Jump to content


The separation of RoC/TW tanks and decors.

Type 64 M41D Emblem Inscription

  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

Poll: RoC tanks feedback/suggestions (6 members have cast votes)

Should the RoC line exist in the American tech tree?

  1. Yes (3 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

  2. No (3 votes [50.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 50.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote Hide poll

ACXX #1 Posted Feb 09 2019 - 19:49

    Private

  • Players
  • 18023 battles
  • 6
  • Member since:
    11-13-2011

Now I have a Type 64 and a M41D in-game. They are both Taiwanese/RoC vehicles, but I can't put the Taiwanese military Emblem (RoCMC) and Inscriptions (the traditional Chinese character ones with RoC propaganda) on them. Historically, RoC tanks are built more aligned with American influences and they exist to stand against communism.

It was understandable, although not comfortable, to see solely one Type 64 exists in the Chinese tech tree before. Now that two are here, I just have speak it out.

Unlike Australian in British and Canadian in American, I think it is contradictory to put tanks produced to stand against each other in the same tech tree. Also, it pains me to see Taiwanese in PRC.

 

Since this can potentially trigger quite a lot of political opinions, I am only putting the ideas out there for now.



shinglefoot #2 Posted Feb 09 2019 - 19:56

    Major

  • Players
  • 24289 battles
  • 3,367
  • [LONER] LONER
  • Member since:
    02-07-2013

View PostACXX, on Feb 09 2019 - 14:49, said:

Now I have a Type 64 and a M41D in-game. They are both Taiwanese/RoC vehicles, but I can't put the Taiwanese military Emblem (RoCMC) and Inscriptions (the traditional Chinese character ones with RoC propaganda) on them. Historically, RoC tanks are built more aligned with American influences and they exist to stand against communism.

It was understandable, although not comfortable, to see solely one Type 64 exists in the Chinese tech tree before. Now that two are here, I just have speak it out.

Unlike Australian in British and Canadian in American, I think it is contradictory to put tanks produced to stand against each other in the same tech tree. Also, it pains me to see Taiwanese in PRC.

 

Since this can potentially trigger quite a lot of political opinions, I am only putting the ideas out there for now.

 

     You've really let all the worms out of the can here...

 

Potentially

 

 



__Worm__ #3 Posted Feb 09 2019 - 20:03

    Major

  • Players
  • 33246 battles
  • 4,412
  • [PYRMD] PYRMD
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011

View Postshinglefoot, on Feb 09 2019 - 11:56, said:

 

     You've really let all the worms out of the can here...

 

 

 

 

hey now...



Mojo_Riesing #4 Posted Feb 09 2019 - 20:38

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 18470 battles
  • 907
  • [ACATS] ACATS
  • Member since:
    11-26-2011

View PostACXX, on Feb 09 2019 - 10:49, said:

Now I have a Type 64 and a M41D in-game. They are both Taiwanese/RoC vehicles, but I can't put the Taiwanese military Emblem (RoCMC) and Inscriptions (the traditional Chinese character ones with RoC propaganda) on them. Historically, RoC tanks are built more aligned with American influences and they exist to stand against communism.

It was understandable, although not comfortable, to see solely one Type 64 exists in the Chinese tech tree before. Now that two are here, I just have speak it out.

Unlike Australian in British and Canadian in American, I think it is contradictory to put tanks produced to stand against each other in the same tech tree. Also, it pains me to see Taiwanese in PRC.

 

Since this can potentially trigger quite a lot of political opinions, I am only putting the ideas out there for now.

 

You're absolutely right, but i suspect it is unlikely given how much WG wished to retain the mainland China accounts. Like it or not, "politics" does play a role here along with economic interests.  It's probably a big part of why we won't see an Israeli line (along with Egyptian/Arab) developed.  This in particular is ironic given that these nations have had significant tank engagements historically. 

dunniteowl #5 Posted Feb 09 2019 - 20:41

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 26368 battles
  • 6,004
  • Member since:
    09-01-2014

View PostMojo_Riesing, on Feb 09 2019 - 13:38, said:

 

You're absolutely right, but i suspect it is unlikely given how much WG wished to retain the mainland China accounts. Like it or not, "politics" does play a role here along with economic interests.  It's probably a big part of why we won't see an Israeli line (along with Egyptian/Arab) developed.  This in particular is ironic given that these nations have had significant tank engagements historically. 

 

Yeah, they lasted a whole six days.

 

 

OvO



shinglefoot #6 Posted Feb 09 2019 - 20:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 24289 battles
  • 3,367
  • [LONER] LONER
  • Member since:
    02-07-2013

View Post__Worm__, on Feb 09 2019 - 15:03, said:

hey now...

 

:teethhappy:

motoracedave #7 Posted Feb 09 2019 - 21:13

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 18708 battles
  • 953
  • [HSOLO] HSOLO
  • Member since:
    05-21-2013

View Postdunniteowl, on Feb 09 2019 - 14:41, said:

 

Yeah, they lasted a whole six days.

 

 

OvO

 

POW! 

Mojo_Riesing #8 Posted Feb 10 2019 - 05:14

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 18470 battles
  • 907
  • [ACATS] ACATS
  • Member since:
    11-26-2011

View Postdunniteowl, on Feb 09 2019 - 11:41, said:

 

Yeah, they lasted a whole six days.

 

 

OvO

 

Well, that sure beats a lot of the "paper" tanks or nations that have primarily used tanks to roll over their own rebelling citizens.





Also tagged with Type 64, M41D, Emblem, Inscription

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users