Well that gonna change sooner or later as the US air tree is already bloated as is.
And people still want a sub for it but with a similar system made by @MAUSWAFFE here would make a Sub tree possible for the US and could tidy somethings up.
2 Likes
Given the 85% positive vote, you seem to be the specific crowd.
Then just say that instead of creating an unnecessary argument where you jump between random “points” & misunderstandings of the base thing you critique. It’s A-Ok to have a disagreeing opinion, but that doesn’t translate to filling a suggestion with comment “clutter” that you claim to hate so vehemently. There is a poll for a reason
7 Likes
Idk what happened there
1 Like
+1 always thought it should be like this in my opinion
2 Likes
I don’t get how this suggestion is bad.
If anything is a Best of both worlds suggestion.
As it gives sub-trees, pusdo-independent-trees. Allowing them to have anywhere for 2-5 lines (and most of them need more than one line). It always allows people to either skip the sub-nation if they don’t want to play or just play the sub-nation.
And besides, whenever a better sub-trees question comes up it’s always something like this for an answer as of right now sub-trees are looking more and more like a bad idea. Used more as filler for the host nation than to represent the sub-nation.
6 Likes
Yea as I said South Africa & other Commonwealth things in Britain is a good place to start with.
As then not only would you have a full line but premiums to go with too.
1 Like
This is a good idea. If they do feel like testing this system on one nation first, South Africa could be a great option. There is already a decent variety of vehicles to be moved, and they could add it together with an air tree to show off the possibilities the independent research tree offers.
2 Likes
I mean under this system used be able to have more than one sub-tree as nations like Canada would need at least 2 lines on both air and ground(after removal of the shared stuff)
So it would be:
UK: South Africa, Canada, ANZAC and other major commonwealth nations. (because just lumping the rest of the commonwealth together is its own bad idea)
Sweeden: Finland, Denmark, Norway, Iceland
could get as sub-trees and you could play all of them together or just by themselves over the other nations with them
2 Likes
+1, there are plenty of vehicles that could be added to almost all of the nations that have subtrees in game, and the same goes for many subtrees (hell, currently BeNeLux air has 1 unique aircraft and HU air has none) that either dont fit due to both trees taking up a large amount of space or certain vehicles in subtrees not fitting the style of a nations cough MiG-21 Bison cough.
This would allow for a diversification of some trees and give greater freedom for what could be done with subtrees, especially in sim where things make no sense sometimes with the same aircraft on all sides.
Something I am curious of though is how you would deal with parts of subtrees offering little to nothing over their Main counterparts, like south african air ranks 1 to 4, in which everything thst could be added is already able to come to the main tree, would you leave it blank and have an israel style tree?have skins that change the vehicles apparent nationality? Just have the player grind the same vehicles again?
1 Like
Yea though with this move the SPAA line will look more bare than a starved field mouse.
But with the recent research ground with heli thing you kinda need to grind this tab to get decent SPAA’s.
That’s the only real downside to this
2 Likes
This sounds the most Gaijin. (but I also wouldn’t rule out there being a few domestic mods or just other C&P that’s not in the host nation to use)
It’s also why I said “shared stuff” because C&P not in the host tree or in a sub-tree added before I feel is fair game to come to the sub-tree(under this system)
1 Like
That is actually a good question. Perhaps vehicles that are available with multiple nations could receive lower research requirements, and generally be preferably foldered. Another option might be to make their techtree connections optional once equal aircraft of other nations within the folder have been acquired.
I’d still like to include them though, for the sake of players that want to (for example) play the South African tree, without playing Britain.
I’ll include this under issues in the suggestion as I’m not quite certain about a solution yet.
That is actually something that had been addressed earlier. My current solution is to have a rank unlock for all nations once you get it in one. So through this system if you wanted to research just an SPAA line, you still could do that alongside another nations grind.
It is probably still a flawed system, but I’m always open for ideas for improvement.
1 Like
This might not be the most solid idea but you could have it that both vehicles in the trees are linked, IE if you research it in one tree you get it in the rest of the trees, for example If i researched the hurricane in the british tree it would unlock in the south african tree as well, or if i researched say the Kittyhawk in the south african tree it would unlock in the british tree.
You could also add something like a camo link on top of this where you could take the aircraft from the tree you are looking at and can change its nationality by selecting a camo for the other nation, for example if i had the british Hurricane in my linup but wanted to swap it for the south african one, i could just change the camo to a south african one and it becomes the ZA one
2 Likes
I really like this idea honestly. Added it to the suggestion.
2 Likes
Instead of folders, how about just expand the width of the tech tree. 5 columns cannot be enough if a subtree is added. Why are we forcing ourselves to this limitation when even just a simple zoom out or resizing could add like 2 more columns and get rid of the clutter problem altogether.
The past suggestion for this in the old forums even have the nations as “Alliances” instead with the same foldering aspect however I dont think we nearly have enough nations & vehicles at the moment to implement this.
The current roster of vehicles arent enough to warrant the need for the foldering. Sure its slowly becoming cluttered but then again I would suggest adding more columns first before implementing a radical change such as this. I would imagine Gaijin would prefer the current system as well as they wouldnt be forced to fill in vehicles fast.
Yea true so scrap the ZA one for now and make a example for Finland as Finland got enough C&P things to make a whole new tree.
1 Like
This is a fantastic idea! The separation of sub-trees, while still being within the main nation is a good way of giving sub-trees a unique feel, rather than just being sandwiched into the main nation’s vehicle lines.
I 100% support this suggestion and hope it will be implemented! +1
9 Likes
This idea right here, if there is one word to describe it… Its perfect.
Okay I’ll explain my reason why I think that (Even though I don’t really need to but hey screw it I got nothing better to do lol.)
This in many ways will not only would be great but also would be a win-win for everyone on board.
The 1st being the people who wanted there nation in the game: Nations that been suggested like Poland or Yugoslavia or India or Canada or BeNeLux, etc… This will well not a full on independent tech-tree, but almost enough to where the people can play with that nations vehicles or like how one of the image shows a combine line-up Which I love that type of idea, though that’s just me personally.
another being it will leave space for stuff for the main 10 nations that they had made like for example: A British Light/IFV Line-up or more domestic Italian planes, so in a way it makes both the people who wanted there nation in the game happy & the people wanted there domestic stuff in there tech-tree happy as well.
Hell not only that Gaijin would benefit from this and in many ways…
By the wise words of Lickboot from that one Tom & Jerry movie:
Though I only have one deep concern though. That being on how Gaijin would implemented the thing as a whole, since with there track-record when it comes to implementing stuff which was botched heavily by them, so there is somewhat fear and speculation on that Gaijin may botch it though that is something we have to wait and see.
Overall, I support this but I am a little scared on how it Gaijin can mess it up but I am a man who can cope & hope that it will be smooth-sailing.
2 Likes
+1
This is actually a great suggestion, I love it. Great work!
I definitely see the flag issue though, that is my only concern about this. Being represented with your own flag in battle is important for equality. Flag of the ‘selected’ nation being shown makes sense, but which flag would be shown if you were to bring a ‘mixed lineup’?
1 Like
That is sadly an issue I don’t exactly have an answer for yet. I’d love for it to simply show all flags, but I can see why Gaijin would want to avoid such a thing.
Perhaps the majority of vehicles in the lineup? Though that does leave the question what would be done if you take multiple nations in equal amounts.
1 Like