This is the poll on the Research System for the suggestion. It will be open for about a week, the result will decide if Shared Research stays, or if the suggestion reverts to Divided Research
I think having split research would definitely help foster that sense of independence for a subtree, however, with the current RP gain, unlocking vehicles would be incredibly slow as the earnings of a single battle would have the be split among different vehicles of different subtrees.
I mean wasn’t that where the heils-shared RP system came in? (the one that was originally in use for the research part of the suggestion) How the first research system read to me was RP gain was split until you checked a box allowing all RP to go to the same place. Or at least that’s what the original research part looked like to me.
Basically, RP is split until a checkbox is clicked(with an attached drop-down to select the nation), which then all RP will go to the vehicle currently being researched in that nation.
Definitely the shared research system. I don’t really see the need for a split system since it would force you to play vehicles you don’t want to play just to unlock one you want to. It’s also just simpler since researching one tank/plane at a time is simpler than researching 2.
The split system also prevents premiums from being as effective.
My point still stands that the only way I support this is as an alternative OPTION for people.
If people prefer segregation, they can have it.
If people prefer everything on one page, they can have it.
Both systems require adding new features to the research page system.
This is a compromise where everyone wins and one I initially shared earlier in the topic.
If you want it in coding terms: Pages/lines are visual, and the backend is how it’s handled.
“Shared” requires the backend to be separate from the visual pages, whereas the pages are a visual representation of what’s going on behind the scenes.
Both systems require an overhaul of how research is done, as well as separation from the underlying system.
Might as well allow people to customize their visual experiences.
The issue is you’re not asking for different visuals, you’re asking for an entirely different research order.
You can’t take an entire tree, squish it into a single line and have the research order stay the same. That’s just not possible.
So once again, this is a rework, not a purely visual change. The only way I can see a shared view possible is by having the toggle you propose arrange all foldered nations trees side by side using a side scroll bar and combined premium section (since there is no premium research order).
This has its own issues, but is at least a reasonably possible purely visual variation of the Rework.
I have worked in quite a few changes and improvements based on the input of other players, there’s even a currently active poll on the suggested research mechanics.
Your suggestion requires the same exact overhaul that having customized research visuals would have:
Separation of the mechanic of research and the visual representation of the tech tree.
With that, people that aren’t offended by other nations being with their country can have it all on one page/window, and for your preference you can segregate the nations.
And yes, I am using the literal dictionary definitions of words in the previous sentence; no connotations.
Cause with your suggestion, or those that want more customization among their research window, both have the same solution.
So opposing the solution that your own suggestion pushes for… just cause I said it or what?
Not really. It does require a new research order, but a vehicle can still only be in one place of the research order and there cannot be a toggle to switch it around. There is no separation of research order and the visual representation, instead the research order changes by putting vehicles in their own nations.
Current Research Order
Spoiler
Reworked Research Order
Spoiler
You can’t have both at the same time, and you especially can’t have a toggle between the two without destroying the games progression.
Your problem is that you think the rework is a visual change. It is not.
They can be, but the issue is players would simply use the toggle to change research order, which would essentially make large parts of the trees skippable.
As much as I’m all for changes that benefit players like this, it also doesn’t seem realistic in the slightest.
If there is a toggle there needs to be a fixed research order that is the same no matter how it’s displayed, which sadly doesn’t seem possible when switching between one 5 line tree for multiple nations and multiple 5 line trees for single nations each.
Though if you do have an idea how this would work you could propose that here as well.
Voting time for the Research System Poll is over and the results are in! With a 90 to 10% difference Shared Research has won the poll and is here to stay!
How do you pick a vehicle in a different sub-tree? As requires switching pages, and you can’t switch pages without WT automatically picking your next research vehicle.
Let’s say you unlocked a tank but you want to research something in one of the other nations in the folder, how do you switch pages to do that? As WT currently does not allow that, as due to what I pointed out earlier if I switch tabs(going from ground to air, switching nations etc) it auto-selects the next vehicle to put RP into.
I’ll accept the shared research win, but I still think it should be togglable like ground-to-helicopter research.
That’s actually a pretty good concern. This system would require the nation selection(within the respective folder) to be available to cycle through all pages of a vehicle type a faction would have to offer.
I’ll put some more thought into it, then add a more detailed solution to the suggestion.
That is actually one of the main principles of this rework.
Basically, you’d have two lines of SPAA, an Italian one for the Italy, and a Hungarian one for Hungary. You can still research both and use all vehicles as you can now, but you can also stick to just one country if you want.
While now a Hungarian player is forced to play Italy to get some of their nation as support in the tree, with the rework they would have a Hungarian tree that fully represents the nation and can still be used with Italy for gameplay purposes.
The idea is to get rid of the “sub” in subtree, instead it’s just two fully implemented nations that can be used in lineups together.
The rework doesn’t just move subtrees, it uses the additional space from the added specific national trees to expand both nations, so more new vehicles would be added to all nations involved.
That’s more Hungary and more Italy, everyone wins!
Yes, since more vehicles automatically means more grind, and many nations if givem the space to expand could also get their foreign imports.
But…
No, because this would relieve “copy and paste” designs from many nations. Take for example the Hungarian aircraft or Finnish ground vehicles that are currently a mandatory part of their respective “main” trees. Both would now be optional for their nations and instead replaced in that tree by some of the many indigenous developments Italy and Sweden are still missing. Here the tree becomes more unique.
So if this is an issue for you, you can still choose to only plan nations with their own significant military development, and possibly even have a better experience than you can have now with some of them.
Yet it doesn’t hinder players wanting to play these other nations either, since they are still available. It even gives an option that isn’t there now, playing Finland or Hungary for example alone as their own nation.
Also keep in mind that subtrees themselves are very restrictive. Many current subtrees simply lack the space to add all of their unique options, and with more and more subtrees per nation and even rumored subtree plans for USA and USSR this issue will only become more present over time.
