This is the Air Tree that was made to work with the Ground Tree.
1 Like
You should add the AS21 Redback. Apparently it won the deal to build IFV’s for the Australian military. It’s also an evolution of the K21.
1 Like
+1, K21 is easily one of my favourite IFVs and I’d love to see it in the game, this tree sounds quite fun as well.
2 Likes
Weird BR rating, The number of vehicles is too small compared to what could actually come out.
2 Likes
I agree to implement SK tree, they do come with interesting vehicles but i am unsure in what way it should be implemented, as someone earlier said, perhaps it would be better as a sub tree like Finland but for the US perhaps?
Other than this dilemma i do fully support a South Korean tech tree :)
4 Likes
based on your list alone, it makes more sense to add it to Japan, even if it politically doesn’t go well together (as seen with Taiwan and China, Gaijin has shown they really don’t care either way).
SK has nothing below 6.7 so by making it a standalone tree we have an Israel 2.0 situation here, while Japan is lacking stuff 6.7 and above so this is a perfect matching to finally buff up Japanese line ups.
11 Likes
China and Taiwan isn’t a great example at all to justify S.Korea in Japan.
Even with political issues thrown out China/Taiwan Tree still would make sense then Japan and S.Korea. The PRC (China) and KMT (Taiwan) had an old alliance so they at least were militarily connected which isn’t the case for Japan and S.Korea.
The suggestion on S.Korea being fused to Japan would be more illogical then the addition of the F16AJ, creating more exceptions for Japan while there is some other (logical) alternative options.
9 Likes
I would like to see the South Korean TT as an addition to Japan, while the political issue may stop some, Gaijin has already put Taiwan and CCP China together.
Japan could use the additional vehicles, escpecially the SPAAG. Possibly this could be viewed from the lense of regional partners in a very close geographic area, instead of tying it to political interweaving.
21 Likes
The main reason why South Korea hasn’t merged with the Japanese at all before in War Thunder is, like mentioned before, due to an incredible political tension between the two communities. Not because of Gaijin’s stance in the matter, but because of the backlash that could come with it. There was already community backlash when Taiwan and China were added to the game, where Taiwan’s flag was completely changed out at once instance.
I’ll highlight my post to reiterate why I’d rather have SK in the Japanese tree over America : It’d be awesome to see some South Korean vehicles added in some way to the Japanese tree mainly because gameplay wise, it would broaden a lacking main tree with more variety from a more localized country than a country that already has 10 other nations within it.
5 Likes
Having a drill together seems like a GREAT testament to an alliance!
2 Likes
wow, I haven’t been monitoring this post for a while and it just turned into a political fallout. How war thunder forum-esque this is.
If you guys really want South Korea to join Japanese tech tree, you might as well not call it Japanese tech tree. I don’t know, maybe call it something like “East Asia tech tree”? “Pan Asian tech tree”???
I wholeheartedly support South Korea as a separate tech tree, and if it doesn’t have enough content, then I would say United Korea instead of “muh Japanese tech tree”.
7 Likes
Pacific Asia tree is definitely appreciated, we can in the future look forward to Japanese tree with 3 variant of F-15, one of them the EX, at least 4 additional F-16, several MiG-21, and other shit that should definitely not belong in there but is there anyway because I love combat vehicle representation.
I think it would be better to put a non-local upgraded M48 variant that SK imported from US before M48A3K, and make M48A3K’s rating a little higher, maybe 7.7 or 8.0, as it is using 90mm APFSDS.
I think this APFSDS issue will be the most problematic issue for SK M48s. This strange country is using such outdated tanks for more than a half-century, loading 21st century ammo into old 20th cannon. Imagine a M48 without any armor upgrade but shooting something like DM63. What br it should be?
1 Like
One of the main balancing factors I feel would come into play in regards to this would simply be limiting the ammunition based on the BR. Another main thing as to why the tree is the way it is, is because I felt like having 5-6 vehicles at every rank would give a more fleshed out tree than having 10 vehicles at every rank, where there are a lot of similarities to each other. In the future as the tree is added and the game continues, I do believe there are more vehicles to be added inside the tree, I simply made the tree this way so it could be added with enough unique vehicles, while also being a reasonable grind.
1 Like
I usually prefer fully packed suggestion tree with all avaliable varients but yeah leaving some space for future by getting rid of similar things would be better for “suggestion” to developers. Korean trees I’ve seen before were usually united korea trees or sub-trees, so SK only independent tree is interesting to me. Nice work
2 Likes
Northern Korea and Southern Korea should be as one Tech Tree - this will give it more Vehicles, a more fleshed out Tech Tree and will make more people play it and also makes the most sense because well…both are Korea.
Chinas Tech Tree also consists of both PRC and RoC whereas the RoC is literally just US-Equipment and PRC also up until higher Tiers just USSR Equipment (the first domestic ones being also just Variants of USSR Vehicles).
GDR / DDR is also in Germanys Tech Tree and not a Subtree of USSR despite being entirely USSR EQ.
And if we take Politics into Account about PRC / RoC or when Germany was still split…lets not do that.
But im definitely for a Korea Tech Tree - both North and South combined.
13 Likes
I would prefer a United Korea tree, between the two there are many viable vehicles and lineups. It could start at Rank V and look something like this:
9 Likes
Just to avoid headache at this point, I’ll reconsider and just go with this, considering my original suggestion did just gloss over the idea of a unified tree.
Although my main issue with a unified Korean tree is the polarity in alliance between the two countries now. How would that look in game? ( NATO vs Warsaw, with SK/NK being either or. )
Thats a political no-go.
4 Likes
Ingame matches don´t reflect real world politics in general. Teams are formed based on the availability of players.
5 Likes