Yeah, pretty much congratulations to @ChieftainWarrior et al. that made these Korean suggestions, especially united Korean ones given that’s what Gaijin looks forward to.
I am just interested if Koreans themselves feel fine with it. Not like Gaijin listens every time to community, but still.
And can’t wait for sekrit dokument leaks for said TT, as I bet that will be one hell of a play proving one right or wrong.
United Korea is great News - Can’t wait for it :P
genuinelly tho how are you lot gonna bug report north Korean vehicles lol
That is honestly my biggest concern. I fear there will be no way to bug report them, since we don’t have any primary sources…
Hopefully they make exceptions?
Serious question here, sorry for the ping @Smin1080p_WT:
I know that it is still in the works, and we may not see it for at least a year, but would you be able to clarify this? Could there be exceptions for bug reporting North Korean vehicles, given the absence of primary sources? Would well-researched analyses + secondary sources suffice? Could this be passed on to whoever makes these decisions? Thanks :)
whats sad is that north korea lacks any form of IFV to added… at least SK has a few
prob North Korean officials will bug report that, and Gaijin ain’t gonna put “Not a Bug” to such reports to not get nuked 😭🙏
Other than the BTR-80A and a couple IFVs armed with 14.5mm KPVs…
Good secondary sources (for example, respected industry journals or books published by a reputable author) are already accepted for bug reports, primary sources are just preferred
Problem is, there’s a lack of secondary sources too. ‘The Armed Forces of North Korea’ is one of the only detailed books with accurate information, and even then, it has some errors (and omits a number of vehicles — the authors did a great job, but they just can’t cover every vehicle, and so there are plenty that are only known from images or video)
I’m not sure if Jane’s is accepted as a source anymore, but that has awful information about North Korean vehicles. I’m not sure there are any other journals/books that have worthwhile information.
We also have plans to implement a standalone Korean research tree nation with vehicles from South Korea and North Korea.
Can’t wait to see this suggestion become the ‘Implemented suggestion’ at some point.
UNITED KOREA MENTIONED RAHHHH (Basically all Korean WT community)
Two agreeable secondary sources has always been sufficient for consideration.
See my comment here
My concern is that most North Korean vehicles won’t be able to be added or bug-reported, simply because very few people (in particular, authoritative sources, not just randoms on the internet) have wanted to analyse them. A large number are only known from images, or are just briefly mentioned in books (like, 2–3 lines at best).
Congratulations Korea bros.
Yugoslavia next ))))
Finally!
See also:
Just woke up to see my #1 favorite concept tree officially announced, how awesome. The loss of Greece and Cyprus is a shame, but I suppose you can’t have everything with Gaijin.
Regardless, I’m sure the tree will be completely barren at launch and it will turn into an Israel situation where people start believing that it never should have existed in the first place despite Gaijin very much ignoring most of its potential.
Yay !
I’m glad to see Gaijin is going the United Korea tree route, here’s hoping they do it justice.
Im late to the party but im glad to see that Gaijin is willing to go on with the United Korean Tree. Thanks to @ChieftainWarrior and @SaabGripen for their efforts on making this happen.
Truly can’t wait!
Not me switching my VPN from ireland to argentina only to realise that you posted a screenshot, not an actual imgur link.
Anyway, excellent news for people in this thread, bad luck for those wanting to put korea in the japanese or chinese tree.
