has “nothing in common”/“nothing to do with” Japan is 100% false and needs to stop being repeated. It is simply not true.
5 Likes
Japan should not get SG.
they have plenty for current meta.
China would be best because of their proximity and that China currently lacks dedicated CAS Aircraft.
Israel, good option because of their military collaboration and can fill up their tree with more vehicle.
4 Likes
What are you even talking about, Singapore is nowhere near China.
4 Likes
Ignore, previous post was edited/corrected 👍
lul, I think you will want to edit that. I will delete this reply after you edit yours.
1 Like
But what about Sweden, they both start with the letter S /j
3 Likes
Cheers lol
1 Like
I’ll admit I’m 50/50 here. I would love to see it in Japan, but then again, Japan already has Thailand and Indonesia (and other ASEAN Nations are also options for future content), so I’m not sure if that would be wise. On the other hand, Israel does need some assistance, and incorporating Singapore would provide them with some interesting new top-tier options, alongside some general filler, to broaden the Israeli Tech tree. Plus, come to think of it, Singapore has a pretty decent Naval force, something Israel in-game would lack.
As for China, honestly, they have boatloads of content that could still be added that would fill the roles that the Singaporean stuff would add. Plus, they have Pakistan and Bangladesh, and could probably get NK or similar. So they don’t really need Singapore as a Sub TT.
10 Likes
But China is geographically closer to NATO countries than vice versa!
2 Likes
There’s sufficient room for both of us. Sure we can be added into Japan, if 1. Gaijin decides to turn it into an ASEAN hub and 2. they decide not to fully expand the potential of the already-existing Thailand and Indonesia subtrees.
1 Like
It’s closer to China geographically speaking than Japan or Israel.
Alliance speaks, Israel is closest with SG
Then we make a new tree, CGCTN (Coalition Geographically Close To Nato)
3 Likes
What does that have to do with anything ???
Thailand is closer to China too and it went to Japan, so I don’t get why you’re pushing this reason
1 Like
Using ties outside of military-wise (commercial and civilian) to justify us going into Japan may seem less relevant as compared to our established defence ties with Israel.
After all, is this game not militarily-related?
Nothing wrong, I just fear this may be used against us whereby Gaijin doesn’t see any differences with adding us into China (We do not have much military-ties with China compared to other regions such as economy).
2 Likes
what about just make a pan-asian like tt. with all ASEAN nations as a individual tt.
SK could be included in it to fill the early and late era tech.
Japan is excluded because they don’t need much more.
1 Like