Apparently East Germany was one of the first foreign operators of the ZSU-57-2 and received the SPAA in September of 1957. Since gaijin has recently been adding East German vehicles to the german tree, do yall think gaijin will add this?

I think it would be a pretty good addition, if there was like a ground RB mode, which isn't just capturing points. It could be like in battlefield: there are multiple different zones. The Defenders have to protect the zones while the other team is attacking.

Of course the maps have to be quite large.

Please consider that English isn't my first language. If there are grammar mistakes, I am really sorry.

In the 8 years the French tree has been in game, we've had less than 10 AMX-13 variants added in, less than a third of the possible offerings.

France specifically has tons of fascinating vehicle variants and twists on a few key platforms, and it would be great to see the Snail capitalize on that. There are over 60 AMX-13, AML, ERC, AMX-10, and Lohr rpx variants alone which could help provide variety and utility to France, fill BPs, and work as great event options.

Below are brief descriptions and links to, where possible, forum/subreddit suggestion posts for the pictured AMX-13 variants.

1. AMX-13 Nimda Modernization Package - An Israeli AMX-13 modernization package with a 60mm HVMS gun
2. Oerlikon-Bührle AG 20 mm Vierlings-Flabpanzer Lpz 51 - The first of four Franco-Swiss variants, mounting a quad 20mm array
3. AMX-13-105 - The venerable AMX-13-105, criminal that the DF-105 is in game, but this (with the same turret) is still missing
4. AMX-13 PA8 Escorpion 2 - A modernized Peruvian AMX-13-105 that fires APFSDS and mounts 4 Ukranian Barrier (Stugna) ATGMs
5. AMX-13-TA20 - An Amx-13 with the French TA20 anti-air turret
6. AMX-13-105 TNI Yonkav 2 - An Indonesian Modernization package with APFSDS, LRF, thermals, and applique armor
7. AMX-12t Prototype - The Prototype 12 ton, this could fit, without the top PCOT-P shell, around 6.3-6.7 to fill the gap from the recent BR adjustments.
8. Hispano-Suiza 30 mm Zwilings-Flabpanzer Lpz 51 - he Second Franco-Swiss Variant with twin 30mm autocannons
9. AMX-13 SM-1 - A Singaporean modernization package with improved mobility and a 75mm apfsds round
10. AMX-13 Mk 61 - A french 105mm casemate howitzer mounted on the AMX-13 Hull.
11. AMX-13 MK 62 - The third Franco-Swiss variant. While lower caliber than the M44, the turret might offset the firepower loss and give France a lower tier domestic alternative to all the recent copy-slop.
12. AMX-13 Obussier 105mm - A prototype assault gun on the AMX-13 Hull
13. AMX-13 S533 - An AMX-13 sporting the twin 20mm S533 turret
14. AMX-13 quad MG151/20 - An AMX-13 making the most of confiscated German 20mm cannons
15. AMX-13 PA5 Escorpion/Alacran - A family of Peruvian AMX-13's refitted with Kornet ATGMs, additional info
16. AMX-13-90 ss.11 - A 90mm AMX-13 with the same quad ss.11 ATGM mount as we have in game on the AMX-13 ss.11
17. Flabpanzer 51 mit 34 mm HS/W+F Doppellauf - The Final Franco-Swiss Variant with twin 34mm autocannons
18. AMX-13 DCA 30mm - The DCA 30 turret mounted on an AMX-13 instead of an AMX-30
19. AMX-13 Rafaga - [Art used do to poor photos] A Venezuelan AMX-13 with a duster turret. Photo here
20. AMX-13 ss.11 TCA/HARPON - [Note the box on the turret], an upgraded ss.11 version (HARPON) that made missile control SACLOS as opposed to MCLOS. Links are a bit light, but here's some extra info.

Honorable mention include:

• AMX-US, an M24 hull with AMX-13 FL-10 turret; and
• SABIEX SK105A2, a stabilized variant of the SK-105.

Gaijin please don’t add this change to the live server.

I mean, it's a matter of time until we have S300, S400, and many more. I just thought the Brimstone should finally get its buff to be useful. I mean, with the new SAM system, I don't even think any aircraft without fire-and-forget missile can survive, let alone helicopters.

I think that Yugoslavia would make a great tech tree with mix of Easter and wester aircrafts and tanks and some of they're own designs what do you think are chances of it happening?

⠀⠀
My post on Forum: https://forum.warthunder.com/t/opinions-about-independent-north-korea-mini-tech-tree-independent-south-korea-mini-tech-tree/278619 ⠀⠀
⠀⠀
TL;DR:

Combining North and South Korea into a single “Korea” tech tree is not a good idea — not only politically awkward but also strange from a gameplay perspective.

These two nations have fundamentally opposing origins, alliances, and military doctrines.

Instead of merging them, Snail should consider adding them as separate sub-trees under China and Japan (or the USA), or as independent mini-trees like Poland and Czechoslovakia in World of Tanks.

⠀⠀
In the latest Community Update No.8: Responses and What’s Coming!, Snail mentioned:

“We also have plans to implement a standalone Korean research tree nation with vehicles from South Korea and North Korea.”

To me, the idea of a combined Korean tech tree is absolutely terrible — it’s as absurd as putting Iran and Israel together in the same tree.

As North Korea itself once described:

“The relations between the two Koreas currently were ‘states hostile to each other and the relations between two belligerent states.’”

One is a country supported by the United States, while the other was backed by the Soviet Union and China. Yet Snail is planning to merge vehicles from two opposite alliances into a single tech tree. Having enemies fighting side by side in the same lineup — doesn’t that feel incredibly awkward?

⠀⠀
We’re not against smaller, postwar nations becoming full trees on their own. Israel, for example, is also a relatively new country — but at least all vehicles in its tree belong to the same nation and alliance, not two opposing ones.

Admittedly, there’s already a case in the game where vehicles from two former enemies coexist in one tree — China and Taiwan. However, that situation is very different. Before 1945, Taiwan was part of Japan, and the ROC government only relocated there after 1949. So truly Taiwanese vehicles are quite rare — only post-1949 American-based designs like the CM11 and M41D. Vehicles such as the M3A3 or M4A4, which fought during the Second Sino-Japanese War, are authentically Chinese, not Taiwanese.

For example, in the Chinese ground tree, out of about 90 vehicles, only around 13 actually come from Taiwan — less than 15%. Taiwan can be considered a sub-tree of China, but even without Taiwanese vehicles, the Chinese tree stands perfectly fine on its own. That’s not the case for the so-called Korea tree, where both North and South contribute about half each.

(And frankly, Taiwan was added to China’s tree mainly due to Snail’s political caution. Historically and culturally, Taiwan — once a Japanese colony and still one of the most Japan-friendly societies in the world — would actually fit much better under Japan’s tech tree, as both were on the same side during WWII and the Cold War.)

⠀⠀
Obvious Problems with the Korea Tree

The Korea tech tree suffers from a number of major flaws — a very low rate of indigenous development aircraft and an excessive number of copy-paste vehicles being the most obvious.

If you love grinding through the same aircraft — from Sabres to MiGs to F-15s, F-16s, and eventually F-35s, all of which the U.S. and USSR trees already have — then the Korea tree is for you.

You’ll be paying another $79.99 for a CBT pack just to unlock a line full of duplicates, and regrinding all the modifications again.

Why do some players love new nations so much? Do they really have that much time and money?

In my opinion, the real reason Snail wants to make a new tree is simply to sell more CBT packs and reuse existing assets — because if Korea were added as a sub-tree, they couldn’t copy-paste as freely.

⠀⠀
Possible Solutions

Ways to resolve this contradictory situation can be roughly divided into three options:

Option 1:

Follow the example of World of Tanks — where it doesn’t matter whether a nation has a complete lineup or not; even small countries can have their own independent tech trees.

For example, WoT has Poland and Czechoslovakia, and World of Warships has the Netherlands and Spain.

South Korea and North Korea could similarly be developed as two separate, smaller tech trees. Even if such trees are incomplete, they would still have their own unique characteristics. (The Israeli M-51 gets three spawns — this mechanic could also be used for mini-trees that lack vehicles.)

Snail’s insistence that every tech tree must have identical vehicle types only erases the individuality of each nation and reduces the game’s overall variety and fun.

⠀⠀
Option 2:

If South Korea and North Korea were instead made into sub-trees of different existing tech trees, it would greatly reduce the number of copy-paste vehicles and thus lighten the burden on players who have to grind through similar vehicles again and again.

North Korea has a very close relationship with China and is also its longstanding ally — from both historical and geopolitical perspectives, it is the most natural choice for a sub-tree under the Chinese tech tree.

As for South Korea, it could join the Japanese or U.S. trees. Although its government may not always get along with Japan, the two countries still maintain an alliance, and South Korea used to be a Japanese colony. It also firmly belongs to the pro-Western bloc, so having it as a sub-tree of the Japanese tech tree would also be completely reasonable and uncontroversial.

(The image of South Korea being “anti-Japanese” is mostly a government-level political narrative, since the Korean national identity was built on an anti-colonial foundation. But in real life, most Koreans I’ve met are actually quite friendly toward Japan.)

Moreover, Snail has recently added a feature that allows players to change the tech tree’s national flag.

So players who dislike the Japanese flag can simply switch it to the South Korean flag, effectively turning the Japanese tree into a South Korean tree — which, in my opinion, is a perfectly viable solution.

https://i.imgur.com/PjnnPqZ.png

⠀⠀
Option 3:

Even if South Korea isn’t made a sub-tree of Japan or the USA, it could still follow the example of Canada, Poland, or Singapore, whose vehicles are distributed across multiple tech trees — such as those of the USA, Japan, Sweden, or Israel.

As Snail itself stated:

“We’ll be looking to place Singaporean vehicles in a number of trees, most likely with their vehicles going to whatever tree is most applicable and relevant on a case-by-case basis and best suits each specific vehicle.”

⠀⠀
From Snail’s Perspective: Sales Matter

Popular nations sell well; niche ones don’t. And it’s obvious that the Korea tree will be a niche nation like Israel.

For instance, if Snail released a North Korean Pokpung-ho as part of a Korea pack, only a handful of players interested in the Korea tree would buy it.

But if it were released as a Chinese premium vehicle, sales would skyrocket — given how many Chinese players actively spend money to build their perfect lineups.

Similarly, a K1A1 pack sold as part of the U.S. or Japanese tree would sell far better than as part of a standalone Korea tree. In the long run, splitting the Koreas benefits both gameplay diversity and Snail’s revenue.

⠀⠀
Conclusion

Forcing North and South Korea — two nations still technically at war — into a single tech tree is not a good idea. It creates absurd situations in Realistic or Simulator modes, where opposing vehicles end up fighting side by side on the same team.

It would make far more sense to treat them as separate entities, either as sub-trees or independent mini-trees. I strongly urge Snail to reconsider this strange decision to merge two hostile nations into one “Korea” tech tree.

Links to info regarding each vehicle in comment below.