I doubt they’ll include vehicles that require seperate radar or tracking vehicles anytime soon. Gaijin has been very insistent on self contained SPAA.
That’s the whole point of sub-trees no? A somewhat related nation gets added to an already existing tree to add more options and sure up tech tree deficiencies.
That’s the point, Type 11 requires the vehicle only for mid course correction, LOAL and target search, just like the Type 81.
The Trailer mounted system isn’t an idea to make it possible, but an idea for a seperate version of the Type 11 that is added in addition to a basic launcher at a higher BR, since it would have these abilities the launcher vehicle can’t do alone.
2 Likes
So I keep saying that Korea and Japan are not related… They are not related to the same level as holding FlaRakRad…
2 Likes
Are you crazy people? New nation, made of adversary states, one is like china but much worse, obsolete soviet era tech, other has handful of high tech toys and some of US gear?
last thing this game needs is another scuffed nation. I would even toss out israel if you asked me.
Subtree of poor japan, sure, japan has smallish techtree and introducing one line of interesting korean toys in it would be a good idea, like the south africa with GB.
Subree? Why not
New nation? Hell nah!
4 Likes
Combined Korea tree and Thailand subtree for Japan seems like a good option. Most sub trees start at low tier so Thailand would be a better option for Japan.
6 Likes
Japan tree complement is Southeast Asia subtree, that’s it.
1 Like
Thailand has low tier options? That aren’t Japanese?
course not, they can try indonesia, they got a lot of Japanese and Dutch early ww2 trainer and fighters.
And in the long run Japan will see Mirage, A-4, F-5, F-15EX, Rafale, Su-27, Su-30, Hawk, and more F-16 variant.
They have Japanese options that aren’t in the tree yet, as well as others like the H-75N for example. They even have a few completely domestic aircraft, even if those would be at a very low BR.
Tanks are a similar thing, with Japanese vehicles and others as well. Some personal favorites for me here are the T17 armed with a Japanese cannon, or the Type 76 40mm SPAAG.
Naval they probably have the most unique options, like the Thonburi class that would be really interesting to see.
I’d also hope for a bunch of Thai camouflages for vehicles already in game. I’ve been wanting to fly a Thai Ki 27 for a long time, but my only option is a user skin that other players aren’t able to see. There is a nice marketplace Ki 43 III camo however, which if I remember correctly is the only instance of a foreign operator of Japanese vehicles in the tree, apart from the US test paint for the Ki 45 and G8N.
3 Likes
Had me in the first half king
I argue the US top tier MBTs are some of the worste MBTs. Because their armor profiles are just so bad, and are extremely loud you always get counter ambushed. Plus they have a bad reload in comparison to say the Leclerc or Type 10, and dont even get an autloader with an equal reload time like the T-80s
Alternatively, I say again this poll is Biased and doesnt offer S Korea to any other nation as a sub tree. I strongly recommend the US if it must be a subtree.
Or…a second proposition. Moving the ROC tree out of the PRC tree, and giving China PRC, N Korea instead.
Then, Putting ROC/ROK/Phillipines and Viet Nam all in one “Pacific Pact” tree. Every single one of those nations is politically against the PRC and 3/4 are supported mutually by the US MIC, with Viet Nam currently building new relations with the US and undergoing massive “De-chinasization”.
This would be the most fair, and politically correct way of doing this, and everything get implementated! The problem is the ROC tree will for a fact eventually get SEPV3s…thats absolutely unacceptable, as PRC players will be using them, with ZTZs, those SEPs are meant to fight the PRC IRL, and making them bolster the PRC in game would be comically senseless.
Said very well.
I fully agree a US subtree is a fantastic Idea, as the Abrams get methodical, and are underwhelming, on top of the fact of the US’ and S Korea’s military and political history. We even fought a masive war together over the entire landmass of Korea.
But again, back to the problem. Russian mains absolutely wont have that. Every time Ive suggested it, ive been hit by a russian fanboy claiming “america is too OP”
So how would a combined “Pacific Pact” tree fly, with the ROC/ROK/Viet Nam/Phillipines? Then having N Korea replace the ROC in the PRC tree.
This would also solve the issue of PRC China getting to use the very same SEPV3s given to the ROC in its lineups with its ZTZs. 3 of those countries are heavily supported by the US MIC, and Viet Nam is building new relations with the US, with very high US favorability.
Curious on your thoughts
People here simply put too much political biases on whether or not certain country should be an independent-tree/subtree, this is an FPS game not some creepy model UN simulations. If a united Korean tree is more profitable than a Japanese sub-tree then it would happen, which I believe is very likely as gaijin would want more Korean players over benefiting existing Jap tree players. It’s also worth to mention that all minor “nations” in game (Norway, South Africa etc.) has much less market potential than major “nations”. In this sense Thailand is more like to be a sub-tree of Japan, unless Gaijin wants to use Thailand as a base nation to create an ASEAN tree, a similar approach from Sweden/Scandinavian.
3 Likes
Honestly, at this point I do just see a combined Korean tree happening
Please do not create any poll in General Discussion section, this section should be used to discussion about any issue in-game. Please use proper section to submit and discuss any suggestion.
Thread locked.
2 Likes