Subtree Rework - Nation Folders

[SilentTracker]

@MAUSWAFFE

which allows them to provide 110% of the actual RP gains to vehicle research.

EDIT EDIT: Lol, I am going to modify some of the info/screens in the post below still in a bit, need a break first though Subtree Rework - Nation Folders - #279 by SilentTracker

Spoiler

EDIT: OK! I think this is correct now, please let me know if there are still any errors, math or concept wise. Thanks!

Some comments about the math, you would need to add the new RP boost % inside of the ( )'s.

Everything inside the ( )'s is additive (all RP boosts currently are), and everything outside of the ( )'s is multiplicative (like the Premium vehicles’ 2.0x SL boost. Which doubles SL boosters, unlike the additive math that RP boosters use).

A 1.1x outside of the ( )'s wouldn’t work as you described. Everything inside the ( )'s is always added together before the external multipliers are factored in ( PEMDAS ).

Your 1.1x multiplier math shown below:
(I used Wolfram Alpha to make sure of your initial math, which is correct, the result would be 765.6%)

However, 1.1x like you have outside of the ( )'s would be a multiplier. And, it would not be 10%. An increase from 660% to 766% = an increase of 16.06%:
(I am using Wolfram Alpha to prevent errors on my part.)

Conversely, if you did add an extra 100% inside the ( )'s, the result would be 928%
2.32x(100%+100%[premium time]+100%[Talisman]+100%[New proposed boost])
2.32x(400%) = 928%

IF your intent is to add a simple 10% RP boost, then you would add it inside of the ( )'s:

Resulting overall % increase in RP boost from 660% to 719.2% = overall increase of 8.97% (This resulting overall % increase is always going to be a bit funny, as the RP multiplier to the left of the ( )'s changes depending on the BR of the vehicle.) But the resulting overall % boost is much closer to 10%, compared to adding a 1.1x to the outside of the ( )'s.

Even if you added a 2.0x RP boost outside of the ( )'s it would never be an added 100%, it would be a 2x multiplier to everything else previously added up inside the ( )'s making a proposed RP boost wildly high 🙂

So, if you are intending to only increase the gain by 10%, you would simply add in an extra 10% inside of the ( )'s, not 100%, nor 110%. And absolutely nothing outside of the ( )'s. You cannot add a % outside of the ( )'s because it would instead be turned into an intensely powerful multiplier. (And again, 1.1x outside of the ( )'s does not = 10%, it is well over 10% “because of the math” lol.)

UNLESS that is your intent, but the resulting boost would be much higher than 10%, especially at higher BR’s where the normal RP multiplier outside of the ( )'s gets higher.

TL;DR: Percent boosts go inside the ( )'s, multipliers go outside the ( )'s 👍

[MAUSWAFFE]

@SilentTracker

An increase from 660% to 766% = an increase of 16.06%:

Yeah, sorry I made this unclear, but the AV-8S usually has a total multiplier of 696%, which is higher than the T-2s 660%. So due to that your math is a bit off, since I didn’t provide all necessary values for it.

I should’ve probably included that as a reference.

---

Basically the entire math I did was just taking the final RP multiplier of 696% and multiplying that by 1.1, which is 765.6 (rounded up to 766). The reason I added it to the end rather than in front of the brackets like the the premium SL multiplier of 2.0 used to double SL gain is simply lazy editing.

This basically means that the final SL gain is increased by 10%.

I did also consider applying it like a 10% booster, which gives 719.2%.

This only increases final RP gain by ~3.3%.

Since I wasn’t sure if the next-vehicle-in-line bonus applied like a booster or a full multiplier, I decided to use the more significant number of the two, since that benefits the players more, but also gives a greater ince tive to spend money from a dev perspective.

Of course this is just an example value. This idea is more of a proof of concept to show Gaijin that the Subtree Rework can be profiteable to them, and in light of the current auction situation also to show them that you can create incentives to spend money without building on predatory marketing or harming players in any way.

[SilentTracker]

@MAUSWAFFE

Yeah, sorry I made this unclear, but the AV-8S usually has a total multiplier of 696%, which is higher than the T-2s 660%.

Ahhh, I will edit some of my screens/info in a bit, but I need a break to eat and stuff lol. Cool, cheers man! 🍻

Also, you can edit your post and click the 75% or 50% buttons to make your screenshots a bit smaller so as to not take up so much space in the thread 😉

[MAUSWAFFE]

Don’t worry about it, this is mostly on me for making it so confusing…

I’m always happy to see people help improve my suggestion in any way!

(Like this here for example)

@SilentTracker

Also, you can edit your post and click the 75% or 50% buttons to make your screenshots a bit smaller so as to not take up so much space in the thread 😉

[WZNGT]

This will make the trees rather confusing IMO, and we might get more copy-paste in order to expand the nations that don’t have much stuff when they can be just skins in the current tree system.

Let’s say if a nation lacks anything between Rank 3 and 7, you will have to go to other nations in that folder to unlock Rank 4 to 6 just to unlock the Rank 7 that you want in the first place, since there’s no way Gaijin letting you research that with Rank 3 vehicles.

Meanwhile I heard that the reason behind 5 lines maximum was the codes of War Thunder, if that can be solved to allow more lines I would prefer to keep everything under the same tab which is simpler.

[MAUSWAFFE]

@WZNGT

This will make the trees rather confusing IMO

Personally I’d say finding each nations vehicles under the same nations flag is less confusing than, say, looking for Indian vehicles that are now under the British flag.

---

@WZNGT

we might get more copy-paste in order to expand the nations that don’t have much stuff when they can be just skins in the current tree system.

Yes, copy paste could increase, but I’m woking on a system to solve that issue right now.
I can’t say too much since it’s not done, but I will say that it might be very muh appreciated to make progression faster, and makes such vehicles more of an option or a bonus than a roadblock as they are often seen now.

But as for skins, I see that as a problem. If I want to play Canadian vehicles for example, I wouldn’t be able to make my lineups. I’d have to play multiple nations, just to get fractions of the lineup I want that can’t be used together.

---

@WZNGT

Let’s say if a nation lacks anything between Rank 3 and 7, you will have to go to other nations in that folder to unlock Rank 4 to 6 just to unlock the Rank 7 that you want in the first place, since there’s no way Gaijin letting you research that with Rank 3 vehicles.

The goal is to have each nation be able to functionally independent. However I haven’t thought of nations that lack entire ranks.

For the most part nations might have issues like Israel, where there is content for those ranks, but in the current games setup Gaijin don’t deem it worth it to add them. In the reworked system though, even just a handful or in extreme cases just one vehicle per rank are enough to male progression work.

But yes, nations that lack entire ranks couldn’t be played independently.

Though it’s worth noting that right now, no nation can be played independently, with even “main” nations sometimes requiring subtree content to progress, so the rework would still be a net positive.

---

@WZNGT

Meanwhile I heard that the reason behind 5 lines maximum was the codes of War Thunder, if that can be solved to allow more lines I would prefer to keep everything under the same tab which is simpler.

Gaijin stated they see the issue with lower resolution screens, where trees would be hard to view. They also explicitly reject the idea of a sidewards slider.

However I think even with higher resolution screens nd possible 6-7 line future trees, such a rework might be necessary.
For example take a look at the complete (Ultimate) British tree by Ixtav, which is a 9 line tree for Britain and South Africa. Add to that the now official Indian subtree, and you already ran out of space again.

[YaSen]

How would you implement complete copypaste planes? For example Italy, Hungary and Romania all used Bf 109G-6, will I have to grind each in separate branch?

Maybe it can be possible to implement it as a single plane, which you research only once and operator depends on the skin applied.
Also there could be some special icon for such vehicles telling that it’s common for all branches.
Like there is Bf-109G-6 in Italian, Hungarian and Romanian branches (set to respective skins), I can choose any to research and they will have a common bar showing same amount of RP, once it’s researched, I can buy it for SL and I have to do it only once no matter in what branch, it becomes purchased in each branch. So it’s treated like a single plane which I can research in different branches, but it’s still a single plane, which I can put into line-up only once.
Same with premium planes, you purchase it once, but it’s represented in each respective branch, example would be Bf 109G-2, which we already have as Hungarian premium with Romanian skin available, this plane would be shown in both Romanian and Hungarian branches, but it’d be treated as a single plane.

[MAUSWAFFE]

@YaSen

How would you implement complete copypaste planes? For example Italy, Hungary and Romania all used Bf 109G-6, will I have to grind each in separate branch?

This is something I’m making a separate suggestion for. It’s a problem that isn’t only there with foldered nations, just gets more noticeable.

There’s still a bit to work out, but the basic idea is to make internal categories for copied vehicles. So for example all Bf-109G-6 are considered part of one group. The more of them you already have, the less RP and SL you need to spend on others from this group.
This also isn’t just for foldered nations, but all common vehicles. So for example after playing US, US exports in other trees become cheaper in other trees too.

Essentially instead of roadblocking players and having them play the same over and over again, familiar vehicles like these can be quick and cheap ways to fill lineups, especially once it comes to higher BRs.

---

@YaSen

Maybe it can be possible to implement it as a single plane, which you research only once and operator depends on the skin applied.

That’s not a bad idea. This might be a good system within Nation Folders. I also like the idea of the skin changing the operator nation. So each foldered nation that has it in the tree provides one standard camouflage option, which is already a level of choice that I’d really like.

[Tubby_Vermin]

I respectfully disagree; this approach perfectly addresses the existing limitations of WT’s current Nation layout restrictions.

Representing each nation individually adds diversity to the game and allows players to create unique, and occasionally nation-exclusive, lineups. In my opinion, this is a win-win situation.

[THEPolishThunder]

Is this basically sub tree’s getting their own tech tree’s inside of other tech tree’s, while being able to use those vehicles in the same load out and being under that countries flag when in match making?

[MAUSWAFFE]

Yes, that’s essentially what it is.

About the flag though it might be possible to show the flag of the majority of a players lineup instead of always defaulting to one nation, but this is a difficult idea because it might be an issue for the UI with too many national flags.

[THEPolishThunder]

Pretty interesting concept,could the same idea be used for when making a group tech tree (putting multiple countries under one flag)?

[MAUSWAFFE]

Yes, that is the idea. I think this might be a good option for multiple nations that aren’t in game. Like Eastern Europe for example, where Gaijin had plans for a long time, but likely also understand that any single nation as “main” nation over others might cause backlash.

This way the nations could all be equal, but still combine lineups to match existing nations like the combined tree concepts made by players do.

[AydanL44100]

We need this so much, I can’t imagine any problem this would probably pose for anyone and it solves so many current issues
Maybe if we whine loud enough the devs will lose it and give us this system

[MAUSWAFFE]

Gaijin have just announced their newest event vehicle, the HAL HF-24 Marut

[Event] Get the HF-24 in the Spirit of the Tempest Event! - News - War Thunder

This is a rather interesting aircraft for the Indian nation, and I’m sure many are really excited to see it in game, but it also shows one of the biggest flaws with current subtrees.

With the HF-24, the main serial production variant of a domestic aircraft of the Indian nation is locked to a limited time event. In an Indian tree, this would’ve been a techtree vehicle, but because it is “just” a subtree, it is treated differently.

Subtrees should mean multiple nations working together, instead of one nations content being taken to pad out another.

[GTP_Paulie-psn]

Right on.
Nation Folders is desperately needed for this game. And people need to get over the mentality that “wah but giving that nation to that tech tree means they get access to things that my main nation doesn’t.” Just play more than one tech tree…

[Kingtiez-live]

This is a great way to put more independentish style trees into the game without exactly making them their own tech tree.

[PlayedStatue626-live]

+1 could be used to flesh out subtrees while also allowing the host nation to receive more domestic options. A win win for all involved

[Nostalgistic]

What the heck, why hasn’t this been passed on to the developers yet? This is a solid proposal, and it absolutely deserves consideration. You have my full support.

[AydanL44100]

wait till we get the Tejas as an event xD
I swear at this point it might happen