South Korean Ground Forces Tech Tree

Suggestions Ground
416

In the end, it means ‘constitutional amendment was not achieved.’ Recall that opinion polls change as easily as the approval ratings for a particular political party. The constitution is codified, and changes require a referendum. (Unlike ‘opinion polls’, all Taiwanese voters participate.)

May or may not, the people of the ROC will one day agree to the position: “We are not China! We are Taiwan, just with Chinese immigrants!” However, the ROC’s constitution, which defines the ROC, does not, at least not yet. When that time comes, I will also be willing to respect the position that the people living in that land have decided for themselves. But at least for now, the most authoritative and reliable reference on this topic is the current ROC Constitution.

As I have explained several times so far, despite their identification with each other as an ethnic community, they do not recognize each other’s government. Therefore, they try to fend for themselves. There is no contradiction here, and that is why their relationship is not just ‘hostile’.

Just as much as the two Chinas, so do the two Koreas. If you were to stop someone on the street in Seoul and ask them, “Should North and South Korea unify?” they might say yes or no. But if you ask, “Are South Korea and North Korea two different nations - you need to think about why ‘nation’ is sometimes used interchangeably with ‘ethnicity’ - with no relation like China or Japan, etc?”, he or she will think you are talking nonsense. Even the armed forces of North and South Korea regard each other’s governments and armies as terrorist organizations or puppets, but teach each other’s people as beings that need to be ‘liberated’. Your worldview - a hivemind where relationships between governments are spread to all citizens - does not explain this.

You imagine that the ‘hostile’ between governments also persists between whole populations. Readers will decide which one best describes Asia, including China and Korea. Unfortunately, according to the number of likes, the parties qualified to judge this debate, the Chinese and Koreans, do not seem to support your argument.

6 Likes
417

If you ask the people of Taiwan today, they identify themselves as Taiwanese overwhelmingly as per polling/survey data available today. And that day has been since 1996.

It is interesting that you say this given ive looked to the opinion of people in Taiwan.

418

I think it would be interesting as a parallel tree, or the Japanese tree, or the Latin American tree.

419

I hope to see equipment from both South Korea and North Korea join the game together

2 Likes
423

Very interesting and insightful findings. I’ve never really seen such information before.

While this does increase creedence of the South-Korean sub-tree concept for Japan, I still don’t believe it is worth more than what a United Korean tree could provide.

3 Likes
426

Just a few weeks ago the North Closed all diplomatic channels with the South and basically said reunification would never happen.

The South feels about the same as many people worry about reunification creating a welfare state where it would take multiple generations to fully integrate Northerners into the South.

Even with a United Korea TT there would still be massive gaps. If started with rank 1, then the majority of low tier would be North Korean meme guns against a bunch of we vehicles. Then you have the air tree that needs basically every T-50 variant built to give it a semblance of Korean identity outside of US/USSR vehicles.

3 Likes
427

There is indeed a lot of military cooperation between South Korea and Japan, but the civilian attitudes of South Korea and Japan are hostile, and the degree of conflict is far beyond your imagination. If Gaijin regards South Korea as a Japanese tree, it may be seen as insulting behavior. In this way, Gaijin cannot make money from Korean/Japanese players, and even servers may be attacked as a result. This is something they need to avoid，Unless they change the Japanese tree to “Blue Dragon” and replace the national flag with other symbols, just like in the “War Game Red Dragon”

10 Likes
432

My point on a United Korean tree has no basis in any actual unification movement. It is based on much the same principle that the Chinese tree is, with both PRC and ROC being part of it.

And I’m sorry, but regardless of rank, both Koreas would be quite uninteresting in their aviation. Yes, ROK would have some exclusive mods, but it would be as interesting as the Israeli mods are while being less numerous, and we all know how interesting Israeli air is to people.

6 Likes
445

Just put China, Korea, Japan and SEA into one big Tree called Dragon Tree or whatever.

Europe (West) into one, North Amurica as one and USSR+Yugoslavia as one or some Commonwealth one

470

topic cleared?

1 Like
471

Yes. This is not the place to discuss something else than what’s suggested in the OP.

5 Likes
479

Also I’m curious about the MD500. This case was the first airplane manufacturing plant in South Korea, but the MD500 was being built prior to this as a “helicopter”, so who was the one building the MD500?

480

Korean Air produced the first Korean-made MD500 on August 20, 1976 (Hugues License)

4 Likes
481

The J85 jet engine of the kf-5 was designed by the United States.
Purchasing processing tools and raw materials from other countries does not call it military cooperation

3 Likes
494

+1
I Like it. Maybe south Korean and Turkish Tech Tree?

2 Likes
501

no

1 Like
543

Hello, please do discuss the contents about South Korean vehicles here. Be on topic.

9 Likes
544

I wonder when we will see the PIP variant of K2

545

I disagree on giving South Korea it’s own TT, I don’t think it has enough vehicles for it. I also don’t think that WT really needs anymore standalone TTs. We have enough as it is. That said, I think South Korea should be a sub tree of the United States. The only alternative I can think of would be Japan, but even when they are defacto allies in both being enemies of China, they refuse to converse with one another during exercises without a US ship to act as an intermediary, and only really share geography as a reason to have SoKo as a Japanese sub tree. The US has extensive military and political ties to Korea, far more so then Japan even if they were on speaking terms. The only argument against such a sub tree would be that the US, strictly speaking, doesn’t need a subtree. If we go by that logic, however, it could be argued we don’t need South Korea in the game either. Moreover, by making South Korea a US subtree, they would benefit from having a plethora of vehicles to fill in any potential br gaps and would get all the shiny new US vehicles that are released, such as the F-35 when it gets added. This would completely sidestep the issue that minor nations have historically faced where the US and Russia get the newest jets, while everyone else is stuck with the older gens and cannot, realistically, compete.

4 Likes
546

Confused

6 Likes