They could pull a China and have a united korean tree with a starting point like Israel. If theyre desperate for the lowest of low tier additions they can probably find some spitfires, meteors and stuff from the Korean war to start them off.
Not saying it won’t be a lot of C & P but then again there’s a fair few indigenous designs nowadays like in the Chinese tree and even if it is C&P its a few new fighters, the players playing the C&P vehicles would just be in the US or Russian or Chinese tree anyway it hurts nobody.
I’d definitely be in favour of a United Korean tree.
I am fully for the addition of Korean vehicles to the game, but I felt I had to say no to an independent tech tree. I never liked the fact Israel starts at rank IV, and I wouldn’t like to see more trees like it.
I still think Korea should be added to an existing tree, or another new combined tree. North Korea is an easy decision, add it to the Chinese tech tree.
South Korea is harder. As has been WELL covered, Japan is not an option. The tree that makes the most sense in terms of alliances is also the one that makes the least sense in terms of the game and “need” which is USA. So obviously that shouldn’t happen either.
This screenshot from Wikipedia indicates strength of forces aiding the South in the Korean War which could be a possible way (albeit a weak sauce one?) to choose an ally for a combined tech tree. I have already seen opposition to Canada being it, which are right there at no.4 on the list behind USA and England.
Australia’s ties with South Korea have been increasing in modern day, with both the AS21 Redback and AS9 Huntsman being sourced there (but built/modified in Australia). And any Australian addition would by default basically include New Zealand. The ANZACs though have quite a lot of ranks I-III content but arguably not enough to quite be the standalone nations at those tiers in ground.
It’s a tough question IMO of how/where to add South Korea, hopefully it gets figured out, but I hope it’s not a “starts at rank IV tree” answer.
I try to express objectively: I do not agree that this Air Force technology tree should be called the KOREA technology tree (after all, it includes countries in the non-Koryo Peninsula), and I think the army technology tree is more characteristic than the Air Force technology tree: after all, South Korea has a lot of good army vehicles, at least in the absence of a lot of North Korean data. The Air Force is not even as “characteristic” as the Japanese technology tree (I mean the F-15 or other vehicles with a new engine,and call them ‘‘xxxJ’’), which is inevitably a bit far-fetched. It is a good thing to have more countries join the family of war thunder, but at least it should not be named after KOREA. It is suggested that the name should be Pan-Asian Science and Technology Tree.
Here is a picture of 2 North Korean JDAMs/Glide bombs on display, the one on the right is likely the AGP-250 as mentioned before which are used on the MiG-21PFM, BiS and IL-28.
My opinion might be a bit controversial here but ill say it, i think both SK and NK should be added into the chinese TT.
Now, hear me out, SK could be added into the ROC part of the TT either as a new line or just by adding them in folders with the ROC aircraft
And NK could be added into the PRC part of the TT
Idk how good the relations between ROC and SK are but imo that would be the best option since japan is not a good idea
Any particular reason as to why? I can understand North Korea being in the Chinese TT but I don’t see the logical reasoning of South Korea being there.
An Tech Tree can only have 5 lines currently according to Gaijin so an extra line is out of the window and the Chinese TT is in no need of a subtree especially when they have a lot of potential domestic vehicles that can be added.
So if player want Korean vehicles it would either have to be through Combined Tree, subtrees (SK bit difficult) or individual event vehicles.
I mean it mostly in the sense to be able to add the vehicles in the game, since japan is not an option and imo the US does not need them, i think the ROC part of the chinese TT would be the best idea imo
Iirc china has only 4 lines atm, SK could get its own line while NK could be mixed into another one something like the hungarian bomber line mixed with the italian bomber line or vise versa, NK could gets its own independent line while SK could get added in mixed with the ROC line of the TT
While I get the PRC+DPRK and ROC+ROK subtree idea, there is one glaring issue. Gaijin can’t officially make an ROC subtree, as for that they would need to state PRC and ROC as separate countries, which they sadly won’t do due to the controversy that would bring from the PRC side.
So if they add it it will most likely be a simple “Korea to China” explanation that will assume ROK as a collateral for the DPRK joining PRC rather than a subtree for ROC. Sure, they could add it to a more separate ROC/ROK line, but then there is no more space for a DPRK line.
So in my opinion it’s best to avoid this issue and add a Korean tree, and different subtrees for China.
Korea is one of those countries that if you put either or into another nation you are just wanting a lot of bad press and a considerable amount of controversy. It isn’t one of those countries the populace will shrug off. Since they won’t.
DPRK as a subtree for China would be a workable concept, but ROK in the China tree wouldn’t really make much sense. It’d be almost as problematic as making them a subtree for Japan.
IMO there are only 2 ways get ROK into War Thunder that wouldn’t cause problems. Either the united Korea tree or as a subtree for USA. And USA doesn’t really need a subtree.
The only thing I have an issue with is that the Ground Forces would have to start at Rank IV to match the Air Tree because I highly doubt we would see Rank III without any CAS support. It’s possible since it’s only one rank difference but I don’t think it’s likely. Other than that looks good to me. Sure there’s Copy and Paste but if anyone wants any new nations, then we’re going to have to have C&P. +1
Frustratingly nothing that would fit at Rank III. The US did claim a few air kill as La-7s, but these are most likely misidentifications of La-9s and La-11s. North Korea also restored an abandoned Ki-43-II (Rank I, 2.7) but it was never airworthy.
