while non major nations should be in War thunder, they should stick to being a supplementary to the main tree.
my only issue with how subnations are at the moment is that countries are being torn between multiple trees, imagine being a Canadian wanting to play your vehicles, you got to grind three whole trees to do that when it should only be one for that experience
Also in response to your DM that I’ve had open for a month now as a tab.
That’s part of the concerns that this quote solves:
To use this as an example at this time.
Right now this visual page is directly connected to the research mechanic. It’s not a representation of the research system, it is the research system given a GUI.
This is the problem Gaijin faces for YOUR suggestion as well as more than 5 columns.
What I state is correct: They need to separate this visual representation and the actual researching of vehicles in order to change how the visual representation is.
The reason I oppose your suggestion as a “be all” solution [American slang for “everything solution”] is because it’s inherently nonintuitive and forces something that many players will never want.
The solution of separating the visual representation FROM the actual research system allows for your solution to be an OPTION for players, and the existing visual representation to exist for those of us that don’t want to go through extra menus.
On top of that, you’d need to figure out how to keep these lines existing when viewing other windows:
I hope this clarifies my concerns of your suggestion anywhere being close to forced upon people rather than being an option, as well as supplying the actual solution which would make multiple columns as well as your idea both able to exist.
Okay…. So what if there was a visual indicator of your currently researched vehicle?
As I said, optional.
Don’t force people into a system that’s objectively more menus.
There’s no non-anti-consumer reason to oppose player choice when the solution allows for it.
Sorry, I don’t understand.
Players do want this subtree idea, look at the voting results.
You want the current system, but with more columns to accommodate more trees? This is not possible, Gaijin says they cannot expand beyond five columns. Also this system is clearly more readable than having to add a horizontal sliding bar.
I don’t understand why you’re opposed to more folders. It’s not even like you have go through each one manually. You just hover over the main nation’s flag and that’s it. That’s like two seconds.
There wouldn’t have to be a need to keep current vertical lines. With these folders separating out the subtree, you could just research the particular vehicles you want (in that nation)
1- No, people that have found this allegedly want this; which outright replacement of a graphical interface with something that can’t even be AB tested with how things are currently would be a massive gamble which is terrible.
2- More trees aren’t necessary for most tech trees to begin with especially since we lack at least 1 more dedicated tech tree for Europe.
3- You do have to go through each one manually to begin research on something, or find something. Whereas currently it’s just a scroll wheel.
4- Which is what I believe can be done with separating the graphical interfaces with the research mechanics, with seamless transitioning.
That way this idea CAN be implemented, and people that want other graphical interfaces can get hose as well.
Calling something terrible is not objective. I understand you don’t like the suggestion, and that is perfectly fine, but that is also exactly what the “No” vote option in the poll is for.
So far your only proposed improvement to the suggestion is that you want to be able to turn it off, ignoring what the implication of such a feature would be. You seem less concerned about improving the concept then you are afraid something you don’t like might get too popular and be implemented.
I never made that suggestion. I feel your post is dishonest about me.
I suggested a separation of the UI and mechanic, which would allow multiple options to exist for people.
Edited for removing stupid combative language, and for clarification.
Your suggestion was to make the entire rework of the subtree system an option you can choose to toggle off to go back to the current structure. It is clear you don’t want the rework, you want to keep the current system.
Your criticism isn’t done to work out issues and improve the rework, you just try to minimize the impact it would have on you in case it is implemented.
So please, use the poll that is there specifically for players to voice their opinion.
I want your suggestion to work.
Polls have opposition bias that concerns me.
Everyone plays the game, everyone knows the forums exist.
If they’re upset at the existing features or perceived issues they come to the forum. People content with how a thing is tend not to speak on it.
I fear removal of a comfortable graphical interface, namely the replacement, would cause major strife in the community.
I BELIEVE that your idea CAN exist with the current graphical interface, or a minor modified version of the current graphical interface.
People don’t mind added features, people hate when familiar features are removed; you see this across games.
And ALL my suggestion is doing is to make YOUR suggestion plausible without causing backlash for the highly likely majority that are content with the existing single-page UI.
The separation of UI from the mechanic of research makes YOUR suggestion plausible without threat of backlash.
I’ve been stating this for months at this point, though poorly initially.
I fail to see any removed feature. Everything is still there, the nation based trees are easy to understand and navigating them is as easy as a simple additional mouse click that in turn allows for many exciting new vehicles to be added for all affected nations.
When I tried to consider a toggle as you suggested I ran into many issues I couldn’t fix, mainly boiling down to the point of research order.
A vehicle is placed behind another, but when turning multiple 5 line trees back into one, this can’t be kept the same. So either the research order changes with the toggle, or the display of research order will be very unintuitive and hard to follow for at least one of these options.
So really all that can be properly done with a toggle is still stay restricted to the space of only a single 5 line tree, with no real option to branch out any of the nations further than you already can. And even then there would still be issues with vehicles that are currently placed throughout the main trees, such as the South African ZA-35 being connected to the British Chieftain Marksman.
So even when the rework is effectively down to a glorified search filter by operating nation, it doesn’t let the toggle function properly.
I can’t compromise a rework that hundreds of people have voted for, so unless you have an implementation that doesn’t face those issues and still allows for all benefits of the rework, there won’t be a toggle.
It can though. You just tie the progression together in the backend, and give a visual indication that they’re attached. AKA separating the UI from the research system, and the UI being a “loose representation” for lack of a better term; MMORPGs do this with quest requirements.
As an alternative, you can treat the start as a foldered vehicle.
You can do branching paths.
There are an unknown amount of more methods to result in the same parity between visual representations on the screen.
Edit:
To reiterate: I do not oppose the idea itself; I only oppose replacing outright the graphical interface.
The backend, the mechanics of research, I assume everyone here wants that unified.
And in my eyes the only way for that to be unified, and this idea to work is separating the graphical interface from the underlying mechanics of research… which would allow for columns, the existing graphical interface, and your idea with a number of methods to make them all seamlessly work.
(Hi I’m Laiti the one who wrote the old forum post) I whole heartedly support this for the game, glad to see someone made a suggestion far more in-depth than mine! (And making a lot more sense)
FINALLY!
The solution to the major issue that allows people to stay comfortable with what they’re familiar with.
To reiterate why I think this is plausible:
Gaijin, YOU have to separate the research functionality from the graphical interface of the research windows/folders in order to implement Mauswaffe’s idea to begin with.
With that said, it’s a perfect opportunity to keep the old inferface and/or have the new faction idea at the same time as Mauswaffe’s idea.
Update: Improved formatting and a new Overview!
In a recent update to the suggestion, the formatting of the suggestion has been updated. This includes minor changes for better visibility and a more visually appealing design. @馮如’s Rework for Subtrees from the old forum is also now finally mentioned in the main suggestion.
The main new addition for the suggestion is the Faction Overview, a new menu that, as the name suggests, gives an overview of all vehicles from the various nations of the currently selected faction.
This helps make it easier to navigate the many vehicles these nations could now offer, and makes it a lot more convenient to create lineups.
For more detail, feel free to take a look at the main suggestion!
Special thanks to @AlvisWisla for his original idea
Big +1
Sub-trees should have their own autonomy; their own separate tech trees, premiums and everything, while still being under their parent tech trees. Personally I even want RP not to be shared, but keep the lineups interchangeable in combined battles, with in-battle tabs representing each flag and you would be researching both countries simultaneously.
Any chance you could have something toggle-able like the research helicopters with ground vehicles thing? Instead this time you decide whether or not to split the RP earned across nations evenly or to research just one nation’s tree.
IMO though it would be bad if the RP earned would only be limited to the flag carrier of a nation since the entire point of subtrees in the first place was to supplement what was lacking in a parent tree which would mean both trees would have difficulty researching without the other especially in the current state of economics in WT since the only option you might just have is to split evenly which would mean you will require twice the RP.
I do believe that having the “sub nations” locked behind the main nation, would be a good idea, for example completing Britain, would then unlock Australia and India for research.
But you would be researching two tech trees at once and using both in the same battle. If that’s not enough, maybe some sort of bonus RP and SL multiplier could help, or lowering the costs of researching and purchasing vehicles of sub-tree nations.
This is possibly one of the best suggestions i’ve ever read
