Hello everyone.
In Call of War the tech tree seems a bit lackluster in that it is pretty much a straight line and 99% of the time you just go down the row upgrading and maxxing only a couple units in a match which leads to a lot of repetitiveness and a lack of diversity in army composition.
Being the history nerd I am, I would love the idea of having tech trees specific to the doctrines we have in game. In my concept, each doctrine will still have all the same unit types of course but the trees/days in how or when they can be acquired should vary according to whatever is semi-historical for that doctrine. Below I lay out an ideal tank tree for the Axis doctrine. As you can see many of the vehicles that use the same chassis historically need to be researched prior to unlocking those later units. This would not only adds a great deal if historical authenticity to the trees, but a great deal of diversity to gameplay and force players to actually think about what they want to spec into as opposed to just going in a mundane straight line.
To further explain my image, the levels filled in grey are the "Unit models" for the early/late model system Bytro has adopted. The blueprint level for each unit is outlined in gold.
Please log in to post a reply.
Good idea although it would be a big change so it’s probably going to end up in the “maybe for 2.0” bin. The important thing is that this will be considered so good job on the effort and hope to see this soon.
it definitely would be a nice mix up.Habo778 wrote:
“maybe for 2.0” bin
nice job but honestly for me this is just a game, and this would complicate the game a lot. i do prefer the actual system, units have a specific role, and if the enemy use a lot of tanks for example, i just want to improve my tank destroyers without investing on tanks
An army would not lack the most basic technologies and at the same time have one type of advanced weapons. Likewise, you cannot have a Jagdtiger heavy tank destroyer without having first researched the Tiger. And yes, all units would of course retain their roles as they are now but tweaking is always welcome.Danieliyoverde123 wrote:
nice job but honestly for me this is just a game, and this would complicate the game a lot. i do prefer the actual system, units have a specific role, and if the enemy use a lot of tanks for example, i just want to improve my tank destroyers without investing on tanks
If we go for More realism i think a better option Is investigating on diferent chasis, turrets, cannons and motor instead of go for directly investigating vehicles.
After all the diferent tanks we're the Solution for diferent Situation on the Battlefield.
If the German use the Panzer 1 chasis for their panzerjager it's bcuz they still has Panzer 1 chasis AND those chasis could be used to transport the gun of panzerjagers. But if those chasis werent useful, the Panzerjagers would never existed, they simple can produce another tank destroyer Variant.
My goal with this concept is to allow for a sense of historical advances but moreso to place greater emphasis on player choices when researching units and allowing greater diversity in composition. In addition, it presents an opportunity to make the doctrines more unique.Danieliyoverde123 wrote:
If we go for More realism i think a better option Is investigating on diferent chasis, turrets, cannons and motor instead of go for directly investigating vehicles.After all the diferent tanks we're the Solution for diferent Situation on the Battlefield.
If the German use the Panzer 1 chasis for their panzerjager it's bcuz they still has Panzer 1 chasis AND those chasis could be used to transport the gun of panzerjagers. But if those chasis werent useful, the Panzerjagers would never existed, they simple can produce another tank destroyer Variant.
I partially agree. However, this must be compensated with versatile units. But it would be a nice feature of the game. This or armor*/ munition / movement investigation... So you would investigate the basis of an unit (for ex, a SP Atn air), but powerup its armor or whatever depending on situation. If the enemy spams mution and amror, maybe armor and speed would help, apart from unit balance (that is, having lvl 3 anti air vs air units)
I am all for Bytro making changes to how units work if they were to adopt this type of tree system. I would certainly also support to make varying trees for the different doctrines we have. Not anything drastic but some variation is welcome.arkranox wrote:
I partially agree. However, this must be compensated with versatile units. But it would be a nice feature of the game. This or armor*/ munition / movement investigation... So you would investigate the basis of an unit (for ex, a SP Atn air), but powerup its armor or whatever depending on situation. If the enemy spams mution and amror, maybe armor and speed would help, apart from unit balance (that is, having lvl 3 anti air vs air units)
Definitely one for 2.0 or even 2.5
Strong suggestion - definitely game changing! and can add some levels of complexity to your economic build up as well as your military strategy.
Through your suggestion since you have to research some of these items first before unlocking others, would you eliminate the days in game that you can access certain upgrades?
This is a good idea, but it can’t be just for the Axis doctrine. If other doctrines received something similar, this could be something implemented in the future. It probably wouldn’t have a super high priority though.
As for 2.0, that’s just a name for updates after 1.5 has become the new standard.
I know the days are not listed in my concept, but imagine they are above and as you move to the right those units can be researched in the mid-late game.Tribunate wrote:
Strong suggestion - definitely game changing! and can add some levels of complexity to your economic build up as well as your military strategy.Through your suggestion since you have to research some of these items first before unlocking others, would you eliminate the days in game that you can access certain upgrades?
Yes of course not only for Axis. In fact, I would like each doctrine to have their own fleshed out trees. If it was not clear the first row is light tanks, second mediums, third heavys, and fourth tank destroyers.DoctorDR1 wrote:
This is a good idea, but it can’t be just for the Axis doctrine. If other doctrines received something similar, this could be something implemented in the future. It probably wouldn’t have a super high priority though.As for 2.0, that’s just a name for updates after 1.5 has become the new standard.
Did the tech tree not used to be more like this? Where you needed to research Strat bombers to get nuclear bombers and other stuff like this.
Everyone he only did the axis tank tech tree as an example. It would take many more hours to map out each tech tree for each unit in each individual doctrine.
Yes precisely. I am working on others but it takes some timeTribunate wrote:
Everyone he only did the axis tank tech tree as an example. It would take many more hours to map out each tech tree for each unit in each individual doctrine.
Please log in to post a reply.
