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
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)
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.
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.
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.
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)
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.
Well beyond that there’s also the case that Taiwan isn’t a formal member of the UN: it’s an unrecognized state.
It would be like separating US states from the USA tree.
Yes, in the practical sense the ROC is independent, but the point still stands.
No it wouldn’t be. No US state has the circumstances akin to this situation. The closest you get in terms of IRL examples would be seperating North and South Korea. Which we do IRL, and afaik no SK vehicles are in the game, and North Korean ones go under the chinese banner for now.
Anyways its a lot of politicking to satiate one nation, point is that the statement i respondend to has been nonsense for a long time. And what you responded with doesnt actually address the fact its only been one nation that lays claim to Taiwan and China.
VIDAR is in the Swedish tree presented as a Norwegian premium.
Saying North Korean vehicles “go under the Chinese banner for now” is very false. All they have is the Shenyang F-5. There is no sub-tree, thus they aren’t currently part of anything.
You get the point I’m making, regardless of the details.
The closest thing to ROC in this regard is Palestine: neither are internationally recognized but both are “observer states” in the UN, not formal nations.
I didn’t intend to address anything, it is a new point.
Regardless, the choice has been made to include ROC in the Chinese tree (not PRC tree) and so it will continue to be, just as BDR and DDR share a tree.
The problem with japanese players is that they need vehicles to fill a lineup, and at times some people are desperate and south korean vehicles are a good option but politically speaking they don’t fit (not that gaijin cares sadly) i’ve been supporting the thailand subtree as an option and south korea has so much vehicles that using it as a subtree it’s a waste of a good tech tree and honestly south korea has a lot of unique vehicles and would make me mad if they add it as a subtree
Thank you for confirming that currently North Korea is represented by one vehicle under the Chinese banner
Norwegian Spec K9 with upgrades like the ability to do direct fire that is sold from South Korea is not a South Korean representation of the vehicle.
Yeah i think its a dumb argument in regards to wether or not Taiwan is a nation or not. A seperate thing to what i was answering, and not one to argue without breaking forum TOS.
Yup, and i think thats fine. It is just an example to show that Gaijin as no issue with putting hostile nations next to one another in a tree.
Also per the flagging it is a PRC tree (aka China and not Taiwan) as they own the most vehicles in the tree which is how Gaijin goes about naming/flagging trees.
You implied multiple vehicles are present in the Chinese tree, thus is not the case.
That is just a laughable idea.
So the almost fully South Korean produced K9 with some Norwegian attachments means little for representing South Korea despite it being the Koreans themselves who kitted this vehicle for Norway? Please.
Sure, but you are comparing two sovereign and recognized states to a case where one is recognized and the other isn’t.
It’s not the same.
Yeah my bad for using plural, but as it stands thats where they are.
Oh i am not to say how much it means for South Koreans, but the vehicle we see in game is the Norwegian representation of their K9 Vidar and not a depiction of one South Korea uses.
Its the closest, it is not the same. I do not think UN representation is the end all and be all of statehood. Neither would China think so considering how long it took for them to get recognition. Other than that its pretty much identical in how the states were created except Taiwan now doesn’t claim lordship over China where as China does. Where as North and South Korea from my understanding does have some ““wants”” for unification.
