I can think of a few places south Korea could go? Unified TT with north Korea is always a possibility and I don’t think the Devs would see many complaints from north Koreans about it, although that may leave China without a subtree. Perhaps South korea with a few other US aligned nations like Singapore or Malaysia?
At this point, Pakistan is a de facto subtree for China.
7 Likes
I’m surprised there wasn’t a proper subtree update yet, with either Pakistan or even Pakistan + Bangladesh
3 Likes
Word is that it’s going to be a US subtree, which would honestly be just awful and such a stretch just to get them added.
Imagine Israel gets it’s own nation tree and SK gets clumped with the US instead. I really hope that leak is false.
3 Likes
Amazing work!
These “obvious” or “various” reasons seem to be rooted in political discussion, which as far as I can recall: gaijin, staff and moderators have made several comments on how political discussions should be avoided when it comes to this game. Something I couldn’t agree more with and is the reason when bandaids were ripped off for Finland, Hungary, Taiwan to be added into the game, they were there purely for the sake of adding more nations to play with.
A South Korean tree with the Japanese tree isn’t some mark of subservience to another nation and this predisposed notion is what’s caused some annoying and ultimately useless controversies. No. The whole point is adding the nation to the game as itself with the most sensible connections and as another fun set of vehicles to fill missing spaces.
Facts are:
-
They complement each other with enough additions to be considered a more full tree
-
Culturally they are similar
-
Geographically they are close
-
Both are nato allies and in extension allies with each other
-
Similar vehicles in parts due to war leftovers, post-war imports & alliances
-
Korea was occupied by japan during ww2
Gaijin is going to rustle someone’s feathers either way, and unfortunately they’ve held off because of that. Only way they wont is if Koreas get their own tree. If they refuse to do it, because idk it cuts into profits or something and Israel being a bad notion as an independant tree, Japan is the best option. Even with Thailand they’re going to be lacking as they have 1 additional top tier MBT to add (as an example, they aren’t a nation with the most options relative to other nations.) US on the other hand has so many vehicles in their tree already and uncountable future options which haven’t been added yet, it would be bloated and unfair to others. The only 2 points they do share is nato alliance and defense contracting.
What are these reasons to counter these points again?
They complement each other with enough additions to be considered a more full tree
- Any country could do that but it doesn’t mean it should be there especially when there isn’t any military connection between.
Culturally they are similar
- They aren’t similar, how you came to that conclusion?
Geographically they are close
- Yes they are close but what is the point you trying to make here? We have SA/India in the UK and Thailand in JPN. We also got several singular vehicles like the Australian M1A1 in the US or Canadian 2A4M in Germany, so that they close near each other doesn’t mean much.
Both are nato allies and in extension allies with each other
- They are NATO partners and not allies. South Korea and Japan are also no allies in any means and this can be checked on the Japanese MOD website.
Similar vehicles in parts due to war leftovers, post-war imports & alliances
- If this is a reason to justify S.Korea in Japan then we can have any country in Japan with “similar vehicles” in that sense.
Korea was occupied by japan during ww2
- As you mentioned, Gaijin tries to avoid political things and this is one of them. So this should not be considered as a justification.
Every subtree in-game has 1 thing in common. They all share a military connection with the nation they are in. They all either bought and used the vehicles from that country, have or had a military alliance/pact together or they joint developed and received assistance from the nation.
You can also see this with the majority of singular vehicles which are mostly placed based on the origin of the vehicle like the T-72M2, however it isn’t always the case.
I doubt Gaijin would let a United Korean go especially with the popularity and potential it has, they already passed for consideration before and even mentioned it in a QnA. However let’s say they won’t add an Unified Korean TT then South Korea still has several countries/nations in-game which it actually go to as these nations actually have an military connection to South Korea like Israel (although a weird combination).
Japan also has many alternative options which have been mentioned many times. Thailand is one of them and now likely Indonesia with the addition of the Indonesian Mi-35, countries which Japan has actual military ties with.
9 Likes
They complement each other with enough additions to be considered a more full tree
Except for the fact that Thailand and Indonesia already does that job arguably better than SK ever can and that’s not discounting the other ASEAN nations like the Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore or even Vietnam
Culturally they are similar
Not an argument. Even if it is then why have an independent Japanese TT at all and lump JP with China since Korea is culturally similar to Japan the same way Japan is culturally similar is to China or Korea is culturally similar to China
Geographically they are close
Australia, Canada, South Africa and India in the UK TT makes that point mute
Both are nato allies and in extension allies with each other
Their “allies” in the same way the Third Reich and the Soviet Union are “allies” during the early second world war so no they are not really allies to each other, only sharing the same enemies and allies and that’s increasingly put under scrutiny
Similar vehicles in parts due to war leftovers, post-war imports & alliances
Only the DPRK used grandfathered/captured Japanese equipment at large scale, SK in contrast overwhelmingly used leftover US equipment. SK used more British equipment than JP equipment
Korea was occupied by Japan during ww2
I would not use that argument if I was you and I’m just going to leave it at that
also there’s also one thing you forget to factor in
SK never used any Japanese made weapons postwar and vice versa which I already touched on. And no whatever SK made weapons that the ASEAN nations operate do not count since they aren’t under the Japanese flag and they are for the export market anyways. In contrast the majority of ASEAN nations used Japanese built weapons and equipment even post war. The Philippines for example is acquiring Japanese built destroyers and Hueys. Vietnam used Japanese built COIN aircraft in the form of the FD-25 as well as acquiring basically a unique sub-variant of the Aso class Patrol Boat for the Vietnamese Coast Guard. And that’s not including Thailand or Indonesia which is self-explanatory.
Would also like to add that (Most) of the ASEAN nations has just as strong of a tie if not stronger to Japan militarily than to SK. Indonesia and North Vietnam in particular had a significant portion of their Militaries having member that are ex IJA/IJN holdouts & ex Kampetai operatives in them. South Korea in contrast booted any high ranking Japanese official the second when the time is right for that
Even with Thailand they’re going to be lacking as they have 1 additional top tier MBT to add
Refer back to the first point
Israel being a bad notion as an independent tree
The Hungarian, Norwegian Air Subtree, Indian and Finnish Subtrees more generally are bad notions of subtree so you aren’t proving anything here. Also the main reason why Israel is it’s own TT to begin with is because the player base got fed up with every Israeli vehicle being locked behind a paywall even if it’s lowkey funny. And the way things are going there’s a decent chance that India could get the same treatment. What I’m saying here is even if SK is added as a subtree of Japan it will never work, won’t last long as a subtree and end up being an independent TT anyways due to backlash.
10 Likes
Lot of these are petty excuses, but I’ll answer the more ‘reasonable’ ones.
If you know anything about asian history, Japanese are a break-away from Koreans and they share lot of influence. You can even see it in the grammatical and aesthetical choice similarity. This point would be too long to continue, but you saying “no they aren’t” is a blatant lie.
They are allies. Period. Not even in the way USSR and NSG was, because they don’t plan to go to war with each other and infact during recent times have tried warming up relations over the continuous uncertain security climate in asia. They also do extensive cultural exchange & trade with each other.
Korea having being occupied by japan is not a political discussion, it is a historical fact. During that period south koreans were drafted, around 300k people, and by all means did fight in ww2 alongside Japan. Also if you would actually research into the background, their military backbone when they became independant consisted of IJA remnants and influence. “No” is just a blatant lie again.
Because of their similar vehicles, they would complement each other actually. You have to choose if that’s a bad or a good thing when you’re also saying nations that got added like Hungary are bad. I’m assuming you mean the disparity from eastern equipment. For Korea-Japan, though, this isn’t the case as they have equipment based on US & Nato designs. Rather than other ASEAN soviet equipment, the parity with SK-JP would be better.
I didn’t address this more in my first reply, but long-term there would be no backlash. Each nation has that vocal minority that will get pissed off about some additions. While I can’t speak for everyone, personally I’m not fully against the way Gaijin implements nations, I’m not sure I see your issue with it. People have gotten it mixed up that just because a nation is added to complement another, it’s a sign of cultural subservience. It’s not and that notion is ridiculous. If SK would get added, They would be their own independant nation with their own flag. They aren’t doing it because of stupid political reasons to mess with sensitive issues.
Someone in another topic said it well that the new generations shouldn’t bear the sins of their forefathers. Arguing non-sensically on politics makes it only worse. I’m guessing that’s the whole idea here. I, for one, respect both nations and wish to see SK added after a long due in a way that makes sense. If not individually, then complementing the existing JP tree.
What a genius.
How the hell did forced conscription from the colonised Korea become a perfect link for being sub-tree…?
Yes, it might be a historical fact
But also, it will be serious political discussion as I claimed in other topic.
Congrats, you lit the flame on the fireworks.
And proved why we can’t have it as our option
In your doomed theory, post-war Germany is the direct successor of the Third Reich because the Bundeswehr adopted the Wehrmacht/Luftwaffe remnants.
:/
Sorry, I don’t know much about Koreans, but this feels like a blatant lie to me.
If you respect SK, I think you wouldn’t use forced conscription as evidence to support your short-sighted theory.
Yes, there will be a vocal minority that will get pissed off.
(Unsure that reaaally be a minority though)
And that is why WE CANNOT GET SK AS A SUB-TREE OF JAPAN.
They will force their military contractor not to give a license to Gaijin by political threats.
It is their commercial risks.
No matter
- whether you want it or not
- I want it or not
- Gaijin want it or not
We won’t gonna be getting licences from them.
And no SK subtree to JP will happen.
Why are you continuing to push the most controversial option when there are less dangerous ones that exist?
6 Likes
Exactly this. Especially now that the Indonesian Mi-35P was added, which opens up a ton of opportunities I really don’t know why “Korea to Japan” of all things is brought up again instead…
6 Likes
Well, if there were no other options in sight just like old times.
I might disagree as same as now
Because I don’t want to see [Squid Game in WT Forum].
But at least I would’ve understood why that opinion showed.
But we all know that tides are turned.
- Gaijin officially terminated the option of the SK subtree to JP
- We got Thailand instead
- Maybe we could have another option from ASEAN, such as Indonesia too.
I really, really can’t understand why ‘the most controversial option’ was resurrected.
3 Likes
Ah, now we are at THAT level, we have to dig all the way to the B.C. to just make a sub-tree.
Cultural exchange and trade means absolutely nothing cause countries can do that even with the potential enemy. Also military cooperation is still nonexistent.
That also really means nothing cause there’s really not much options when when it comes to new poor independent country.
And even then, korea barely used any heavy IJA equipment cause IJA destroyed most of them. And that influence vanished after the US came.
How? Tell me. I think Asean countries can provide more options, especially with cold war equipment.
More like cause Korea has absolutely nothing to do with Japan??? Are you making some ‘stupid’ conspiracy?
No military connection.
No reason to add cause JPN now have Thailand and Indonesia.
And people’s are still talking about JPN…
4 Likes
Downplaying my points won’t help your counter reasoning. Also to make myself clear on something I never intended to be disrespectful. What Japan did during ww2 was wrong but I shouldn’t even need to say the obvious. You would think that overcoming grievances would involve both acknowledging history, but also acceptance. Keeping on repeating “you can’t say facts” or analogies to something much worse fuels the flames more. This was also not meant to be about that, but why I think they have enough connections to justify the addition.
Indonesia would be good
It’s copypaste. That’s all. I think I’ve made my case clear and don’t want to reply any further.
Btw from what I was able to find, what gaijin has said is they have no plans for it. This statement is coming through the Korean forums 6 years ago from a moderator reply, not a dev.
The point is that ww2 history is extremely controversial, especially so in East Asia. But just because South Korea was under occupation does not constitute to it having reasonable and tangible enough evidence for it to go to Japan.
If that was the case then France should just be grouped with Germany since they were under occupation back then.
To be blunt, one side doesn’t acknowledge their history, or admit their issues of the past. That is why there is so much resentment for the whole idea in the first place. And we cant talk about modern times without the implications of ww2 history, even if “its all in past” doesnt mean its forgotten entirely.
So no I dont support SK going to JP under any circumstances. Thailand can help with JP, Indonesia can provide reinforcements. There is no reason for SK to be added to the pile.
If you think this is to be the case then you should broaden your perspective on things and research more.
Saying its just copy paste when we have tons of unique ground vehicles to add is just nonsense. Just because Gaijin chose to implement only the C&P doesnt mean TH & ID only has C&P.
10 Likes
4 Likes
…is that your “justification”?
3 Likes