I want to  explain the principles and assumptions I follow when I making tech trees before I present my British Commonwealth Aviation tech tree, 

 

1.

I assume that the performance and stats of all vehicles in the game are as historically accurate as they can be.Proper BR is given to vehicles after they are given the correct performance. This is a dream of course. WT is nether balanced or historically accurate since 2013. Since fully flushed out tech trees is a dream, I think it is alright to include this assumption.

 

2.

A high quality tech trees should be able to show the development history of vehicles(tanks, aircraft, ships etc) of the respective countries and and vehicles that the countries’ armed force used.

 

Furthermore, it should be competitive in all game modes and enjoyable to play with.

 

There are numerous designs remained at the stage of prototypes and did not entering mass production, due to the one or several of following reasons: existing mass produced designs could already satisfied the needs; the war was going to ended or had already ended; they are too expensive compare to other alternative; the military or the government changed their mind at the last second and canceled the production plan due to all sorts of reasons; other less common reason like the designers died so his/her projects (even it is promising ) were canceled. I think these designs should be added to the game.

 

I add non domestic build vehicles and important experimental vehicles even there are no “BR Gaps” in the tech trees.

 

3.

I will not add fictional designs and unrealistic designs. I add blueprint designs that have detail information (so no proposal or sketches) to fill gaps in tech trees if necessary. Fictional designs(yes that’s right, there are fictional vehicles in the game) and unneeded blueprint designs that present in the current in game tech tree are removed in my tech tree.

 

4.

Minor countries, like Poland, Romania and Hungary, produced and used many interesting and unique vehicles. 

 

Vehicles of these countries should be added into the existing 7 fractions: USA, USSR, UK, France, Germany, Italy, Japan. Here’s the detail. 

France: Netherlands, Belgium, Poland, Czechoslovakia and Czech.

Italy: Hungarian and Romania before and after cold war.

Britain: Australia, Canada and South Africa.

 

Minor counties vehicles must be domestically produced, or they must be unique models or designs if they are imported from other counties. In another words,  Imported reskined vehicles are not allowed for these countries.

 

The political background of all countries in one fractions should be the same. I use France fraction as a example. Since France belong to the fraction of Allies of WW2 and NATO, there should not be any vehicles that is used only by Czechoslovak and Polish People’s Army. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional assumptions for making aviation Tech Trees

1.Auto cannons do not sparks.

2.I assume that air battle is reworked so attackers and bombers can be useful and stop ruin games. I had written a proposal about this:

3. All bombers’ maximum bombload are removed except bombload consist of one single large bomb. For example, the bombload of Yer-2 and Do 217 is reduced to 3 tons. Yes, Yer-2, Do 217 and B-17Gs can carry up to 5, 4 and 10 tons of bombs respectively, but these kind of bombload are rarely used and have little practical value since the speed, maneuverability, and/or range of the plane suffered greatly and the take off distance will be very long. In the game, these planes are over-tiered due to these extreme bombload, and they ruined games with these stupidly large bombload (Yer-2 and Do 217 base rush in very old patch)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2145178526_UKaviationtech.thumb.png.755a

 

1.There is no relationship between the Rank and Battle Rating of the vehicles.

2.The basic information of these vehicles can be found on airwar.ru, Valka.cz, and English Wikipedia.

3. * = Australian or Canadian aircraft.

 

As the name of this tech tree suggests, there are Canadian and Australian aircraft. Canada and Australia have maintained very close political and military relationships with United Kingdom since their independence, and it makes a lot of sense to include their vehicles in UK tech trees. 

 

There are researchable US aircraft since UK received thousands of them through lend lease.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, please take a look at this tech tree made by  LB95 :

 

Edited by kentwong4a28

_Catweazle_63 (Posted )

moved > Machinery of War Discussion > International Tech Tree Project (Unofficial)
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt this will ever happen, due to the sheer size and complexity of the tree. However, that doesn't mean it isn't an idea I love! I would gladly research all of these aircraft. One other thing I would add - the heavy bomber line is somewhat lacking. Maybe the Washington, or the V-Bombers (1,000 HE bombs only)?

 

If this did happen, it would also be cool to see more skins available, for each country that used each aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, moved to international tech tree??:facepalm:

 

My tech tree is more like a ultimate evolve form of the current UK tech tree. I change its name to "British Commonwealth" so it fit the content of the tech tree better.

 

Should I change the title from "Complete British Commonwealth Aviation Tech Tree" to  "Complete UK Aviation Tech Tree", so this thread can be moved back to UK section?.

Edited by kentwong4a28
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.