My point exactly. Apparently not all share the sentiment. e.g;
They do, the T-50TH is a Thai specific variant of the KAI T-50, though it’s not in game.
But what is in game is the KGGB a Korean made glide bomb Thailand uses with their F-16s and is being added to the Thai F-16 next update.
5 Likes
Hah okay which mean Koreans still have no problem about them in Japan sub tree
Ukrainians don’t have problem about their Oplot-T
Koreans don’t have problem about some of their tech in Thai TT
Even Americans don’t have problem with their vehicles in Thai TT go to Japan
But Chinese does have problem with their VT-4
guess who the real troublemakers here?
This is unfair to Thai players.
3 Likes
I expect Gaijin to be fair to all players, and everyone can play their own country’s TT and vehicles without any third-party involvement.
1 Like
There are quite a few triggers here. Firstly, there has long been skepticism about the performance metrics of Chinese vehicles. Then, the newly introduced missile for the Z-10EM, which has a penetration capability of only 50 millimeters—comparable to a catapult—was unexpectedly upgraded to a 12.3 battle rating. Finally, the dissatisfaction was ignited by the VT4 incident.
1 Like
I been around Chinese forum for some time using rough google translate from English to Chinese
here what i’ve got so far
basically
They don’t wanna see Japanese flag to represent their VT-4
so, I asked
“What if French players don’t wanna see Chinese flag on their Mirage 2000 asking for Mirage 2000 removal will you happy with their idea?”
He said “No because Chinese Gov don’t want Taiwanese to buy Mirage 2000 at the begin with so French players can ask for it removal”
I’m kinda surprise with this answer for real
well i guess it fair game then if US and French players do the same.
3 Likes
Many tanks appear in different tech trees to keep things balanced and fun. Singling out Japan and saying “it’s a Chinese tank so it can’t go there” is unfair. If we start treating Chinese players as special and blocking everything they don’t like, then what about all the other nations? They have tanks that show up in weird places too, and nobody complains as much.
Just because some players don’t want the VT-4 in Japan doesn’t mean it should be treated like some national betrayal. It’s a game, not a political arena. The tank fits Japan’s playstyle and helps balance the lineup. Giving in to that kind of pressure makes the game less fun for everyone else.
3 Likes
true, all sides should be respected. As @MAUSWAFFE mentioned, a rework of representation of sub-trees might be the shortest route to solve all issues so that everyone can agree.
2 Likes
Likewise, reaching a mutually acceptable solution such as @MAUSWAFFE 's ( Subtree Rework - Nation Folders ) or having an independent tech tree for ASEAN countries @NFrost51 ( ASEAN Founders Ground Sub-Tree - #389 by NFrost51 ) would all resolve the issue where there is no argument. This is also the main view from the chinese community channels, for an example, u may refer to:
4 Likes
Btw, Taiwanese government is called Republic of China
( Oops, I just realized that @MAUSWAFFE already mentioned it:
)
The way u r presenting is misleading. Those were his replies to different series of questions of urs. Please present his responses properly.
3 Likes
Why isn’t F16 removed from Chinese tech tree?
1 Like
But I dont like it being in Chinese tech tree
1 Like
Chinese community and China Tech Tree players can always fight for those if they want their vehicles to be fixed instead of actively working against addition of a vehicle to another tech tree/sub tree.
That is an entirely different problem and not a valid reason for such a crash out.
1 Like
that is just a fancy way of a UI rework and if anything it will clutter up UI and make it hard to understand for new players. I don’t even want to think about all the possible bug/glitches that could come with that.
I strongly oppose treating one part of community as if they have privileges over others.
I wait for an official statement confirming that.
The debates in the Chinese subforum & Reddit showed a very strong determination of some participants to use the “whatever it takes” approach to prevent this VT-4 from being anywhere close to JP - which included a boycott of wt.
In case they will be successful with these efforts you have to admit that they used their sole power (called buying power) to convince gaijin to change their plans and to surrender to concerns addressed by a large market.
Without commenting on the political aspects i saw a lot of imho really valid concerns regarding the treatment of bug reports by gaijin - which apply to basically every other nation with the exception of the USSR/RF.
As a neutral observer i am always happy to see when a company with a certain level of market dominance is forced to change course - if this happens as predicted it is a win for all players; last time seen in May 2023 with the planned economy changes.
You know, we practially have never seen any such disputes being solved via pleasing both sides. It was always only one side, but today it is just happens that larger en masse specific community is pissed off because 80-years-old reasons, not even nowadays reasons.
There were people being pissed off because India joined the UK, BeNeLux joined France, there were also people being pissed off because Iranian Tomcat joined the US and Swedish Leo2s being better even though upgrade packages and tanks themselves were produced in Germany…
Overall, I see your point, and I support it.
However, I ain’t supporting people that ground their demands on last centuries’ beliefs, and I don’t care much if some vehicle is of implied ownership or not.
Say, as Ukrainian, I am pissed off that some T-64s/T-80s and other Kharkiv plant vehicles are located in the Soviet TT with what Russians have done with Ukrainians (100 years ago and even nowadays), so what, should I review bomb Gaijin for that reason? Nope, I shouldn’t. Honestly, I didn’t get over the stuff (especially with what happens rn), but it should not be entirely based of the sentiments only, unlike someone does rn.
Should I complain on behalf of Ukrainians wanting our T-84 Oplot-T in the Soviet/Ukrainian TT because, like Chinese think, “any vehicle produced within a country, even export one, should be within the said country”? Absolutely not, because that’s not what export vehicle stand for. And those saying it has nothing to do with Thailand are completely wrong, because that VT-4 is based on Thai demands and specifications, not Chinese. Just like Oplot-T shouldn’t be added to Soviet/Ukrainian TT because it is an Oplot model for Thais specifically, and Thailand sub-tree is established within Japan TT.
Should I complain on behalf of German mains to return all produced Leo1/2s, Marders, KF-41 and alikes to German TT because it is the origin of these vehicles? Should I complain on behalf of American mains to return all produced F-4/5/15/16/18s and so to the US TT because it is the origin of these vehicles? I can, but I won’t, because some vehciles are, yet again, destined to the country-specific usage, and these countries are already established with other TTs.
Do you see my point? I ain’t judging you by any means, but you try to defend someone who can’t have shit their way specifically because one (1!!) vehicle that is an export model on behalf of Thai operator is to be placed with Japanese TT.
And before someone asks or makes comparisson: I am fine with some Ukrainian-modified or designed/produced vehicle entering Soviet TT if a country operator not of Ukraine enters as sub-tree (say, if Belarus purchased some T-84 designed for Belarus specifically, and it happened for Belarus to be placed within Soviet TT, I am completely fine with it, even if (made-up) implied operator turns out to be Russia (even though TT is Soviet, not Russian))
9 Likes
The Chinese complain about the Thai VT-4, but they don’t mind having Japanese vehicles. For example, China has the Nakajima Ki-43-III Ko, although at least I haven’t been able to find confirmation that China acquired it. The Japanese built over 1,000 Nakajima Ki-43-III Ko aircraft, yet they don’t have it. This could be called double standards. I’m from Poland, and I don’t mind the Leopard 2PL in Germany, although many in Poland still call the Germans , “N##i” . Besides, my grandfather fought against the German occupation and lost three brothers in 1939. So what? That was 80 years ago; most of the people from that era are dead. We should remember those events as a warning, not a reason for hatred. Thailand has VT-4 tanks, Poland has Leopard 2PLs, and these are their vehicles. The Thai VT-4 will be a Thai tank, not a Japanese one. The Polish Leopard 2PL is a Polish vehicle, not a German one.
9 Likes
I would dare to take this a step further and call out their hatred as borderline racism. By their standarts half of the world should call Germans nazis but they don’t, why? Because today’s Germany has nothing to do with WW2 Germany.
There aren’t even that many people alive from that era, time moves on and things change. Their hatred does not make their demand reasonable at all and that demand should be treated as such.
Politics should be strictly kept out of this game and it’s development, otherwise it may stir something worse in the future.
2 Likes
Sadly, it is incredibly hard or even impossible. The game moved further than WW2 era that quite easily grounds reasons for having one nation within another, but because we are far beyond Cold War and have modern day vehicles, you cannot really just put any vehicle anywhere without explaining why the nation’s vehicle is put within other nation’s TT.
It makes sense for WW2 S.African and Indian vehicles to be placed within the UK tech tree because all of them fought against common enemy, but modern day vehicles have less and less ties with the UK, like SA Mirages modernized with Israeli/Russian components, or Indian Arjun being based off of the T-90 and Leopard 2 etc.
The latter is the reason why politics are barely avoidable, because implications. But again, one thing is conflict that happened back then, and the other is what’s going right now (again, proving why some nations get underrepresented/not represented).
I’ve actually been lying about being Cypriot this whole time, I’ve been looking for pity points on these forums for being from a country split in half /j
1 Like