-
If you mean Canada by North American vehicles, they can go either way really either USA or UK Commonwealth, the thing is it shouldnt matter too much where they end up being added as theyll be a distinct tree under a larger group of trees that make up both US / UK parent trees.
-
Now for Africa, its a bit tricky, not a whole lot of them can even be considered a subtree on their own. Maybe for North Africa in a separate Arab Nations Tech Tree but thats about it I think.
-
It really should affect WW2 as well as this is a total reorganization.
2 Likes
In this reworked system vehicles are still divided by nation, so specific conflicts only indirectly matter.
They matter for the consideration of where to place a nation initially, alongside general player appeal and gameplay concerns, similar to subtrees now.
The difference is that once a nation is placed it’s not a subtree of another nation, it is a national tree simply sharing a gameplay faction with another nation.
I’ve also thought about going into old War Thunder lore about mercenary factions repairing and using old military vehicles to maybe establish these factions a bit more, but I’m devided on this and not sure what players would think.
2 Likes
Well I assumed Canada would be in the allies and Nato factions in their respective time periods but I was mainly wondering about smaller countries like Cuba .
1 Like
Tbh, this proposed system reminds me of how world of tanks did post war vehicles, splitting it between east bloc (USSR and China), west bloc (NATO and Japan iirc) and neutral (Mostly Israel and Egypt).
1 Like
You’ll find most Canadian wouldn’t be too happy with being put under the US, even with the pseudo independent trees, nation folders bring.
(Mix of historic and current events)
Rereading this conversation, this is about the “NATO, WARSAW, etc trees” which I think is a silly as a “Commonwealth tree”(this suggestion dose allow something like it to exist without the glaring problems with the idea most people seem to miss.) and not what this suggestion is at all.
2 Likes
That’s not exactly what this system does. It’s still the same national trees, only that subtrees are added the same way that “main” nations are and coherent national trees are preferred over scattering vehicles.
I don’t think any full on “NATO tree” or Warsaw pact tree" would work out, instead it keeps a similar national model to what War Thunder already has and improves on it.
2 Likes
Reminds me about dealers in Armored Warfare…
But it will decrease most of discussions about why X country become subtree of A tree.
2 Likes
I more ment what 君则 had suggested
1 Like
Eh idk how I feel about this one, I’ma have to think about it.
1 Like
Is there anything in particular that you’d do differently?
If so it could help improve the suggestion if you brought up those issues here.
Well I’m not exactly grasping on how to split vehicles from the same sub country from WW2 and modern.
I also not sure what the best system of research is. Mine was pretty straightforward and it was doubling rp and spliting it between main tree and sub tree.
1 Like
They aren’t split for the research tree. It’s a rework of subtrees in the sense of research progression and UI, but matchmaking isn’t part of it just yet.
I might consider a separate suggestion about that at some point, mainly for sim matchmaking, but that will be a separate suggestion.
Right now it’s simply that you research one tank, aircraft, helicopter, bluewater and coastal vehicle at a time per faction. Same as it’s done now per nation where subtrees are permanently part of.
Doubling RP would be nice, but is also a hard sell when trying to convince Gaijin to add it.
True but it wouldn’t make it go any faster since their are so many new vehicles. It would also keep the grind manageable.
1 Like
True, with more vehicles and nations added Gaijin should make sure to have the grind reflect that.
Completing the game doesn’t mean reaching the top of one nation only, they need to encourage playing more nations.
It’s not the point of this suggestion specifically, but I do agree it’s necessary.
Doubling rp for nations with subtrees isn’t the solution imo, that would mean some nations (the ones with subtrees) get more rp than others so a single tree can be grinded faster if there’s many trees foldered with it. They should just make the grind less absurdly painful, especially at higher tiers
1 Like
Yeah I agree. When I said that I meant a general RP increase across the entire game, not bound to any condition. After all when there is more content in the game, the rewards should reflect that to allow players to keep up.
But again, this is an unrelated suggestion that doesn’t include any reward changes by itself.
If you are interested in a suggestion that actually promotes playing more nations, I made a separate suggestion about achievement-based research bonus.
It introduces a permanent 10% bonus to RP rewards for each completed nations, which stacks the more nations you complete.
Of course looking at the reworked subtree system, these additional nations could also provide such a research bonus, which helps balance the added amount of vehicles and the time players have to spend to unlock them.
1 Like
Tbh 10% ain’t a lot for a whole nation grind
Overall I also think the reward multiplier of vehicles should get much higher at high tiers to compensate for the drastic cost increase at these tiers
1 Like
How much space is in a techtree?
Just now we finally got a confirmed vehicle limit per rank, so we actually have a proper way of defining how much space is in a tech tree!
According to this, a vehicle folder is limited to 3-4 vehicles. Since we already know the hard set limits of five lines per tech tree, as well as three vehicles (potentially folders) for each line per rank, it’s now possible to fully calculate the exact amount a research tree has!
So assuming all the space is used regardless of logical placement, we can calculate this as:
5 [Lines] * 3 [Folders] * X [Vehicles per folder] = Total amount of space
Now using the high estimate [4] from the given value of 3-4 as our X, we can calculate a maximum space limit:
5 * 3 * 4 = 60
This gives us 60 vehicles per rank as the maximum available space, which gives us 480 vehicles in total for the ground and air research tree with eight ranks each, 420 for bluewater naval with seven ranks, 300 for coastal naval with five ranks and lastly 180 for Helicopters spanning three ranks.
The numbers in the text are invisible, what do I do?
If the numbers in the text appear invisible to you, that is because you are using the light theme of the War Thunder Forum. This means that the symbols highlighted in white appear invisible on the white background.
This color has been chosen to increase contrast and highlight these symbols only in the more widely used dark default theme of the forum, since there is currently no variable highlight color that can show white in the default theme and black in the light theme. Once such a feature is added to the forum this issue will be fixed and the suggestions will be more accessible to all users.
The best temporary solution currently is to highlight the text to read it, revealing the missing symbols. Alternatively it is also possible to temporarily switch to the default theme
On paper this seems like a lot, however when keeping in mind logical progression this does break apart rather easily. This is also reflected in official statements
Here we see that this limit is only a theoretical maximum, there will be 3-4 vehicles at most in a folder, and vehicles in a folder are required to be placed around the same BR.
Additionally, research trees all follow a general structure, where you couldn’t simply place any vehicle in any line. Mostly they are divided by vehicle type, but where progression allows also sometimes by other factors like manufacturers or their historical role. In current subtrees, we also sometimes see a division by nation, such as in the mostly Finnish / Hungarian lines in the Swedish / Italian research trees.
Reasonably it can be said that especially when dealing with multiple nations in a research tree, space becomes much more of an issue than it would seem from the theoretical maximum.
It also seems Gaijin have noticed these issues, as seen with the recently leaked restructuring of the British ground research tree. But I won’t go into this too much for now, since it will be much better to do that once official news are released.
9 Likes
RP Discount for Previously-Played Import/Export Vehicles
Subtrees currently are already known to bring many imported vehicles that to players that have already played them might seem uninteresting. With reworked subtrees this becomes even more noticeable, as imported vehicles often form the backbone of their respective nations militaries.
However recently @Rowiek has submitted a great suggestion that helps deal with this issue and more
Functionally it is relatively simple, giving 20% RP discounts for both research and modifications on vehicles a player has already researched or spaded respectively elsewhere. If a player has already done this a second time an additional 10% discount is applied for a total of 30%.
Mechanics:
- Base Discount: If a player has fully researched and spaded a vehicle (or a very similar variant) in one nation, they receive a 20% RP discount when unlocking that vehicle in another nation.
- Extra Bonus: If the player has also completed the same or nearly identical vehicle in a third tree, they gain an additional 10% RP discount, totaling up to 30% RP reduction for subsequent unlocks of the same platform.
- Discounts would apply to both RP required to unlock the vehicle and RP required to spade modules (optional, but recommended).
Unlike RP boosts that often apply only to base RP and have less than stated effects on actual earnings, the discount to the price directly allows the grind to be notably faster by those exact 20 - 30%.
This bonus also isn’t limited to just vehicles across nations, but also functionally identical vehicles of the same type.
Eligibility Criteria:
- Vehicles must share the same chassis/frame/platform and be functionally very similar.
- Examples:
- F-5E in USA, China, and Germany.
- T-55 in USSR, East Germany, and Finland.
- Leopard 2A4 variants across Germany, Sweden, and Italy.
For an added example within a single nation, this might apply to the foldered Type 74 (F) after researching and spading the Type 74 (E).
Please go support his suggestion, since it can really help make it more enjoyable for players to branch out across different nations while giving no downside at all.
13 Likes
I’ve always thought vehicles should be cheaper when you own them in another tree, guess I’m not the only one then
1 Like