Tech Tree Expansion

This post is partially in response to a video by Youtuber Quadro where it was argued that Enlisted is running out of content for WWII. He said that while there are plenty of maps that could/should be added, there aren’t that many more guns besides prototypes.

I disagree. There is heaps of content that should be added. Much of that is limited due to the determination of sticking with four factions and supposed necessity to get to BR V.

There has been much debate around sub trees, separate tech trees, what factions should and shouldn’t exist.

I was further inspired by reading about Rising Storm: Vietnam where players choose between USA-Allies OR Communist Vietnamese. But within that players could specifically choose to play as USA, South Vietnam, even the Australian Army. Likewise North Vietnam or Vietcong.

So today I propose that for the current factions, instead of having a single giant tech tree, we have drop downs of smaller tech trees for different nations.

The USA and Germany tech trees should be renamed Western Allies and European Axis.

Players would then have a list of countries rather than a single tech tree.

My idea would work very similar to the drop down function on this forum.

This would save trying to cram everything into a massive tech tree or having folders everywhere. It also means players can grind specific nations they’re interested in, without creating whole new factions.

Regarding squads I would suggest that instead of the obsolete ‘accurate units’ we instead have generic ‘Rifleman I’, ‘Assaulter II’ and so forth.
For Western Allies for instance youd have a generic Rifleman squad that starts off as USA but then you can choose between different uniforms for the different nations and research the nations and lines you’re interested in.
For myself I would choose Australian uniforms and then research the Commonwealth tech tree, within Western Allies faction, to get my Lee Enfield Mk III and Owen gun.

Weapons/vehicles would be added based on interest and necessity. I do NOT propose that every single nation here have a full tech tree. Indeed that’s one of the benefits. It’s OKAY if a faction cant make it to BR V or doesnt have such and such a weapon class because they all work together.

It also reduces the need for copy paste. There’s only two major factions which already exist and heaps of tech to go around.

This is a long term proposal. For example I understand we don’t have a Balkans campaign yet, but there’s no reason why we can’t have Greece/Crete/Yugoslavia maps in future, in which case tech trees for those could be added under Allies/Axis where appropriate.

What about Overlap?
I believe most nations wouldnt need overlap/copy paste since they usually had their own tech.

For those instances where tech is shared:
Firstly, all weapons are available to all squads within that faction. So British, Commonwealth and USA can all use Thompson SMGs.
Likewise if you choose French squads you can research French weapons and American tech tree for late war stuff.

I am open to debate over whether specific weapons should be ‘locked’ to certain nations within the faction. So an American couldnt be equipped with a French SMG for example.

Currently we have Brits allowed to use US weapons and vice versa, likewise Germans can have Carcanos so I would imagine keeping it like that but perhaps others disagree?

For the UK and Commonwealth trees I would propose either choosing some weapons for one and some for the other (eg. Commonwealth used the SMLE Mk III whereas UK was more commonly armed with the Mk IV) OR for SMLES and Brens for example, include them in both but unlocking them in one automatically unlocks it in the other. I’m open to suggestions on that.

See below for sort of how this would look. Players would ‘show’ or ‘hide’ the different tech trees. This helps visually, categorises weapons and makes for a better grind. If you only want to play as USA, you can just grind that tree. If youve done UK and USA, maybe you want a shorter grind of the Greco-Yugoslav tree to gain some unique weapons.

Western Allies:

USA
-tech tree-

UK
-tech tree-

Commonwealth
-tech tree-

France
-tech tree-

Poland
-tech tree-

BENELUX
-tech tree-

Greece-Yugoslavia
-tech tree-

Denmark-Norway
-tech tree-

Axis:

Germany
-tech tree-

Italy
-tech tree-

Hungary
-tech tree-

Romania
-tech tree-

Finland
-tech tree-

Croatia
-tech tree-

Japan
-tech tree-
Switzerland (?)
-tech tree-

Regarding China:
I would happily include China as one of the drop down nations however I’m not sure where they belong.
The current premium squad in Burma is Western Allies, however I believe China could be a good addition to USSR as it adds more variety in maps, allows for the remaining two factions to fight one another, and the Soviet tree already has German and American weapons.

THESE ARE JUST EXAMPLES. I do not suggest that every single one of these be added, they’re just ideas. I know Switzerland for example was proposed by others for Japan since Switzerland was neutral and Japan did use Swiss weapons, some of which are already in the Japanese tech tree.

I would appreciate if people can comment on the idea as a whole rather than picking out specific nations you dont like. Additions on the other hand are of course welcome.

There would be no split queues because the queues will be the same. USSR, European Axis, Western Allies, and Japan.

Once again I would reiterate that some tech trees would be more substantial than others, and that’s a good thing. It means we can add tech that otherwise wouldnt be added, and there’s opportunities for shorter grinds as well as just more stuff to do if players choose.
Some trees like Germany would go to BR V, others like France and Italy might get to BR III or IV and others like Greece-Yugoslavia or Finland might only be BR I-II.

6 Likes

This guy literally doesn’t know anything about WW2.

I bet he can’t get the years in which ww2 took place. Without googling it.
Literally anyone who knows at least something about WW2 is clearly aware that there are many years in potential content of WW2 stuff that is not yet in game.

And before the merge he himself said he didn’t care that it would kill HA.

He always uses totally bizarre arguments just to justify the changes to game he personally wants to push.

Plus he’s one of the CCs who literally blackmailed DF with some boycott with his community.
Another CC who did this is now a CM btw.

This guy is definitely something…

3 Likes

i would rather just make britain/france/italy their own tech trees, except they get placed into the same queue as USA or Germany, so the matchmaking numbers/matchmaking times are literally the same as before, it doesn’t matter if there’s 99% USA players and 1% British players if they queue as a single “Western Allies” team and get put into the same teams as each other

darkflow doesnt do it because it would be a lot of work and content and they just aren’t capable of it

2 Likes

What’s the benefit?
Why is it good for Britain to have a separate tech tree from the US?
Why can we have a proper techn tree of Western Allies (and European Axis) instead? And to be able to combine things from both nations in one lineup.
The devs could impose restrictions like British soldiers can’t use US equipment (unless some exceptions are met).

Having separate tech trees for Italy and Britain would inevitably lead to only one thing. More copy pasted stuff and equipment balance issues (just like with Japan). And we wouldn’t have the ability to combine stuff from both nations in lineup.

The fact that the developers didn’t focus much on Italian/British content after the merge doesn’t mean that if those nations don’t have individual trees, we won’t get more content for them.

I just dont see the benefit in pushing for minor nations to have a seperate tech trees

4 Likes

Chances to explore more equipment from other nations while not loading one tech tree up with an insane amount of content, plus it would stop weird situations of having soldiers with American accents in a British squad with British uniforms

Let players keep all of their British stuff in the current US tech tree, turn it into legacy content like Stalingrad weapons. If tech trees share a weapon, researching it one tree should unlock it in all other trees.

3 Likes

How is an “insane amount of content” a negative thing?

Just so newbies could get faster to higher BR? Huh? Yeah, that’s extremely “positive”…

This needs to be fixed either way. Since British soldiers that are already in “US” tech tree are going to stay there. And there’s planned option to change nationalities of soldiers between ger/ita and US/Brit.

Yes, terrible solution. So I wouldn’t be able to use my old stuff with newly added content.

No, seperate tech tree is just BS. There’s no real benefit in that.

And I am very glad devs has stated for several times nothing like that is planned.

3 Likes

nvm im not going to argue on enlisted forums at 3 AM, try asking me another time or coordinate a time when ive consumed a few alcoholic beverages and then maybe we can battle it out

5 Likes

That’s understandable. xD

Sleep well.

1 Like

thanks bro you too

3 Likes

big agree but I’d say let people choose their own weapons, we don’t need to lock specific nation gun to specific nation squad because I’m willing to bet 90% of the players will mentally block themselves from creating farb squads

2 Likes

image
2023-10-02 (1)
2023-10-02

1 Like

also this one:
image
image
image

1 Like

Ew no

So I ain’t gotta see 9mm and .303 in the middle of my Freedom Dispensers. Duh. Lol

1 Like

This bothers me to no end and I keep forgetting to fix it and which one it is

Preach!

I feel that

Okay and what’s your argument against?

It’s ridiculous having real units when none of them use the correct weapons, fight in the correct battles or even have the right uniforms.

We already have like 50+ squads. Why do we need six versions of each squad (class I II and III, British and American) when we could have half that amount where players can just choose the nationality of the squad?

I’m very sure it was mentioned that the ability to easily choose nationality of squads is planned by the devs anyway.

How I miss it

Well actually one of the reasons Ive previously asked for a separate UK-Commonwealth ad France-Poland-BENE trees was so players could fight in the correct battles.

For example UK and France in Battle for France 1940, and USA only in the Philippines.

But people dont want separate trees. Okay, I thought about it and came up with the idea posted in this thread.

I believe my arguments stand as to why this would be a good idea and allow for easy introduction of more content over time.

Because at the moment if DF refuses to add new factions OR separate US-UK and Germany-Italy OR create factions within factions (similar to War Thunder) then we’re stuck with the occasional BS late war prototype for the main 4 factions and thats it.
We saw how we got a new Burma update with basically nothing related to Burma, while our only Chinese squad is some random USA premium when they couldve made a whole Sino-Japanese War update.

1 Like

He also can’t do math. I can’t remember what he exactly said but something like: I don’t know whether this stat is based off “x% times y% times z%” or “y% times z% times x%”, even though the product of those are the exact same.

I also remember when he said Browning was the inventor of the Garand or something along the lines of that.

But yeah I don’t mean to be toxic, I just hope he thinks clearly before he talks

are you talking about Quadro?

Im not a fan, I merely thought about his comment and posted my ideas.