Vietnam isn’t in the Chinese tree so long as no sub-tree is announced.
Single vehicles aren’t necessarily indicative of anything.
4 Likes
Generally speaking no, it doesnt mean that the country is fixed to that tree. Usually more so the case when tech tree vehicles are added. Usually other country vehicles are either premiums, or event vehicles. So as it currently stands im perfectly fine with stating that Vietnam is in the Chinese tech tree. Like i get nuance, but its more to paint a picture that Gaijin has a history of not caring, so why should they in this situation when arguably they have pushed through worse before.
And if you are pointing at the Finnish ITO-90M in the Frence tech tree, that is actually a fine given i believe France made that, among many other vehicles, as tech demonstrator for the Crotale NG system.
ItO 90M likely was added to France to prevent another SK-105 fiasco, but another thing to point at is Italian aircraft that used to be in the German tech tree.
nah, more likely they saw it as a legitemate system that will be the cheapest, easiest, and dare i say it laziest way to add Crotale NG to France. Sometimes its good and okay to add lazy vehicles to tech trees.
There were plenty of other vehicles they could have chosen in terms of Tech Demonstrators for that Crotale System.
Crotale NG - (multiple chassis) - France - War Thunder - Official Forum
Yeah, and if you make a tree for that nation, its reasonable to migrate stuff over. But if im gonna say it, back before the Italian tree, Italy was in the German tree, and i would have said so at the time aswell. If that at some point changes, great Vietnam would nolonger be in the Chinese tech tree, but for the time being it hasnt. Same way Finland was in the German tech tree before they became a sub-tree for Sweden. And how Norway currently is in Swedish tech tree, even if that is entirely plausible to change in the future.
as much as i would love to see SK as a subtree for japan i dont want it to go as a subtree due to the ammount of unique vehicles a SK tech tree could offer
3 Likes
The answer is: its complicated, and you misunderstood what im saying. ROC consider themselves China. The PRC says no, theyre the real China.
China is commiting brinkmanship, but they havent actually invaded Taiwan yet, and the US Naval carrier strike group nearby would like a word.
China ruthlessly dominated vietnam for over a thousand years and tried to backstab them again in 1979. The Vietnamese hate China, and rightfully so. Gaijin is foolish to add that vehicle, although maybe its the one SPAA china gave to Vietnam during The Vietnam War. Vietnam refused weapons aid from China. The Phòng Không is also in the USSR tree from an event.
How? Thats wrong and frikin stupid. Thats just lazy to say “oh yeah gaijin just does it this way”. Gaijin just does a lot of things terribly, time to fix that. Its why so many people hate them
While I agree, exactly to your point, its important we consider peoples feelings and history, especially if its not ours, because we naturally wont feel the same feelings that they will. It should be up to the SK and Japanese community to decide. But ive never seen a SK handle say “yes absolutely, I think adding my country to Japan is the best representation for warthunder”, generally neutral or to the contrary, which is a bad answer to send it all home on
4 Likes
Weren’t you the one who said that Vietnam should go in the same tree as South Korea.
Which wouldve been a combined S Korean, Thailand, Phillipines, Tawain, Vietnamese tree someone suggested, similar to a combined Nordic pact tree, which I later redacted in another comment after I learned about the local murder of that woman.
Thats not where Id want it to go anyways. Its extremely hard to always meet everyones criteria, so when new information arises, thats where you need to have humility and roll with the punches instead of doubling down
I suggested S Korea go to the US tree, and for Vietnam, im not even touching that anymore other than mentioning who they shouldn’t go to. Taiwan being in the PRC tree messes other things up too.
Edit: as it stands Vietnamese favoritism of both the US and Russia is high, the soviets used the Vietnamese as a proxy, but it helped Vietnam in the war technically. The US recognize Vietnam as sovereign and important geopolitically and we both hate China, and the general US consensus is “we’re sorry, we got too scared of communism in the 60s, eff those old guys who made the rules, Vietnam war was bad and McCarthyism stupid”, and there are current talks of diplomatic defense relations. Vietnam is now in a conundrum of still supporting Russia (I seriously dont know why), and the US. Itd have to go to one of those TTs if any and there wasnt a combined ASEAN tree
2 Likes
Therefore, I strongly suggest to establish a Canada - United States - Mexico (CUM) joint tree.
9 Likes
Better answer than a lot of current situations in the game. So yeah i dont see why i should take politics into account outside of minimizing DDoS and maximizing interest in a tree.
If there was a history of Gaijin caring, id take it into consideration. They clearly don’t, so i dont see how neutral to negative would stop two trees being together.
If you think its bad, sure. But realistically this is very mundane compared to other pairings in game
Edit:
And no, they havent for decades.
Its really not. The only thing that is complicated how much people pretend it is and what hoops countries go through to pretend to continue the status quo.
Ah ok, we are to pretend pre-2022 situation is not incredibly similar. Offcourse there is nuance and differences
If Gaijin cared about history and politics they wouldnt add Taiwanese vehicles into chinese tech tree, same with South African tree in UK. Adding S.Korea as its own tech tree will just add more and more clones which is honestly annoying at this point. Israeli tech tree is honestly one of the worst tech trees in the game, they are worth grinding only for Merkavas, otherwise you constantly play same vehicles on different BR. And adding it to Japan will make sense, since it will increase the size of relatively small tech tree and make it more diverse. As to avoid controversy, they could rename the Japanese tech tree into something that would include multiple east/southeast asian countries. (But seeing South Korea within a game in any form is already a win for me because I am really excited to see South Korean vehicles)
1 Like
Hence the United Korean concept, allows to the potential to leave out unnecessary C&P
6 Likes
I would say United asia is better option, considering that other east/southeast asian countries vehicles can be added there too, while North Korea can be added to China (and they already have some North Korean vehicles if I recall correctly)
Nah, that is a step way too far.
Iran and Turkey could work as independent Israeli styled trees and India could do so too.
There are a plethora of reasons why this is a poor idea beyond that too.
2 Likes
I think turkey will be just spread around like butter between western tech trees. But i am not sure. They will have to increase the number of vehicles in Japanese tech tree one way or another because otherwise it will just die
Personally I’d say Thailand is a superior option than South Korea and suffices for this demand.
If passed to devs is anything to trust (which it more often than not isn’t) Thailand could very well be on the way.
4 Likes
Adding them separately would have caused more controversy than adding them together. Taiwan’s official name is the Republic of China, and both countries identify as being the sole legitimate government of all of China.
Where else should they have gone? Britain had a lot to do with South African vehicles historically. The MBT that South Africa still uses today is a Centurion derivative, for example.
I know that Japan needs new vehicles. I completely get that. But they shouldn’t be able to be handed vehicles they had nothing to do with on a silver platter, especially when there’s an idea that actually makes sense - Thailand.
I’m not sure where this leaves South Korean vehicles. Objectively, it would make the most sense to add them to the American tree if they were to go anywhere, since they are direct allies, South Korea uses American vehicles, and the Americans have been heavily involved in the development of South Korean vehicles. Of course, you could say the Americans don’t need it, and you would be right, but it doesn’t change what I said previously in this sentence.
Personally I’m not in favour of an independent tree, even if it is combined with the North, I feel it would be implemented as another Israel and I don’t really want that. But that’s what Gaijin has been seemingly leaning towards more than anything.
2 Likes
And what do Thai vehicles have to do with Japan lol, especially modern ones
Note that I’m not against the subtree, if anything I support it, but let’s be real, Thailand doesn’t have any “vehicle relation” to Japan other than some early props and the Ha-Go
Although same could be said for Finland, other than the ANTI II, Draken and some trainers, majority of their equipment is from Germany or the USSR (aside from indigenous vehicles)
1 Like
Considering quite a few of these props aren’t in the tree yet and the Type 83 Ha-Go with the digital camo would be really funny (and not even useless if it gor the Type 1 shell the current ones are lacking for some reason) there is at least significantly more than nothing.
And I will be severely disappointed if Thonburi is added later than Yamato
Spoiler
In modern day by Japanese nature we generally don’t have many military exports anywhere, but I do vaguely remember Thai AH-1Fs received from Japan.
In general that still puts it close to the likes of Hungary or Finland, unlike Korea would be. Thailand has a military alliance, techinical connection and good relations for well over a century, Korea has none of that, so I see where the argument is coming from.
3 Likes
It is interesting how people say this, but it has not been the case for decades. Iirc the last time one could pretend they did was like early 2000s.