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.
gaijin dosent even take geographical concerns in order to add vehicles lol, they take relations, and up to a certain points political relations, that’s why south korea and japan will not be together or why germany wont get stuff like poland
5 Likes
Absolutely a valid point, I just wanted to share what I found in regards to Singapore-Japan.
I was just looking at Singapore’s ties to Israel on Wikipedia too, very close ties, and looks like they have Bilateral Relations for Defense purposes too:
Diplomatic relations since 1969: Foreign relations of Singapore - Wikipedia
Bilateral relations: Foreign relations of Singapore - Wikipedia
EDIT: Even more information on Singapore-Israel relations, full Wikipedia page: Israel–Singapore relations - Wikipedia
Screenshot of Military section:
5 Likes
Cheers mate, at least some rationale being spoken. Hope you’ve seen my edit of the last part to avoid any confusion!
3 Likes
Cheers! 🍻 I ran out of likes already for the day 😂 Will give your messages some likes later. EDIT: I also edited my post above to show your edit 👍
2 Likes
Much rather not have it in Japan. Yes it makes the most sense if you want to make it a stronger tree, but politically it doesnt make much sense. The ties between the Singaporean and Japanese militaries is not that strong, and if you would look at the history especially in WW2 you would see the vast atrocities the Japanese committed in Singapore. I would suggest those who are unaware to google “Sook Ching” and read the wiki article.
Israel on the other hand makes the most sense, given just how much cooperation there is. They were some of the first to recognise Singapore and helped to set up its Military by covertly sending advisors. Much of the equipment still in use also either has Israeli components or were straight up Israeli. E.g. F-16D+ is an F-16I, SPYDER air defense, Rafael Samson 30mm turret on the Hunter AFV, AH-64D with Saraph-style upgrades, Elbit COAPS CITV on Leo 2SG and more. Doctrinally the SAF is also similar to Israel with its conscription and first-strike with air dominance in a war. The issue with this is that much of the Air and Heli trees would overlap. There isnt much difference (especially gameplay wise) between F-16C/D Block 52 and F-16C/D Block 40, and next to none between F-16D+ and F-16I. Adding F-16A Block 15 OCU would be redundant when you have like 7 other F-16s as well. AH-64Ds would be near identical. The A-4SU was also upgraded similarly to the Ayit and would fill basically the same niche as it. Really the only unique additions would be the Hunter F.74S, F-5S and arguably the F-15SG as it would be the first F-15 with AESA (though late F-15Is and F-15IAs would also have AESA) and has MAWS too.
Adding to China wouldnt make much sense also. Yes Singapore is majority ethnically Chinese, but most Singaporeans do not identify as Chinese. The same way how Australians and Americans come from the same ethnicity as Brits but do not identify as British. Military ties are also again not that close, with only low level excercises held together. We have deeper cooperation/hold higher level excercises with the Thais, Aussies, Germans and French (arguably the Italians too) if that provides any context for how low down the rankings excercises held with China are.
8 Likes
The Singaporean vehicles were promised to the Israeli tree 3000 patches ago!!!
All jokes aside, i believe japan will have sufficient vehicles to flesh out their tree through other ASEAN vehicles. On the other hand, Singapore with our close defence ties to Israel can bring light vehicles and ifvs which are sorely lacking in the tree, along with things that arent a merkava or m60 derivative.
If Pakistani vehicles can be added into the Chinese tree due to their close defence ties and operation of Chinese vehicles, i see no reason why Singapore should not be added to Israel for the same reasons. Just to give more examples of the closeness of SG-ISR ties, our helis are upgraded to IAF specs, or have israeli protection suites. We also jointly developed the MATADOR with Israel and Germany, in addition to the Blue Spear. This is not to mention the plethora of other israeli systems we use for assorted applications such as CONTROPS optical systems etc.
9 Likes
Yes that is a map well done
maybe I’m misremembering but wasnt Finnish vehicles kinda needed to add lineups & backup vehicles? That was ages ago tho so Im not sure
Besides if we’re talking about geographically, Singapore is much closer to us Indonesians, as such they should be a sub-sub-tree of ours, in the JP tree. Im sure this is the most optimal scenario /j
but honestly speaking, I think Israel is a very very good option for Singapore. Sub-trees should be for nations which are lacking in terms of vehicles and as such need help because of domestic scarcity or the like, China doesn’t need that help because they have tons of very useful stuff to be added
im not saying Israel is lacking in these regards, what im saying is that the current implementation of Israel can be described as a bit of a barebones tree
1 Like
And the Fulcrums as well!
Added even more Military details to my Singapore-Israel post above, bottom section. There is a completely separate Wikipedia page detailing Singapore-Israel relations.
You guys will probably be interested in the added info. It lists a bunch of specific vehicles that were traded/sold etc: Placement of Singapore in-game - #39 by SilentTracker
1 Like
in my honest opinion, Singapore going to Israel will help with the problems Israel has with its current string of MBTs, the 2A4SG will help heaps with armor, if japan evolves into the ASEAN holder with ASEAN being the full sub tree is the only ever time i will accept it as i do play japan and after Thailand got added japan really doesn’t need anymore vehicles then what it has right now.
china has more vehicles in its domestic use it could have that will fill the CAS gaps, like later iterations of the J-10, J-16, or the Chinese acquired Su-30Mkk/MK2 are all good examples of this, or adding the the ROCAF’s F-16 block 70/72, and the AIDC F-CK-1, to add more effective CAS options to china’s table, as well.
as for ground i firmly believe China is being sandbagged for suggestions passed to the developers for ground as there are quite a few vehicles i have seen passed but not implemented that would solve a few of China’s ground issues on both the PLA and from ROCA respectively, both in terms of ground based assets and helicopter assets also.
i personally advocate for singapore for israel due to the factor of israel has limiting options and quite frankly pretty big BR gaps that singapore can fill with its IFV/Light tanks which would give isreal more mid BR spotter vehicles, meaning they have more flexability to adapt to changes in a match, and giving israel the Leopard 2A4SG will give israel another option for a top MBT and could also help with players wanting to push fights harder or have more vehicles to keep the fight going as they see fit.
1 Like
Japan or China (ROC), Could go either way since there is plenty of justification to both.
I think a better sub tree option for Israel would be Greece instead of Singapore, Greece also has a close relationship with Israel and they have defense agreements and do joint military exercises frequently on top of them being geographically closer.
Israel also shares their technology with Greece and has even upgraded vehicles for them in the past.
There is also a suggestion thread to give them Chile, So they have a few good options already.
Not against them getting Singapore, Its just that there are plenty of other options worth considering.
2 Likes
the 2A4SG will help heaps with armor
They can solve this issue by actually Fixing the Merkavas. Israel can fill all the gaps by themselves.
2 Likes
Please do not use duplicate accounts, or make throwaway accounts to push your vote.
→ If you feel called out by this please remove the false votes, they will not be counted anyways.
5 Likes