Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 25/03/19 in all areas

  1. 53 points
    On the 23rd of April we will begin the stage that we previously announced - a reduction of research and purchasing costs for aircraft of rank IV-V, ground vehicles of rank V-VI and helicopters of rank V in order to smooth the time of progress and decrease the research time required before unlocking the top vehicles. Now we are ready to announce the exact date of the update and also the vehicle list that will be affected by the economy changes. Planned update date: 23rd of April. We are providing this warning about the upcoming changes in advance so that players that are playing at the high ranks can take this into account for future planning in purchasing any new vehicles. The vehicle list affected by the economy update can be found with the following link. The current table only shows the ‘major’ planned changes; the full list will reflect other economy parameters. A list of the economy changes: Revision of the costs in RP for research for the vehicle and modules of aircraft of ranks IV-V, ground vehicles of ranks V-VI and helicopters of rank V. Revision of the costs in SL for purchase of the vehicle and modules of aircraft of ranks IV-V, ground vehicles of ranks V-VI and helicopters of rank V. Revision of the costs for crews (incl. for expert qualification). Increase of the reward multipliers in RP of aircraft of ranks V-VI, ground vehicles of ranks V-VII and helicopters of rank V. Revision of the repair costs for the aircraft of ranks IV-V.
  2. 28 points
    Research and purchase costs have been decreased for: Aircraft of rank IV-V Ground vehicles of rank V-VI Helicopters of rank V Additionally the costs for modification research and purchase as well as costs for the ground vehicle shells and crew training have been reduced. List of the repair cost changes. List of the shell costs changes. Reward multipliers have been recalculated. Discuss it here! The current provided changelog reflects the major changes within the game as part of this Update. Some updates, additions and fixes may not be listed in the provided notes. War Thunder is constantly improving and specific fixes may be implemented without the client being updated.
  3. 24 points
    Well then, here comes the Hammer. First of all, I want to point out that I am angry about this event. The feedback I'm about to give may probably come off as very constructive, but my emotional feedback in regards to this event is anger, nothing less. And I would like to touch on the whole "anger" topic for a moment, because times and times again, comments get hidden. Now, I understand that those are violating the rules and therefore rather get removed from the already boiling thread, my question though is... are these people taken into account? Because this is a type of feedback that could not be closer to the truth. The people are angry because of your event. That is feedback - very, very serious feedback. So my question is: Is there some sort of list or any sort of feedback collector that takes into account how many users which posted here were angry? Because this should matter! Those people are giving your their honest feedback, and even though it is not pretty, it is at least pretty honest. Just keep an eye on them and don't dismiss them as "temporarily angry somebodies". Now that this is out of the way, let's get down to the rest. To use the great long ball your gave me with your generosity: I rate this event: 2 "rare" part warbonds/3600 Not because of the assembly or the fact that repairing one vehicle as the basis of making progress. That's actually an interesting mechanic. What I am disgusted about and what I hate are five things: The time and the marketplace. The RNG, the bugs and how you, Gaijin, handeled this. The time was too short. Some could say it forced a decision between easter and time with your family and friends or [playing (this statement was removed for accuracy)] working War Thunder. This is just bad. Absolutely bad. If you ever heard of humaine design - good. Why don't you follow its rules? And if not, let me explain what humaine design is in the context of your event. Humaine Game Design would allow the player to get participating in the event and accomplishing the goals he very likely has set for him withing a reasonable amount of time that allows him to: a) continue his daily life b) does not force the person to make cuts on their health c) allows the person to attend typical real life festives while not missing out on the completion of his goals d) does not force the person to make a cut on his social life e) does not force the person to spend an unreasonable amount of money f) does not push the person to frustration to such a degree that he or she is going to make decisions fueled by it g) Allows the person to play the game to a reasonable amount while still achieving the goals Or in summary: Humaine design allows the player to still be a human with a normal life which does not desire to spend 6+ hours per day in front of a screen. Quite a number of these aspects were pushed out the window for this event. And I don't want to hear this old excuse of "If he doesn't want to grind, he doesn't need to.". Because this is exactly missing the point. Surely a huge number of players were interested in the vehicles of the event. The peak in player numbers showed this quite clearly. But this does not justify to force an unhealthy grind onto a human because he desires to have the vehicles in his hangar. What you did Gaijin, was to chose the opposite of Humaine Game Design. Now you can chose again. Show those thousands of players that you can do better! The Marketplace feels so woven into the event that it feels like an event engineered to purely fuel the marketplace. And I think whether or not it actually way like this, a huge number of comments below YouTube content or comments here on the forum state that players just feel this way. They leave the event now with the impression that you designed this event to fuel the marketplace on purpose. I wonder if those players are going to spend as much time and money in the game after this event. You know, I have tried multiple times to get my friends playing War Thunder. Many tried it but eventually gave up on the game. They told me that they though the grind was too long and that the game was too expensive (mind you this is listed as free to play, am I right) as they felt forced to buy a premium account for reasonable progress together with eagles to train a crew because otherwise they would just never make it to the top of any tech tree. And who can blame them? I never have something to say against this because all in all, they are right. War Thunder is so massively expensive because it is designed that way that a player which would be willing to spend 5$ a month just gets shoved out the door by not allowing him to buy anything of siginificance. Who can honestly claim War Thunder is not made for a extreme minority of whales which are willing to throw money at the game until it comes out of their screens again while a Merkava Mk.1 get sold for the price of 1300 GJN. This is basically WT in a nutshell to many players which could only spend little amounts of money on the game each month. I honestly don't doubt they feel excluded and not willing to spend anything on the game. All in all, the impression for me remains as if the event was supposed to force interaction on the market for the completion of even the 3rd plane as soon as you were not able to spend the entire 11 days in front of the screen. Since the prices on the market are barely hit with a limit, insane prices like the 1300 GJN Merkava are possible which then get bought by some individual who feels the urge to have to own the Merkava. This can hit humans with a weaker psyche quite hard and is honestly quite exploitative. This is not entirely your fault of course, but you at least allow it to happen, dear Gaijin. Think about it. As a result of the feeling that this event was targeted more at the marketplace than the joy of players I have decided to stop reccomending War Thunder to any friend or person I come across, even though he may actually be interested in it. I found that I can not support such practices. The future events will show if I have to become even more strict or can happily reccomend the game again. The RNG is a joke. And I think the easiest explanation I can give is this: It doesn't matter how skilled a player is. If RNG is involved, Skill, at some point becomes irrelevant and the random factor takes over. To say the event is more focused on Skill than the last one, while even making the reward RNG based, feels pretty much like the opposite. Why value my skill if I still can not influence the outcome sufficiently? It's the same with RNG spread when shooting. If it is random, I don't need to pat myself for good accuracy because ultimately, the result wasn't really based on my skill. The RNG drops go even further. This was a mechanic so frustrating and so incredibly "dumb" (Excuse me, but there isn't much of a better word to explain this), that it pretty much took the excitement away. Grinding five or more hours for some random drop with a part I might not even need is not only feeling like a bait, but also just utterly cheap. RNG and skill are basically like opposites. To claim this even was more skill based was honestly pretty much eradicated as soon as the first crate dropped. The War Thunder playerbase appears to dislike RNG quite a lot. That goes for ingame accuracy, ammo detonation and basically all other things. And the dislike that drops which game as a result of skill get messed with by RNG again, should not come as a suprise here. The bugs make me speechless. I am just going to assume you had your expectations for the activity on the market as soon as the event launched. Therefore I am also going to assume you were aware of the amounts of money which would be invested in this event. And when I look at the bugs and the way you handled them, I feel like these were treated as if you did not care. We are talking about part crates not dropping or people losing their entire inventory - basically losing all their progress. The reply was "relog into your game" on the official site at least and here at the forums. Not ingame though - and ingame, is where it all happens! The fact how disconnected the advice was from the actual playground, while a huge number of players which never visite the site and which probably were incredibly frustrated, because they thought the RNG was messing with them, baffles me. Bringing such information to every point but the game itself is a major mistake and one I personally see as so critical that I can not word it constructively on a written basis. So I am just going to say this: Whenever there is a problem with a very important aspect of the game, you have to leave a message ingame first and only then on the forums and the official site. The game is the center, the site and the forum are the additions. I am honestly feeling sorry for all the guys and girls which spend probably 12 hours ingame and did not receive a single part drop because they had no idea and thought they had bad RNG. And the worst of all that you can not even be sure they ever knew what was going on. Yes, and ultimately the way this event was handled made me lose some faith in you, Gaijin. First of all, it felt to me like the bug repots were handeled so half-heartedly, without any clear message ingame, leaving players in the dark which never use the site or the forum (mabe because they have it on Steam, you know?), giving players which missed out 2 days because of such bugs or players which lost all their items no compensation, allowing the insane prices on the market while just letting people post in here how terribly frustrated they were about them not getting any parts they required and that they could not afford the marketplace as an option. All of this makes me wonder whether this was an event for the players or for your revenue, Gaijin. I got the impression it was more for you than for the players. And while I don't have anything against you making a profit of an event, when the impression rises that players no longer play but work so that you have bigger numbers on your deduction at the end of the month, then play time's over!
  4. 22 points
  5. 21 points
    So, since the event is almost over, here is my final verdict: This is the worst event we have ever had in WT. Worse than any of the task-based events, worse than the pure "get-x-kills" event and worse than even tournaments. It is in no way improved compared to the already bad IS-7 event, as Gaijin had claimed, and the information about time frames are also complete fantasy. The 12-15 hours might be accurate for the first 3 I-180s, but after that, it is pure luck how long you have to play for the next vouchers. But easily more than 20 hours per vehicle. The "up to 80% faster for good players" is also total fabrication. According to PvP rating I am among the top 300 players in AB, and it took me 15 hours per plane (for the first three) as well. The RNG of the event is among the worst I have ever seen and can make it physically impossible to unlock new vehicles if you are not prepared to spend money, since the rare parts you need simply won't drop. No matter how much time you invest, it is not possible to get all the vehicles without spending a lot of money on the market. Even if you spend 15 hours a day playing. There are only two possible explanations for this, one worse than the other, either whoever designed this event is completely incompetent or it was deliberately designed that way to force people to use the market, where Gaijin earns 15% off of all transactions. No feedback from previous crafting events seems to have been taken into consideration. If you want to get all the vehicles (and a lot of players are collectors, they don't necessarily want these vehicles to play them, but just to have a complete collection), it is more grindy than even the Tiger/Cobra event and RNG is a even bigger factor than is was for the IS-7. If Gaijin really cares about player feedback, they should stop doing these crafting events. The vast majority of players dislikes them and nothing Gaijin has changed over the three iterations of crafting events we had so far has made any significant improvement. But since I don't just want to complain but actually be constructive, here are a few thing that would have been necessary to make this a good or at least acceptable event: The overall amount of toolkits that are necessary for unlocking one I-180 would have to be reduced, at least by 50%. 15 hours for one plane, of which you need 9 (and the last 6 take massively more time), is completely unreasonable for an 11 day event. The event should not take place over the Easter holidays, where a lot of people spend time with their family. It should not be possible that parts you don't need drop. Not everybody wants to or can use the marketplace, and those people should not be at a disadvantage. If wrong parts can drop, it should be possible to exchange them ingame for other rare parts using a couple of tool kits. The event should work bug-free for everybody, without having to constantly restart you game or manually tinkering with your DNS-settings. If bugs occur, meaningful compensation should be handed out for those affected. It should be possible for dedicated players/collectors to unlock all the vehicles. If Gaijin feels like the vehicles are worth this much work and should not be obtainable more easily, then the event timeframe should be extended or the amount of vehicles reduced. Rewards for performing well should be more meaningful. The few tool kits you get for coming first make little difference, and other rewards like camos have such a low drop chance that I haven't gotten a single one over the course of the event, even though I came in first for probably 75% of my matches. Not only the first player on each team should receive additional rewards. This actively discourages playing in a squad. All in all, this was a terrible event. Events should bring the players enjoyment, but this has done the exact opposite. I usually don't complain about our usual events, even though they can also be a bit time consuming, but this is simply too much, for all the reasons stated above. I will definitely take a break from War Thunder for some time after the event because it has crushed my will to play. It is highly likely many others feel the same. Learn from this Gaijin. You have shown that you can listen to the community. Do so. Either greatly rework these crafting events before you do another one, or simply switch back to the usual task format for all the events. A vast majority of us players would prefer that.
  6. 20 points
    It may be a light, open truck but it is magically able to shrug off the strongest cannons in the game.This turns it into an absolutely broken tank combined with the fact that it has the long 88mm at 5.7 and reloads extremely fast. Neither HE, AP, HESH, you name it - can reliably kill it. Even worse is that MGs can't pen it and 50 cals can only deal with it at range (in which it will still survive, because 2 crew members are in the bottom of the tank. An open-topped AA truck shoudln't be able to survive a barrage of 130mm naval cannon fire, especially with HE. Without hullbreak it's survivability is completely nonsensical. https://v.redd.it/kzeiw1i3e2t21/DASH_480?source=fallback
  7. 20 points
    From today, 583 additional accounts have been permanently banned for using third-party modifications in violation of the user agreement - use of prohibited modifications. (EULA). The introduction of the reporting system has again proved key in allowing players to participate in keeping the game clear of players who insist on trying to gain unfair advantage. The modification detection algorithm continues to improve. List of banned players: Having an account permanently banned will result in a player losing everything in that account - Be warned! Thank you guys for your vigilance. o7
  8. 19 points
    Research and purchase costs have been decreased for: Aircraft of rank IV-V Ground vehicles of rank V-VI Helicopters of rank V Additionally the costs for modification research and purchase as well as costs for the ground vehicle shells and crew training have been reduced. List of the repair cost changes. List of the shell costs changes. Reward multipliers have been recalculated. The current provided changelog reflects the major changes within the game as part of this Update. Some updates, additions and fixes may not be listed in the provided notes. War Thunder is constantly improving and specific fixes may be implemented without the client being updated.
  9. 18 points
    Yesterday I won the first I180S - I already have it in the hangar: Now I play almost all day today to get the second one...hopeless, like a lot of other people I miss only one part ("vertical stabilizer"), which does not appear despite winning battles as No. 1. The useless (without parts) toolkits are constantly dropping from the chests - I have already 44 of them. This event is an unpleasant joke. Instead of something exciting and skill-based, we received a boring, exhausting, excessively time-consuming and unnecessarily complicated "event" based on RNG and bait into shopping on the marketplace. If it was to improve the relationship with the community after the catastrophe with the Mitsubishi T2 and the completely killed top-tier AirRB ... well, that's it, congratulations Gaijin !!
  10. 17 points
    Everything is in the title, no need of explanation, you already know the problem but you don’t do anything about it, probably too busy making bad event with buggy vehicles.
  11. 17 points
    Since mods are reading for feedback right now, I'll repeat one thing I said earlier: Please, get rid of the spinning roulette animation when opening any kind of crate. It serves no real point, by now most people know it's just cosmetic and doesn't reflect the actual chances. Its only effect is showing a parade of "missed" prizes that are always better than the one we actually won. Thus, making us DISAPPOINTED even if we just received a gift. Just show "you won this!" and nothing more, it would be better.
  12. 17 points
    you want it constructive? 1. community has been discussing those issues since saturday. we could have gotten more than a "try to relog" message 2. increase droprate to give people progress for playing hours and days 3. make it more interesting... after 1-2 times repairing the planes is only grind and click.. getting boring to do it for 11 days. (even though i have nothing to click anymore :P) 4. dont blame people who get frustrated over that low droprate and who are trying to point it out. they could simply stop playing instead. be happy they actually try to give feedback (insulting is surely a no-go)
  13. 17 points
    Gotta love how instead of admitting something is wrong, fixing it and overall doing proper damage control. Scarper is just putting oil on the fire, denying everything, pretty much insulting our intelligence and overall making things worse. @Scarper Advancing people doing their 4th planes are not receiving parts because they are not using T2+ vehicles or 50% activity is insulting at best. We're not stupid. We were capable of building 3 I-180S already, why would we not use T2+ vehicles for the 4th one? I urge you to look at the screenshots of some people here on the topic. You have players with 3 consecutive days of intensive grind/hundred of tool kits and not a single rare component drop on their 4th planes. there IS a problem on the 4th plane.
  14. 17 points
    The event is different to usual, yes it is complex, but that's how some of us like it. But I realise that not everyone likes complex and so there is a shortcut, the market. There are no errors being thrown up that haven't been addressed openly. Data will provide us the opportunity to improve it. There is a possibility of obtaining 6 pretty nice vehicles (depending on your preference, but it isn't an absolute necessary to obtain them all. I have added the Pr122bis to my line up and I like it a lot, now halfway to HMS Tiger. These are rarer vehicles, so they need to be special, it isn't the first non tree vehicles we introduce, and no doubt, will not be the last. But the refreshingly different mode is welcome by many in an engine that I would hazard a few people didn't think possible, play the game, enjoy what your doing at the time and provide your comments or bugs to the correct place, in a civil way. Nothing is untrue that we have stated, it works as described - it has been verified a few times now as a result of feedback. Duplicate items can be recycled through the market, or held on to for the next aircraft. Since I started playing (same time as the event started) I have had 5 drops of 10 kits in a box and multiple drops of rare items (too many to count). It is recommended that you spend as much time in battle to add to the 10 minute box drop count, nothing else and any time under the 10 minutes in battle, is carried into the next battle but your activity in the battle must be over 50% with a tier 2 vehicle or it doesn't count. Camouflages for the event vehicles have been gained by players that have appeared in the winning positions in battles on the winning team. If you are in 1st position, and you have lost all your spawns, you may be overtaken by another player, there is no enforcement to remain spectating till the end to preserve that place, that is only for the 10 minute rule. Keep it civil, keep it non inflammatory and lets try and encourage teamwork. Thanks guys o7 Edited to correct number of vehicles - mistyped, and incorrect wording, it was late. Apologies
  15. 15 points
    Sea battles will become more exciting and more interesting. Now any battles with reduced teams will be supplemented with vessels under AI control with a specified number of participants: Naval Arcade battles (only sessions with vehicles of BR 3.7 and above) - up to 16 vs 16 participants. Naval Realistic battles - up to 12 vs 12 participants. If a 10 vs 10 player battle begins in Realistic mode, 2 free slots on each side will be supplemented with AI vessels. If there are already enough players in combat, AI ships will not participate in the battle. The current provided changelog reflects the major changes within the game as part of this Update. Some updates, additions and fixes may not be listed in the provided notes. War Thunder is constantly improving and specific fixes may be implemented without the client being updated. Discuss it here!
  16. 15 points
    While this is a step in the right direction, there is still work to do. Some countries still have egregious repair costs. I do not believe that the T32E1 deserved to have its own repair go up to 15k, ESPECIALLY after the nerf to 7.3. Its only just competent there and will get absolutely smoked in an uptier. If you are going to make the vehicle easier to kill and less effective overall, do not increase its repair costs. Also, French tanks are STILL too expensive. 16k for the Lorraine 40t is asanine, and the AMX-50 is probably too expensive as well. I truthfully don't understand what repair costs are even for. They don't balance the tanks at all. A 40t is going to be as effective with a 2k repair cost as a 16k. Perhaps you should focus on making the game FUN before you make a virtual economy based off of it. Fun is being able to play your favorite tanks, not manage repair costs.
  17. 15 points
    I cant understand how P-47 D25 (4.3) and D28 (4.7) cost only 3,100 and 4,000 lions meanwhile FW-190 A-5 U2 (4.3) cost 13,500 lions. P-47 are cheaper in Respawn Points and repair cost when is much better than 190 in CAS support (rockets plus bombs vs only 1 bomb or 2 rockets). Really, is a big nosense.
  18. 15 points
    Some constructive feedback here: -The first thing they need to do is make a video to explain how the event is supposed to work. Having to rely on a video made by some random youtuber to make sense of it is unacceptable. I have no other word to describe it. There's still people every now and then asking "why are my broken components disappearing" and other basic questions. -Secondly, they need to make the analysis of the broken plane worth something. So I guessed my broken components right and I know that my oil system, armament, rudder control, elevator and electrical system were damaged. Only five components are supposed to be damaged, so why do I have to disassemble, inspect and reassemble my fuselage, wings and landing gear other than make me waste a couple dozen hours more on toolkit grind? If I'm just going to get 10 extra toolkits out of it (about an hour and a half of grind, not much in the grand scheme of things), it's just not worth it. -And third, how about an increase the drop rate of components. A lot. It's not only unfair for people without access to the Market, but wouldn't it also benefit the Market users if there actually were pieces to trade around? There's demand but nowhere near enough supply. It would also be nice if they extended the event duration for all the people who can't slave away on the grind, but that's probably asking too much.
  19. 15 points
    i think you missed 2 other parts of your thread's title, being discussion and feedback.
  20. 14 points
    Hello Forum Surfers, Most of you probably has no idea who I am, I post rarely and make threads every once in a blue moon, only when I feel that something is very important. Anyways, I've been around since the very beginning, witnessed and lived through the ups and downs of the game and played 10 000 battles in the meantime. I am mainly an Air RB player (playing tanks every once in a while too), so the OP will focus mainly on things I experienced with the said game mode. So everything was all right until 4-5 years ago, I was happily playing Air RB, there was balance (good old times, F-86F-2 vs. MiG-15Bis on Korea) and there was a healthy, competitive and fun endgame going on. But as all good things pass in life so did this period. Updates for Air RB stopped coming, the focus was shifted to Tanks, the gameplay quickly became boring. Player numbers dropped, waiting times increased and mixed battles were introduced as a result, which completely destroyed the existing metas. You could no longer expect a given (balanced, may I say) adversary, you could no longer rely on the advantages of your aircraft compared to the enemy team, because the enemy team flew the same aircraft as you did. You could no longer rely on the dive, roll and speed advantage of the Sabres, and you could no longer rely on the vertical manoeuvrability and energy retention of the MiG just to name a pair. This did huge damage to the gameplay in my opinion. This process continued for a while, copy paste aircraft were introduced, etc etc. And it made me stop playing. I could no longer enjoy fighting the same aircraft, any sort of immersion that was present (and it WAS present on the Korea map, MiG vs. Sabre) was lost, Historical Battles were renamed to Realistic Battles but at the same time it could have been renamed Unhistorical Battles or something like that. So for the last 3-4 years I kept myself away from Air RB, and played WT much less in general. And the situation didn't seem to change for quite a long time, until Rank VI Aircraft were introduced. I believe and kept saying back then that Rank VI aircraft with early guided A2A missiles is something that should have happened years ago, but of course there was quite a vocal majority who did not support this motion, fearing it would destroy balance, believing that early A2A missiles are some kind of wonder weapons that guarantee you a kill 100% with 0% skill involved. As it turned out this is not the case, it spiced up the gameplay and introduced new tricks available for learning, and also became a tool against space-climbing bombers or runaway players, which is good. But undeniably, the way these aircraft were introduced was lacking, namely balance issues, lack of quality control, etc etc. It honestly felt like just giving the dog a bone without dedication. The introduction of the T-2 did not improve the situation, as it could be expected. Dropping a 3rd generation fighter into an environment of 2nd generation fighters without opposition is not going to work out properly now, does it? However seeing that at least there is some focus back on Air RB I felt some optimism and I was thinking of trying out the new toys. And with the recent Economy Update hitting the servers, I decided to do so. I don't know how other veterans who left before are thinking, probably I am not the only one. So the economy update is a very good thing, it brought back players like me and opened up top tiers for new players. It is definitely a step in the right direction but it also makes issues more apparent, that top-tier gameplay is riddled with bugs, game-modes are practically the same as they were 6 years ago. Maps are the same with 1 or 2 exceptions. And balance is non-existent. So far I've been focusing on filling the gaps in my tech-trees, but soon I'll unlock the new toys as well and I can see the issues already. So I suggest what many many players have been asking for during the last couple of months, take a deep breath and a step back from introducing more modern vehicles with every patch. Use the time to fix the issues. Plug the huge gaps between nations, give worthy adversaries to fight against each other. Introduce fixes to game-modes and the gameplay, do something against the exploiters, space climbers etc. etc. Give new objectives for bomber pilots. I'm not one of them, but I can see from miles away that at the current meta bombers do not belong in Air RB. Introduce new, historical maps. Increase your Quality Control. The player base could start growing steadily, which might give you the chance to sack mixed battles and re-introduce some history and immersion to your title, which is what got me into playing in the first place. Remember where you came from Gaijin. Take some time to go back to your roots and examine what made your game truly unique and great at the time. Do not throw away your heritage, but build on it. If you do this, you may find many other veterans returning also. Yours truly, An optimistic dinosaur P.s.: Feel free to comment, discuss or disagree, let's generate some pressure and build up some momentum behind this case.
  21. 14 points
    G56 RB : From 25000 to 24850 very generous
  22. 14 points
    Don't worry. After the event ends and everyone grinded for it, Gaijin will suddendly remember that they forgot to add hullbreak.
  23. 14 points
    I hear shoving your face trough the computer screen works wonders... also tried to open my wallet.. didnt help
  24. 14 points
    I am sorry but calling a lie a lie is not insulting. The lying part is insulting. I understand you are a moderator and have nothing to do with this mess other than trying to manage it as best you can, but any sensible person should understand our frustration.
  25. 13 points
    You again. You really love your M1. Here a picture for you and your right hand.
  26. 13 points
    Good changes overall, but for goodness sake, stop using repair costs as a means of balance!. It does not work, and it punishes players. Set a repair cost for each vehicle, and NEVER touch it again. Not a single player wants rep costs to be used for balance.
  27. 13 points
    6k SL in repair cost increase for 2A5 and 2,5k for 2A4 seems very harsh harsh compared to their counterparts.
  28. 13 points
    Except the only reason why the Abrams was "clubbing" is due to having air support. You know, the FJ-4b VMF, the F-100D and the AH-1z? You ever notice how there's no cheeky M18s, M22s or such rolling about now at Top Tier who immediately J out after capping and getting enough SP to spawn in Air? You realize that the Abrams was losing out to the Leo2k prior to the XM-1 being introduced when the BR rework was done in right? We actually talked about this a year ago on how much the Leo2k was choking the life out of Top Tier even after the 4-limit per team for the Abrams was removed due to said BR rework. Both the Leo2k and Leo2A4 was already capable of handling both M1 and M1IP respectively on the ground. Again, the narrative that the M1s was clubbing solely due to their capabilities the last two updates underplays in how much US Air was holding it down. The lack of inherent self-awareness is telling from your statement. You're implicating that the Leo2k and Leo2A4 were practically irrelevant to the M1s, yet in a single patch, Germany gets the Leo2A5 and US gets a lolpenning M1A1 yet now we're beginning to see a sub-40% WR for the all 3 Abrams We already knew M1s armor wasn't much to work with but it had that sURvIvAbiLiTY that was parroted for nearly a year as being such an amazing advantage. So how the hell does one tank, being the Leo2A5, outplay 3 Abrams? I thought Leo2k and Leo2A4 were uncompetitive due to not having the same degree of survivability? Or are you really going to make the argument that 120mm DM33 is making the difference of dropping the Abrams WR nearly 30%? We're just seeing the cracks in the narrative for German tankers built up for themselves that the M1 Abrams was this omnipotent tank, putting up it's advantages just to simplify the issue of Top Tier to a single tank. Not like the Soviet 7.7-8.3 has a substantial lineup in of itself. Obj 120, Obj 906, BMP-2, T-55, T-62, T-10m, T-54s and IS-4m. All of them aside from the last two clearly are stronger than a Leopard 1, the M48s, the M60, T95E1 and M60A1 in that BR range. Soviets have fallback options that all outpace their competitors in that BR range alone. What does Germany have at Top Tier? Leo2A5, Leo2A4 and Leo2k. The last two from same narrative given by German tankers, are essentially uncompetitive due to a laundry list of a comparison to the M1... the US gets essentially 3 of the same tank Let's just see the WR for Leo2A4 and Leo2k to get a feel on how out of the meta they are for Germany to use in a lineup for Top TIer... Wait, before you even say anything else, let me predict what the response will be... "Well that's just because of Leo2A5 hardcarrying them to victory" To which, why isn't the M1A1 carrying when it has the best APFSDS round ingame? The M829 allows the M1A1 to lolpen the hull of the Leo2A5 the same way the M1 does to the Leo2A4's hull with M735 and M774. Wonder where that sURvIvAbiLiTY point disappeared off to... Face it, the M1s today is no stronger than it was when it was fighting Leo2ks. All US got was essentially the same tank twice while being the first to get access to Jets with ATGMs alongside an overwhelming advantage of helicopters. US stomping Top Tier with the Abrams was initially true when it came out nearly a year ago. That died when it started seeing Leo2ks on a more regular basis alongside having XM-1s being a leech to Top Tier US. Germany got 1 tank for Top Tier in the same patch that CAS effectively died due to the Tunguska's arrival (alongside buffs for the OTOMATIC) and very clearly, Germany had very competitive tanks that rivaled and can best the M1s. Not to mention for the first time for Russia Top Tier, they're breaking out of the 40% WR and reaching into 50%
  29. 13 points
    OK, so, i have now completed the entire event, unlocked VFW and Merkava, and i have some positive things to say, but also a lot of negatives. So i will start with the positive. The positive is that, the whole idea of the event, of repairing a damaged vehicle, was very cool! I liked having to solve a puzzle and determine what was wrong on the plane. Another thing, is that i liked that you could complete the event in (almost) any vehicle, without really losing any progress. While not having rank I was understandable (to stop the worst possible seal clubbing) it was good to be almost totally free to play anything you want. Also, it is nice that there was rewards for every single kind of player, be it plane, naval, or tank. And then, there is the negative.......... that i am actually GLAD to see the event end. First off, the event was SO long, and other than the puzzle that you spend maybe 10 minutes on, was a dull grind and did not give me much of a sense of progress at all. The diagnosis puzzle was very fun and interesting, but the grinding was not! I had to play the game constantly for over a week to get the rewards i wanted, and even then i paid a bit of money to skip ahead or get parts that were super rare for some reason. Second, the event, because of multiple reasons, created a very very bad atmosphere for players in ground battles. Because you got extra rewards for being #1, and plane kills in ground battles for some reason gave much more points, there was an EXTREME amount of competition, and people would always bring out their most overpowered vehicles, camp spawns even more than usual, just generally play very egoistically just for that one extra tool box. Also, with a huge amount of plane spam in ground battles, it made me realize that the balance between ground and air at low-medium tiers is NOT good. Low tier AA, in Realistic, is really bad because of the lack of lead indicator, and it is very very hard to hit any attacking plane, even worse with your tank MG. So, many times i would simply be constantly shredded by german 30mm from the air which i was powerless to do anything about. Third, the event was just not fair. The drop rate for certain components was clearly much worse than others, so their price was massively inflated on the gaijin market, with prices of over 10GJN. And again, it was just SO long, i could not possibly conceive the idea of building three planes without buying anything. I already spent a gross amount of time and that was WITH buying components and later on some kits. And fourth, while not really the biggest issue, is that i am disappointed the Merkava was not a premium tank. I did not realize gold-striped vehicles did not mean premium, but that was kind of on my part, and i did not realize until later. However, I would feel much better if the Merkava WAS a premium, or at least came with a free talisman.
  30. 13 points
    3,5 days until this event ends and I cant say anything then....failure. This event failed and was not honest to its devblog. By devs word, it said that planes would take up to 15h to assemble and up to 80% faster for "good players". Now after 4 days of event we all know this is not true. Lackluster communication from devs, lack of good explanation and video on event coming 3 days after the start of the event (?!?!) shows that this was not planned through. I've been playing since 2013, I have over 18k battles, I've seen almost everything WT has done over those 6 yrs...from RP system in 1.37, Tanks, World War, to first EC, lots of event from those like Indian Summer in 2013 to these new ones and I have to say that this event today is the worst event you have ever done...not for the uber grind but because reasons stated up. We were basically getting info from youtubers and it took 4 days to get single info about 3rd and 4th plane !!. I can say that format of this event is not wrong, event as it is is very good, it gives players a chance to earn some money even if they do not want to play event. So maybe my conclusion should be that conception of event was really good but it turned out to be complete disaster because no communication between devs and players. Once we had WTPC for this but in these last few years I think I can speak for all of the players on this topic when I say......you have gone rouge. Please, more communication and more preparation next time. Quick edit: I have never ever seen this many people angry and disappointed on forum, and I've been active on forum since 2013.
  31. 13 points
    I simply cant stop laughing about the "13-15 hours maximum". Thats the biggest meme of this so far. I'll be sure to quote it more in future.
  32. 13 points
    What marketing though? "This game is very hard and will not give you anything if you don't consider paying a significant amount of money or accept that you will not be able to have a life when you decide to play it?" All I see from this event is the bad publicity it creates and how it actually is doomed to push away newer players and old veterans because of the inaccesibility of the rewards. If this markets anything, it is that this game is not made for the player to enjoy it. I don't understand the idea behind this. How these events can be created with the belief that players would engage and enjoy in it. What mad man has had the idea that such a penalizing system would appeal to the broad audience of War Thunder? That an event which involves such huge indirect paywalls would communicate anything positive? Gaijin, it is time that you please sit down and begin to realize the value of the happy customer. This is sooo hugely relevant because especially in your case the customer must be happy before he buys the content you offer. Installing the game does not cost anything and the player can get the experience without paying a thing. So what needs to happen is that the player, the customer gets a good impression of the game and is happy whenever he plays it. It's the emotion that he feels when thinking about the game that matters most! If he feels happy he will be willing to expand his experience and keep on reseraching vehicles. And it will not be long until said player may also consider buying a premium account to increase his progress. This is the first time you get a buck from him and you should thank the player for this by giving him the feeling that he bought something good, something he can value. Why? Well, have you ever bought something again from a company which left you with a product you were not satisfied with? Probably not more than two times. And it is exactly the happiness and satisfaction of the players that I see dropping to a new low with this event. The frustration that will appear after the event is over if the players did not reach their goals will be insane - especially with those players who have invested money into their grind and did not make it because the random drops were just not good enough. And from there the equasion is easy. Unhappy customers = less players in the game = less potential customers = less money for the company. I don't quite get what is so difficult about that. Why is it that Gaijin rather hunts the whales which may pay up to 700€ for a virtual tank but not the 10000 players which would pay 5€ a month for a fun experience. Last time I checked 50.000€ > a cutoff from some 700€ transaction. Get your concepts of customer happiness set Gaijin. You will only be able to truly make money if you have your players happy. Only then your game will grow and continue to be a title player are excited to pick up. I would place the bet that if many player got the Merkava and happend to not be high up in the US tree, a good chunk of them would have bought something to aid them with the grind and to enjoy their time. And if they were happy with that, they would probably continue to play and would be more willing to pay. Funny right? How can people that have a positive feeling towards a company pay them money? Today the first Merkava Mk.I went on the Market for a price of 1099.99 GJN. I consider this the 3rd symbol of the insanity that comes with online marketplaces like these. This has nothing to do with humaine game design but pretty much is just the peak of insanity in regards to video games and I am not happy that Gaijin is supporting such a cause by their events and their marketplace. And in case it is not obvious, I currently am not happy with your event and you as a company, Gaijin.
  33. 12 points
    A similar case to the already approved and open to discussion suggestions on the Finnish Air Force Roundels (International Compliance Version: For many reasons, both those related to legislation in individual countries and ethics, we do not have swastikas in the game. However, I think that it is worth considering a compromise that will combine political correctness and the historical appearance of vehicles in the game. At least in the form of a complementary, optional, paid decal. In my opinion, the most correct and aesthetically neat substitute for a swastika is a symbol / icon being the outline of a square with gaps in the lines: Edit1: To avoid players attempts to modify Gaijin should make this decal "non-adhesive surface". Similarly, there are parts of the vehicle on which no decal can be applied. Edit2: I think that should remain optional (as removable decal), some players may not want any reference to the swastika, even in the form of rectangular replacement. This symbol has been accepted by flying Bf109's collectors in Germany and is accepted even by the very strict German law: Source: EDIT 25.04.2019 - another example of the suggested replacement symbol in the legal context: FW 190 D-9 WNr 400616 9./JG 54 "Greenhearts" restoration completed by SANDY AIR CORP (Sandy Air Corp is a restoration shop based in Austria, where the swastika symbol is banned). Also in the games:
  34. 12 points
    I. Introduction to the Idea Hi there and thank you for taking interest in my suggestion! The post you’re about to start going through is quite lengthy and goes into great detail on how this new mode I’m proposing could work. If you consider yourself a fan of War Thunder naval battles, then rest assured that there’s some great content below for you to dig your teeth into. However, if you’re not so keen on spending a great deal of time reading through this (entire) article, then you can always have a look at the TL;DR section at the end of the post which summarizes everything presented in this article and gives a quick overview of everything in a convenient way. With this out of the way, I hope you enjoy reading through my work and thanks in advance for any feedback you leave behind, it means a lot! Naval battles is something I was looking forward to seeing in War Thunder from the moment I started playing, all the way back in early 2013. Over the years, the game significantly evolved with many new vehicles, modes and features being added. In 2016, the time I was anxiously waiting for seemed to have arrived - Naval Forces were announced. Despite a very mixed reception of the initial iteration of naval forces, of which I also felt underwhelmed by, the mode gradually worked its way up to what we have today and it’s by far still not finished, judging by the fact that naval forces are still in OBT. So knowing that the game mode is far from being finished and new national tech trees and vessel types already being worked on for future releases, I’ve come to the realization that the core gameplay of naval battles hasn’t substantially changed over the years, despite the introduction of larger and more complex vessels, leaving ample room for improvement. We’re essentially still shooting at each other and capping each other’s points in an effort to drain tickets and win games. Albeit, we have recently been seeing more and more game modes with different objective types (i.e. [Convoy] and [Encounter] mode), which are a more than welcome addition to the standard Domination/Battle mode we had for a while now. In my opinion however, these modes, although being a step in the right direction, still don’t achieve the full potential of what War Thunder naval battles could be, since they’re often narrow in scope, limited by time and lack the sense of grandeur usually associated with real-life naval battles. When one thinks of a naval battle, usually the first things that come to mind are large-scale, combined arms operations with multiple vehicle types involved, spanning over a large area. Sounds familiar? That’s because War Thunder is all about these things! Further expanding upon and incorporating the features that War Thunder is known for into naval battles could easily create a game mode like no other on the market and would separate it from its peers. With these things in mind, I had an idea about a potential new game mode for naval battles which would tick all these boxes and redefine naval battles as we know them today. I sat down and began working it all out, coming up with various ideas for this mode and today I’m finally ready to present to the community the fruit of my labour. So let’s dive right into it! II. Naval Operation Mode What is Naval Operation Mode? In short, Naval Operation is my ultimate vision for objective-based naval gameplay in War Thunder. It’s a mix of EC-like features, without the extremely long battle times. It encompasses and involves all types of vessels currently present in the game and could also be compatible for potential classes coming to the game at a later date. It takes inspiration from modes featured in some other games and gives it a unique War Thunder twist to provide the players with a mode unlike any other. The mode is all about proper large-scale naval battles, with battles unfolding in stages, objectives varying in each stage and heavily influencing the outcome of a battle. Players are able to utilize every type of vessel available, with gameplay being further spiced up with the involvement of AI, giving each battle a sense of scale. How Does Naval Operation Work? (Overview) Although the post will later explain in more detail how the mode would play out, players can expect an up to 45 minute asymmetrical battle, which progresses through 3 stages. The entire battle is a large-scale naval operation, centered around the theme of a naval invasion/landing. As players progress through each stage, they’re faced with different objectives, unique to that stage which play a crucial role in determining whether the battle moves on to the next stage or ends at the current one. Besides primary objectives, a number of secondary objectives are also present, allowing either team to secure benefits for themselves which might just turn the tide of battle. Although the battles start off as pure naval engagements, halfway through, players can expect AI, in the form of aircraft squadrons, to get involved. Besides adding atmosphere to the battle, these also help each team with their respective objectives, so players can opt to protect theirs or destroy the enemy’s in their preferred vehicle type. The battle culminates in the third and final stage, represented by a large amphibious landing with AI units. The success or failure of a battle is determined in this final stage, depending on whether the amphibious AI units succeed to capture their objective or not. This following section of this post I have decided to split into two parts; Part I - Explaining how the proposed game mode could work in the current version of the game (1.87), with current vehicle types and mechanics. Part II - Explaining how the game mode could look in the distant future if/when more vessel types and mechanics are introduced. With this rough overview laid out, I present to you the Naval Operation mode! III. How Naval Operation Mode Works? - Part I Naval Operation Mode In War Thunder 1.87 As already mentioned, [Naval Operation] is a large-scale game mode centered around simulating a naval invasion, involving multiple stages, dynamic objectives, AI involvement and more. The following part of the post will detail how the mode could work would it be implemented in the current version of the game (1.87), taking into account currently available vehicles and mechanics. The Ideas and Principles Behind Naval Operation The core idea behind the Naval Operation Mode is to give War Thunder players, especially those interested in naval gameplay, a new mode with complex and structured gameplay, where tactics and teamwork matter more than anywhere else. The mode is also intended to elevate War Thunder’s naval mode above a simplistic “shoot that, cap this” gameplay loop as well as to allow every vessel type to play a distinct role in each battle, rather than having a “biggest boat rules them all” meta. The Case Map Before we dive into the nitty gritty details of the mode, let’s first set the stage by talking about the map I selected to host this new game mode on. Disclaimer: Please bare in mind that the map I selected may not be objectively best suited for the mode I’m presenting. Other or purpose-designed maps may fit this idea better and the chosen map only serves for purposes of visualization and concept exploration. The map was chosen strictly by my own judgement, after taking into consideration multiple options. This particular map promised the best results, but does not necessarily need to represent the final/only map/mode combination that could work. The particular map that I’ve chosen is an air map which has been in the game from the very start and should be quite familiar to both veterans and newbies alike since it pops up in both AB and RB rotation, depending on BR. The map I’m talking about is New Guinea (Port Moresby), and looks like this; So why this map? - The reason why I’ve chosen this map is primarily due to its topographical layout. As it is, this map offers interesting locations for naval battles to take place and can seemingly facilitate a multitude of different vessel types due to the presence of both shallower and deeper waters. Furthermore, large islands on the bay’s entrance provide for solid cover and break direct line of sight on the more open part of the map. Finally, the air RB version of the map for mid tiers offers a mission structure similar to the one I’m proposing with this post, meaning that the groundwork for this map/mode combination has already been laid down to a certain degree. As a result, this makes it relatively easy to expand upon the basic idea and applying it to an entirely different new game mode. Progressive Stages As already mentioned above, Naval Operation is intended to play out in three distinct stages, representing early, mid and late game. All three stages have a different set of primary and possible secondary objectives to complete in order for the battle to progress onto the next stage. With that said, let’s break down what a typical match of Naval Operation would look like, stage by stage. Stage I The first stage of Naval Operation starts off as a regular naval battle, familiar to probably every player who has spent at least some time in War Thunder’s naval mode. Despite being the first stage, it’s no less important than any other stage and failing to complete objectives here could grind the whole operation to a halt, prematurely ending it as a result. That said, in this early stage, both teams compete for naval superiority over two capture zones located on the entrance to the Bay of Port Moresby. Hereby, point A represents the entry to the bay itself, whose capture will ensure that the transport convoy in the next stage will be able to reach its destination, whereas capturing point B makes sure that the attacking team’s flank is secure and that no enemy vessel is able to attack the transport convoy immediately after arriving to the battlefield. Note: Capturing and holding both points (by original idea) is mandatory for the battle to progress to the next stage, however, point B can also be made a secondary objective for the sake of pacing or balance, if deemed appropriate/necessary. To visualize this first stage of battle, here’s a little battle plan showing how this stage would play out, as could be shown in game as well; A big thank you to friend and colleague leroyonly for making this and all other battle plans shown in this post for me. All credit for them goes to him. Disclaimer: The depicted spawn locations are not true to the map scaling nor do they represent the optimal spawn locations for each vessel type. They are merely there for visualisation purposes. These initial engagements will primarily be fought by destroyers on both sides, since this vessel type will spawn closest to the objectives and is usually also the first to arrive on scene due to its good mobility. In this early stage, cruiser captains are best off providing fire support from the second line and only enter the thick of the fighting if necessary. Capital ships play a bigger role in subsequent stages, so preserving them for their prime time would be a smart move. The attacking team’s efforts should be concentrated on capturing the strategic points in this stage, meaning that their tactical options and flexibility is rather limited, but not non-existent. The defenders however, have more options available to them. Besides countering the enemy attack head-on with all forces, the defenders can also choose not to heavily invest their forces into the initial attack, effectively allowing the attackers to complete their objectives, and instead, position their vessels in such a fashion, in which they’ll stand ready for the next stage. This tactic would likely see the defending team splitting their numbers, with some going ahead to slow the enemy’s advance, buying time for their allies to reach the bay area and prepare defenses for the next stage. However, this requiring advanced coordination and teamwork, I doubt will be a sight often seen in random battles, but I thought would be worth pointing out nonetheless. Stage II Provided the attackers complete their first set of objectives in Stage I, the battle then moves onto Stage II. Here, the familiar mould of War Thunder naval battles is broken and players are first met with new types of objectives and gameplay. In Stage II, the focus shifts from achieving naval superiority to escorting, or attacking, a convoy of transport ships carrying invasion forces. In essence, players can imagine an upscaled and reimagined version of the [Convoy] mode already present in the game. Stage II begins shortly after the conclusion of the previous stage. Its start is marked by the spawning of a sizeable invasion fleet, consisting of large transport and landing ships, in the close vicinity of the attacking fleet’s spawn. Once spawned in, this fleet would set course for the designated staging ground for the actual naval invasion. In this particular case, the fleet would set course for the entrance of the Bay of Port Moresby (see battle plan below). The Invasion Fleet Before diving deeper into the details of Stage II, a quick overview of the composition of vessels forming the invasion fleet. Examples from the USN and IJN found below. Attack Transport (APA) - The invasion fleet’s “capital ship” type. They form the backbone of the fleet and carry the most resources, making them the most valuable asset, but also a high profile target. Armed with some medium caliber and AA weapons, doesn’t take part in actual amphibious assault. Landing Ship (LST) - Carries fewer resources than APAs, but does actively participate in amphibious landing. Generally also armed with some medium caliber and AA weapons. Landing Craft (LCVP) - The bulk of the vessels comprising the amphibious assault. They’re deployed from the larger APAs and carry a limited amount of resources individually. They’re easily destructible, but deployed en mass in an effort to offset this drawback. AI Aircraft Squadrons Around the same time as Stage II commences, (several) groups of AI aircraft spawn in for both teams. Close to their spawning location, air spawns for player aircraft will also become available. The AI aircraft groups can consist of virtually any aircraft type we have in game, from fighters to heavy bombers. These AI aircraft squadrons serve three purposes; 1) Assist players in completing objectives, 2) add an additional PvE element to the mode and 3) enhance the overall atmosphere of the match, giving it a sense of large scale. Upon spawning, AI squadrons will start attack runs on various objectives, depending on which team they belong to. AI Squadrons for the Attacking Team - AI aircraft squadrons for the attacking team can, for example, consist of a wing of bombers, a large wing of dive bombers and a wing of fighters. These would set course for the location of the landing ground and would attack ground targets defending this area (e.g. artillery, AAA, MG emplacements, pillboxes etc.). The fighters of course would primarily protect the strike aircraft, but can also engage in strafing runs in the absence of any aerial threats. AI Squadrons for the Defending Team - AI aircraft squadrons for the defending team could have a different composition since their targets are also different. These groups would be tasked with attacking the incoming invasion fleet, hence why they could consist of a group of dive bombers, a large group of torpedo bombers and a group of fighters. Their role would be the same as with the enemy AI planes, only their target would be different. Players on both teams can make individual decisions on how to interact with the AI, based on tactical situation and battle strategy. For defending players, it would make sense to protect their AI aircraft since they assist them with a crucial objective, potentially weakening or even completely destroying the invasion fleet before it reaches its destination. On the other hand, for the attacking team it would be more beneficial to directly counter the enemy AI squadrons by covering their transports with AA fire and simply let their allied AI squadrons do their own thing, since they play a less central role in the battle. Of course, as said before, players can choose themselves how to interact with this AI threat and this is just one way of doing things. Coastal Defences Although present right from the start of the the battle, coastal defences only become active from the second stage of Naval Operation. These are defensive land fortifications placed around the staging area for the invasion (in this case, in and around the entry to the Bay of Port Moresby) and act as an additional defensive line for the defending team. These structures are controlled by the AI and can be seen as bunker installations armed with coastal batteries, which engage hostile vessels, both controlled by the player as well as the AI. An example for a coastal battery, as currently found on the Normandy map. These fortifications could engage targets between 10-15 km away, naturally becoming increasingly more accurate the shorter the distance to the target. Furthermore, these coastal batteries would primarily focus on the ships of the incoming invasion fleet, with player vessels being a secondary target. Other than the example shown above, new bunker installations could be modeled for this mode, with bigger ones being tougher to destroy and having multiple batteries as well as some light caliber AA weapons perhaps. Having mentioned larger forts being possibly tougher to destroy, how would such a land fort be destroyed in the first place? The DM of these targets could either by done in a very simplistic way, similarly to how pillboxes on air maps work, or they could receive their own simplified DM. With the latter, one could imagine the bunker itself acting as a shell for the internal modules (gun, ammo etc.), which if continuously damaged over time would eventually fail and lead to the destruction of the entire structure. Alternatively, a few well placed hits directly aimed at the gun itself may cause an ammunition detonation, resulting in the structure being destroyed faster. The latter method however, would have its successful application restricted to either point blank engagement distances or a very lucky hit from long range. Naturally, bigger shells would deal with these targets more effectively, meaning that capital ships could play a big part in taking these down quickly. Needless to say, these coastal batteries would be a formidable obstacle for the attacking team to deal with. This is exactly why the attackers would receive a secondary objective at the start of Stage II to destroy these fortifications in order to soften up the enemy’s defences before the main invasion fleet arrives. This can be done with either artillery shelling conducted by ships or aircraft, should some players choose to spawn in with one during this stage (strategic bombers and bigger bomb calibers would also find a proper use thanks to the presence of such targets). Either way, completely ignoring or tackling this secondary objective too late could result in costly losses of transport vessels, which in turn, may negatively affect the outcome of the battle for the attacking team. Spawn Location Changes While the attackers press on the attack and face a plethora of new threats and objectives to take care of, the situation for the defenders doesn’t change substantially. Their task is still to prevent the enemy from completing their objectives and protect the valuable strategic assets they received in stage II (AI aircraft squadrons and coastal fortifications, for example). However, one thing that does change is the spawn locations for the defending players. While capital ships preserve their spawns from the previous round, destroyers now have their spawn location shifted to a different location (in this case, within the Bay of Port Moresby itself), in order to move it away from the thick of the fighting, thus avoiding situations where players would spawn directly within an engagement. Apart from that, the shift in spawn locations also prevents the defending destroyers from having a spawn located right next to or behind the incoming transport vessels in the later part of this stage, effectively preventing the defenders from getting a significant advantage over their opponents. Additionally, the defending team would now also receive a new spawn point for light vessels, such as PT-boats, which would be located between the new destroyer spawn and the staging area for the invasion. Although not as important at this stage as it will be in the next one, players would get the option to already spawn in with a lighter vessel in anticipation of the start of the next stage, the big one! Stage III If the match of Naval Operation got this far, then players on both sides can get ready for the final showdown, the decider round which will determine who leaves the match victorious and who defeated. Stage III is marked by the start of the actual naval invasion, in which the attackers have to defend their landing troops in a final push towards victory while the defenders attempt to prevent them from doing so with all resources they have left at their disposal. Stage III begins shortly after the ships of the invasion fleet have reached the staging area. Once initiated, each of the assault transports will quickly deploy a set number of waves of landing craft in quick succession which, joined by the larger landing ships, will set course for the beach. This final stage would roughly look something like this, if the battle plan is observed. The Amphibious Landing As already mentioned, the amphibious landing begins with the spawning of a limited number of waves of landing craft. The spawning of these waves would happen in relative quick succession, but they wouldn’t be spawned all at once. During this time, the transport ships can still be damaged and sunk. Sinking these during the deployment stage will prevent further waves from that vessel to spawn. However, once all waves have spawned, the transport ships hold no real value anymore and don’t need to be prioritized by the defenders. Note: I held back on making any estimation on how many waves and vessels/wave would be spawned due to the lack of any references off of which these values could be derived from. Seeing as these guesses would be just as good as the next one, I’ll simply leave this up for debate as I think it would make for an excellent point of discussion for the comments below. As the landing craft spawn in, they also make their way for the beachhead they’re supposed to capture. While en route, the defenders need to concentrate all efforts on destroying these landing craft and to make sure that as few as possible actually reach the beach. During this stage, smaller vessels and destroyers would be the most prevalent fighting vessels present on the battlefield and also the most suited for this task. The sole objective for the attacking team during the final stage is to escort the landing craft to the beach and to make sure that as many as possible reach their destination. In order to achieve this, attackers will not only have to combat player vessels from the defending team, but also perform coastline bombardments to destroy any potential AI ground units left defending the beachhead. Doing so will not only reduce casualties among the landing craft, but will also allow for a quicker capture of the beachhead once the landing craft arrive there. On the contrary, the defenders must do the opposite. However, while the individual landing craft might seem like easy pickings, players commanding smaller vessels such as PT-boats, should keep in mind that the various landing craft will also return fire on their way in. Depending on the vessel, this fire might also include heavy cannon and machine gun fire, which could quickly send any PT-boat down to the bottom. Spawn Location Changes With the start of the third and final stage, another set of spawn location changes takes place, this time for the attackers however. Similarly to the spawn changes applied to the defending team, the attackers receive new destroyer spawns in the close proximity of the invasion fleet staging ground. A spawn for smaller vessels also becomes available nearby in order to match the spawns of the defenders. Capital ship spawns remain the same as with previous stages. Victory Conditions The outcome of the amphibious assault is the sole deciding factor on which team wins the game, provided the match hasn’t already concluded at the previous stages of course. As such, the following victory conditions are given; The Attacking Team Wins If - Any number of landing vessels successfully reach the beachhead and subsequently capture it. Alternatively, victory can be achieved by ticker majority at time expiration. The Defending Team Wins If - Most/all landing craft have been destroyed and the capture of the beachhead has been prevented. Alternatively, victory can be achieved by ticker majority at time expiration. Draw/Defeat for Both Teams If - Neither team completes their final objective in time and at the same time neither team has a clear ticket majority at time expiration. That about wraps it up for the basic idea(s) behind Naval Operation and its implementation in War Thunder 1.87. From here, the post will continue onto Part II, which will try to project how the game mode could evolve in the future, if more vessels and mechanics are introduced. Although I highly encourage you to continue on and check out Part II as well, since it doesn’t include any substantial changes to the workings of the mode itself, you may as well skip to Chapter IV if you’re not too interested in how the mode could look like in the distant future. Chapter IV will highlight some potential problems with the mode, include my own thoughts and opinions on it and will set up some talking points for the discussion in the comments below. So if you’re more interested into that, feel free to skip ahead to this point, you won’t miss out on much. III. How Naval Operation Mode Works? - Part II IV. Naval Operation Mode - Debrief Thoughts, Opinions, Problems & More Having already extensively covered the mode itself and its offerings to players, I believe it’s also time to shed some light on possible problems the mode could bring with it, would it come in the state covered by this suggestion. Time and Pacing One of the largest concerns I personally have with a mode like this, is pacing and required time allocation to complete a round of Naval Operation. Although I’ve already stated at the beginning of this suggestion that the mode is intended to be around 30 - 45 min in duration, it’s hard to really guarantee that the mode could really play out within this timespan when no similar modes are available to take reference from. Due to this uncertainty, I’m sure many will see this as a suggestion for a type of naval EC mode. While that would certainly address potential lack of time, I personally don’t think that this mode could be used to make a naval EC mode out of it due to its focused mission structure, as opposed to the dynamic one offered by EC. Naval Ops has clear cut mission objectives which not only directly influence the further development of the battle, but also directs players into completing certain tasks as opposed to giving them an option to complete a certain task within regular EC. In essence, regular EC allows you to complete various objectives to gain a ticket advantage and thus get closer to winning with each completed objective, whereas Naval Ops conditions you to complete objectives in order to win, giving each objective more gravitas than those found in EC. Due to this large difference, I highly doubt that this mode could be made into a naval EC mode, despite its large scale, but it may very well be used as a basis for a proper naval EC mode to be developed later down the line. However, naval EC is not something we’ll go more into with this suggestion, we’ll leave it at that. With that said, it will no doubt prove extremely difficult to balance this mode in terms of how much time needs to be allocated to it so players would have a realistic chance of potentially going through the entire battle, stage by stage, without being interrupted by a premature draw (due to time) or feeling like the battle is dragging on for too long and subsequently leaving the match because of it. Once again, I feel like 30 - 45 min would be the sweet spot in terms of how much time an average player would want to invest into a single round of this mode. However, to achieve this, it might be necessary to cut some features of the mode out in order to speed it up and fit within this time limit. Alternatively, it may need its time limit raised to 1h (similar to Air RB), or possibly even more if seen as necessary. What the best way of handling this would have to be determined by the naval playerbase. The question here is; Does the average naval player prefer a single match of a long mode with a complex mission structure, or does he rather prefer the opposite? And in the case of the former, how much of his time would he be willing to invest into that single long round? The decision on how to balance the mode timewise will have to be determined by the answers to these questions. Overall Balancing and Asymmetrical Gameplay No doubt that balance in this mode will make for a central point of discussion, and probably rightfully so. Balance is one of the central aspects of any multiplayer PvP mode, which plays a major factor in creating fair opportunities for all players involved and thus largely impacting player enjoyment of a given mode and Naval Operation is no exception to this. However, with Naval Operation being, by design, an asymmetrical mode, achieving balance will inherently be a more difficult task in comparison to the symmetrical modes currently present in random battles. Therefore, the mode will have to monitored more closely than other modes for player feedback and will need its statistics evaluated more frequently in order to make changes where deemed necessary. I will personally abstain from making any judgements on the state of balance for this mode as in its current state it’s merely concept exploration as part of this suggestion thread. Should the mode ever be put into development, balancing, in my opinion, should be reserved to come well after some sort of reference data is available on which balancing measures could be based on (i.e. play testing). At the moment, I reckon it’s simply too early to tell how exactly this mode would need to be set up in order to achieve as balanced of an experience as possible. However, I do still strongly encourage everyone interested in this mode to leave their own opinions on balancing matters in the comments below, even if it’s based solely on speculation. This way, certain issues that went overlooked by myself can be brought into the spotlight, discussed and addressed by the community. What I will say however, is that I’d like to see this mode shift balance throughout the duration of the mode, instead of offering a “level playing field” from start to finish. What I mean by this is that the mode could, for example, start off with odds being stacked in favor of the attackers (means of achieving this I’ll leave open for discussion), and then gradually shifting over in favor of the defenders with each stage. I reckon this would benefit the flow of battle greatly, reducing the chances of rounds ending early at the first stage, while also making battles more interesting overall thanks to a growing sense of struggle for victory by the end of the match (more emphasized for attackers). All in all, balance is certainly going to be a central talking point for this mode and I imagine everyone will have different views on this subject. However, with it being so important for this mode in particular, I once again call for everyone to throw in their two cents and discuss this subject in the comments below. I’m really keen to see what others think of it and how they view the various aspects of balance, so be sure to share your views below. Required Development Effort Although it might seem hard to believe it after reading through the suggestion so far, my initial idea for this mode was centered around reusing as many existing assets and mechanics, in hopes of making a possible implementation of the proposed mode as least problematic and as fast as possible. However, as I continued working on the idea, I quickly came to the realization that this proposed mode probably has too much potential with all the ideas I had floating around in my head, making a speedy implementation with the use of existing assets next to impossible without wasting some of this potential by leaving certain features out and providing an arguably inferior mode in the end. Having realized that the mode wouldn’t live up to the initial idea if it went down the path of “resource-saving”, I decided to ditch that framework and instead, present the idea in its fullest to the community, with all features initially envisioned, and accept that it may be perceived as too ambitious to consider possibly implementing into the game. Now I’m no game developer and I definitely don’t take part in War Thunder’s active development, so I can’t say for sure how much time and effort it would be required to implement such a mode into the game. However, I don’t think that anybody needs to be a game developer to assume that such a large and complex mode certainly couldn’t be made overnight, or in a few days, weeks or months time. Properly developing such a mode, testing it internally, tweaking it and eventually releasing it would be a lengthy process which would take a great investment of resources and time. Apart from that, various technical problems, such as potential engine limitations, might partially or even completely prevent the development of such a mode for the game to begin with. Whatever the case may be, we as players need to keep in mind that this idea, however great it may be, has the inherent possible problem of being potentially too ambitious. As such, it might never see the light of day outside of this suggestion thread for a multitude of reasons, and that should be seen as a perfectly acceptable possibility/reality which this idea may face. Reserved Space for Further Problems/Concerns (Player Concerns) This space is reserved for highlighting further possible problems or concerns, pointed out by players during discussions. Reserved Space for Further Problems/Concerns (Player Concerns) This space is reserved for highlighting further possible problems or concerns, pointed out by players during discussions. “Too Long, Didn’t Read” Summary (TL;DR) The Basic Premise Behind the Idea: A new objective-based, grand-scale mode for War Thunder naval battles, centered around the concept of naval invasions. The mode takes the most defined aspects of a naval invasion and combines it with both existing and new mechanics to provide players with an authentic interpretation of a naval invasion, specifically adapted for War Thunder. Battles of Naval Operation are broken down into three stages, with each stage offering unique sets of objectives, which both the attacking and defending team must complete in order to progress to the next stage and ultimately achieve victory. During this process, players will find themselves frequently switching between PvP and PvE gameplay, as they go about fighting other players as well as AI targets as part of various mission objectives. As part of its grand scale, Naval Operation will allow each vessel type currently available in War Thunder, as well as potential new ones that are yet to come, to play their part in battle and truly have an impact on the outcome, from the smallest of combat vessels to the largest of warships! As a direct result of its grand scale, Naval Operation will also have a significantly longer battle time in comparison to existing naval modes. Most Notable Features of the Mode: Large-scale, progressive battles Presence of both PvP and PvE elements Complex mission structure More hardcore, objective-based gameplay Opportunities for all vessel types to shine in their intended roles Authentic and immersive naval battle atmosphere Possible Problems: Could have excessively long battle times Significant downtime between engagements Some features needing to be left out to achieve optimal pacing Asymmetrical nature can cause balance problems Difficult balancing Possibly too ambitious to be implemented in the presented form As we have now come to the end of my suggestion post, I would like to wholeheartedly thank everyone once more for expressing interest into my idea and taking the time to check it out, even if you just briefly glanced over it or simply read the TL;DR, it still means a lot! But now that this (quite comprehensive) presentation is done, it’s your turn to pitch in and contribute to it. I invite you to share your own views, feelings, opinions and any possible feedback on the idea in the comments below in order to get a proper discussion on the matter going. The more people join in and talk about it, the more the idea can be refined and possible problems outlined and addressed. Therefore, I would also kindly ask you to share this idea with other like-minded players interested in the naval game mode and help spread the word. Once again, the more people come in and voice their opinions on this idea, the better the end result will be! So, should you decide to promote this idea, a big thank you from my end again on helping the idea gain traction within the community, you rock! Image Sources (links):
  35. 12 points
    Mixed feelings about this event, and I ddin't do that bad actually. 11 days for that was a bit short, especially since people have work, school, whatever, in my case 4 days of work during the event. I clocked in around 65 hours of pure playtime in 381 games, 263 of which I came first. That's not counting queue time and watching that spinner for 1st place come to a halt (which I consider an utter waste of time, why didn't you put an x on it to close it down right away like on the daily rewards?) So I came first 263 times, what did I get? Mostly 1 toolbox, sometimes 2, very rarely 3. I think I got 3 toolboxes more often from regular crates than from the 1st place ones. I would have loved to get some camos, but never mind. What did I get? I grinded the first plane, exchanged it for the I-180S, on the second plane got a bit impatient, so I sold a FJ-4B on the market, got a needed part and bought the VFW and Project 122bis. Grinded planes 2 and 3, exchanged it for the HMS Tiger. Got stuck on the 4th plane, until I figured I'd be better off just selling stuff instead of buying parts for plane for & then probably being stuck on plane 5 again, so I sold all the parts and around 250 toolboxes (why on Earth one has to put them up 1 by 1?) and bought the Merkava. Also during the event I made about 17M SL. I consider the Ju 388 actually just bad, premium or not, so I didn't even bother with that one, though with all the parts I still got (at first mostly parts I didn't need and later ones I could have used but I didn't even care anymore to assemble planes) and just sold them. So I got 5 of the 6 vehicles, mostly through use of the market, still I feel somewhat unhappy, I largely would have preferred to go for heavy grinding instead of having to use the market. Also I found that I don't actually need that many vehicles, I have almost every vehicle there is in game, including premiums, though I enjoy planes the most, also play mostly planes. At one time I played a couple games with Russian tanks, I discovered that I had a SU-85A, had never even played it yet and couldn't even remember how I had got that one. The best thing for me I got out of this event is that I figured that I don't actually need every vehicle Gaijin brings out and should hold on to my money rather. I'm still willing to buy premium vehicles, though not just anything anymore. As far as I am concerned this event involved so much greed on the part of Gaijin that I'll actually block now, so imo they shot themselves in the foot with that one. The best videos on that event were by Implied and TEC I think :
  36. 12 points
  37. 12 points
    This is the BEST event Gaijin has ever given us! The most vehicles, the best rewards. All it takes is some patience, and HARD WORK. Which it seems most of the naysayers have never done their entire lives! I hope they make an even BETTER Event next year!! For example: build a T-95 black eagle You have to construct all the components and individual ERA blocks! that would be fantastic! I hope they limit the days to like 5, so scrubs wont ever get it without buying off the market! And it should take like 120 hours minimum to grind all the materials for it! Would TOTALLY BE BOSS. Make the parts drop in different sections also, so you need like 3-5 of the same part to rebuild a new exhaust muffler, or Fuel filter! Once again THANKS Gaijin! Ignore all the haters, they are like .002% of the popular opinion! Everybody should love this event! ITS THE BEST!
  38. 12 points
    From today, 583 additional accounts have been permanently banned for using third-party modifications in violation of the user agreement - use of prohibited modifications. (EULA). The introduction of the reporting system has again proved key in allowing players to participate in keeping the game clear of players who insist on trying to gain unfair advantage. The modification detection algorithm continues to improve. List of banned players: Having an account permanently banned will result in a player losing everything in that account - Be warned! Thank you guys for your vigilance. o7 Discuss it here!
  39. 12 points
    When all the streamers and community contributors are giving up on the event cause it's mathematically impossible to obtain all vehicles even for them (10-15 hours a day of grind) then you know how broken this is
  40. 12 points
    Over and over and over when i'm playing a powerfull tank destroyer with a deadly shell.. powerfull enough to pen any target and one shot everything. Nothing survives and everything blows up instantly, crew knocked, ammo exploded, just destroyed. But in comes the mighty SPAA or light tanks.. little baby ASU-57 rolls in.. I hit it dead center with an explosive shell with 500g of explosive mass.. ''hit'' no crew damage, no component damage, just nothing really. In comes ZiS-12.. shoot a shell straight through the cabin.. shell passes straight through the heads of the crew members, should just rip their heads clean off, but no damage, fire another shell... ''hit'' no crew damage, no component damage, just nothing really.. little bit of an orange paint. in comes M15 SPAA.. shoot a shell penning front to back, dead center.. ''hit''. Same with the BMPs... you blow up top tier MBTs in a single blow, but the almighty BMP just takes on a shade of orange. I mean really? The best top tier vehicle is now an SPAA and light tanks have a higher level of survivability and more firepower than any heavy in the game, except the known Russian premiums like the KV-220 and IS-7 that will never be balanced ofcourse. '' Ofcourse light tanks were always better as the game is about mobility and firepower and heavies are uptiered to a point where their armor is useless at best, but this is another level''