Why are y’all still expecting Korea to be in Japan when it has been mentioned hundreds of times why it wont be there because militarily wise it dont make sense. Aside from that Japan already received many subtrees.
Also elaborate how this would literally be Israel, just because its starts at Rank III (when it can easily start at I or II)? It offers far more unique (modified) diverse vehicles than the current Israeli TT and would be on par (if not better then) with Yugoslavia in the Ground wise.
Poland can be its own thing and Hungary is already a sub of Italy.
Form what I’m aware, barring a meager amount of logistic vehicles, Ki-9s and Ki-54s as well as other left over scraps from Japanese occupation, both countries don’t really have much Japanese involvement in their respective defense forces or industry.
Also Japan already has Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia, it should be fine with those 3 and thus won’t need South Korea, let alone both.
Hungary is an Italian subtree and Yugoslavia wouldn’t need Polish and Czechoslovakian vehicles.
(Barring both being allies in exile for most of ww2 and several former Yugoslavia nations joining NATO, I can’t really think of a link for Yugoslavia and Poland).
Mate, with all due respect.
They will not get real about this argument.
And you will face tons of rationalisation, such as…
“Magazine02 said it with disclaimers! Those are also subject to change, be delayed, or EVEN CANCELLED!”
Then they would want it to be cancelled.
And still would be complaining like… ‘South Korean subtree to Japan, and North Korean subtree to China’ because ‘Copy-paste is bad, and it will be another israel tech tree which could be boring…’"
Then, I am wondering if ‘a unified Korea tech tree is bad, because of the copy-paste problem’…
Then… ‘aren’t adding separate Korean sub-trees in two nations bad? because those are also copy-paste…’
I love this forum, and I love players who push the most controversial option with ill-constructed rationalisation…
And ‘that’ is one of the reasons why I am supporting this idea.
Imagine it… how awful their logic would be after official implementation of the Korean tech tree…
We even have precedents of some radical US main who wants Israel as a subtree of US TT, IIRC.
Of course, unique modifications from Korea look sick, too. ;)
Soviet tanks on steroid and such.
Honestly, i’ve seen a bunch of suggestions for “new tech trees” recently, and this might be a bit of a stretch too forward, it’s very unlikely we get any of those nations as a standalone tree, same for Greece, Yugoslavia and others.
I really do find funny how the same guy keeps coming here to say “no mom I don’t want it” then gets trashed, disappears for some time, then comes back and the cycle repeats itself
I’m going to do a deeper analysis later, but there is an interesting section on the turret that might house the ATGMs. It’s a much sleaker design.
I’m likely going to refrain from making yet another suggestion on this variant until we see it in action. Given that the 2025 variant of the Ch’onma-20 is also on display at this exhibition, I wonder whether both are expected to be produced, but they also don’t seem different enough to warrant two production lines. It’ll be interesting to see which variants are shown in the future during parades and exercises.
Side note, Ch’onma-20 is the official name for the 2024-2025 variants. This variant seems to be called Ch’onma-21 (the ‘21’ on the turret side is highly unlikely to be a coincidence), but that’s not confirmed yet.
