MTom

Did Gaijin abandon the historical accuracy for the easier path and "balance"?

It certainly feels so sadly.

With the implamentation of the new and classified tanks where the armour composition and values are always questionable, and the new pen calculator which is straight up contradicts many shells historical values but they refuse to change it, because "they use it and that's it".

Lately a Challenger 2 reload time bug report with many video evidence showing the real life reload time was refused saying "there's no need to change it"! NO NEED! Where is the accuracy??

Here it is:

https://forum.warthunder.ru/index.php?/topic/261189-skorostrelnost-120-mm-orudiya-l30/

 

I'm pretty sure you guys could list a ton more vehicles with inaccuracies.

I do understand Gaijin tries to balance out the game, but they did it in thepast with BR changes and repair costs, now they are flat out changing values throwing out the historical accuracy on the window if they see fit. Yhis is really sad in my opinion :(

What is your opinion? Balance with made up tanks/planes, or do we need the accuracy too?

Edited by MTom

P8triot (Posted )

Since OP is ground specific
moved to Machinery of war-Ground Forces
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 3
  • Upvote 23
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion this is what the vocal players were wanting. Even a certain youtuber or two said it. Blah blah blah “balance” blah. Its just a game blah blah. 

 

I want how it was and war is not balanced. I dont play war thunder as a game. 

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 6
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they have, they've removed the sole reason I came to play. I've never touched WoT, never felt any draw. WT's piecewise armor calcs, "real" ballistics, even the barest hint of strategy... RIP.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still play and still invest, but I get more and more annoyed how hints of realism go more and more out the window. The thing that annoys me the most are the fact that the statement "Only temporary mixed battles" was (as unfortunately expected) not temporary and we continue to be stuck constantly in mixed battles.

 

Best regards,

 

Phil

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 8
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 to 3 years ago, you knew ideally what you were gonna get. 

You got the rare mixed battles map that you might get once a week. Now, you can't go a whole day without getting mixed battles in Tank or Plane maps. Maps used to be of a historical nature. Now, you have American Desert or Alaska, no place a battle has ever been fought on with modern weapons of war. 

  • Upvote 7
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game was brilliant when it started,now it becomes an arcade shooter.fantasy penetration values,tiny standard city maps , airspawn in piston engine plane battles and post war tanks on ww2 battlefields are not giving me a realistic feeling.After 5.5 years of playing,i´am very close to retire from WT.

Edited by _pips_
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 9
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, MTom said:

It certainly feels so sadly.

With the implementation of the new and classified tanks where the armour composition and values are always questionable, and the new pen calculator which is straight up contradicts many shells historical values but they refuse to change it, because "they use it and that's it".

Lately a Challenger 2 reload time bug report with many video evidence showing the real life reload time was refused saying "there's no need to change it"! NO NEED! Where is the accuracy??

Here it is:

https://forum.warthunder.ru/index.php?/topic/261189-skorostrelnost-120-mm-orudiya-l30/

 

I'm pretty sure you guys could list a ton more vehicles with inaccuracies.

I do understand Gaijin tries to balance out the game, but they did it in the past with BR changes and repair costs, now they are flat out changing values throwing out the historical accuracy on the window if they see fit. This is really sad in my opinion :(

What is your opinion? Balance with made up tanks/planes, or do we need the accuracy too?

The accuracy is what make that certain tank perform like the tanks in real life, If we throw accuracy away whats the point then? I want to drive a tank that has true values to real life, not made up nonsense. But unfortunately it's been done before, the Tiger II P and H had modifiers on them to increase penetration on their armour, they've since removed them once the power creep started from the above tiers. 

Edited by EricH1983
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Did Gaijin abandoned the historical accuracy for the easier path and "balance"?

 

No.

7 hours ago, MTom said:

 

I'm pretty sure you guys could list a ton more vehicles with inaccuracies.

 

If you can list them, please submit a proper bug report in Technical Section. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 16
  • Confused 5
  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stona said:

 

No.

With the trend your guys map design been going as of late I would say you are leaving historical accuracy in the broom closet so to say. 

 

Seriously who thought American Desert was a good idea for top tier tanks?

 

Edited by FallenZulu
  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 13
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new formula for shells should only be used on those that have little info namely the APFDS rounds since most of them are still classified. 

 

Same as most people, I chose War Thunder because of historical accuracy. But lately especially maps design and the new penetration formula has given me the same feeling a most other people, historical accuracy is being thrown out of the window and into the trash bin outside. And War thunder is becoming more or less an arcade game rather than the realistic game that is was, which is the key selling point and attraction that attracts player. I have been playing this game for almost 6 years never gave up on the game, but with the recent development of the game, I started considering the removal of the game from my PC.  Yes, changes and further development of the game I needed if it is to survive in the market. Changing or even abandon the foundation and the key attraction of the game in the name of "Balance" will not make the game to be more competitive in the market, rather it will most likely lose the unique competitive advantage that makes the game stands out in the market. 

 

Yes, there are some balancing issues in the game but abandoning historical document and replacing it with some formula that is flawed in some way is totally not a great idea. 

Gameplay balance and historical accuracy/ realism are both important for the game, and I believe a neutral point can be achieved between the 2, but not one over another, making the game more arcade in the name of gameplay balance is not the way to make the game more competitive. Bear in mind that many of us choose War Thunder over other games for a reason. 

 

Maps development should focus on historical maps as a priority rather than giving maps where not a single battle was fought in history. 

 

Devs should talk to the players the old and the new alike. And people should respect different opinions and communicate in a good manner with other members of the community or the devs.  

 

Realism and historical accuracy are some of the key unique features that made the game competitive in the market.  Because it is so unique, I can't find any proper replacement that gives me the feeling that it is superior over War Thunder and never removed War Thunder for other games.  

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 5
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my humble, newbie opinion, accuracy HAS to come in a slight second place to balance for a game to be enjoyable by the majority. Gaijin is a business and they need to turn profits to keep things going.

 

To illustrate my point; I read the M1A1 Abrams is coming. In the real world, A1s would mop the floor with all their contemporaries (I'm not going to get dragged in to an argument here; this is a one-off comment, if you don't agree, that's fine by me). But Gaijin simply can not allow that to be the case. When the -A1 gets added, and were it to dominate practically all that time, there's a risk people would get frustrated/mad (and I wouldn't blame them), and that could drive players away. F2Ps need consistent numbers, because that maintains the likelihood of enough people making premium purchases, either regularly or sporadically. Preferably regularly.

 

So in short, yes, historical accuracy takes a backseat, because it has to. 

  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In 2013 we were promised a game that represented historical accuracy as closely to reality as possible, of course we knew somethings wouldn't be completely accurate (sadly it wasn´t ment to be a sim), the thing is in the past years War Thunder has lost a lot of that promise and start dumping the main focus of historical importance and replace it with cold war era stuff (and even later) that cannot be represented accurately because there's no reliable enough data to implement them correctly .

 

The shift in main focus can be noticed in the trailers, dev blogs and (of course) in the content that gets added. 

I even remember one of the first videos of the game: those SBD-3 bombing the japanese carriers and all, it was awesome, even tho the game looked terrible back then... But the idea was reviving those battles, those pivotal moments in history that mean a lot to all kinds of people. But now all we got is French, UK and US planes fighting over russia against the soviets, germans, italians and maybe some japanese guys, MBTs rushing around like go karts in Arizona, or soviet tanks defending berlin from the famous american-japanese alliance of the early 40's (Arcade exist for a reason you know?)

 

Understandably it isn't as thrilling as before even though we have more than a thousand vehicles now.

The gameplay is the same since the game entered open beta... and the comformancy of Gaijin towards introducing broken vehicles from the get go has become the standard operating mode.  At least before we had the option to submit bug reports with high hopes in regards to the problem getting fixed, now the most common answer is "we don't feel like there's anything wrong with it, plus the formula says it is right" or if not "this change is not needed" and just like that submiting bug reports feels like a waste of time.

 

Having performances of different vehicles not being 100% accurate is acceptable and expected but deliberately ignoring documents and in its place putting some makeshift value is insulting, plus the ahistorical matchmaking and maps and blah blah, this thing keeps going down as time progresses.

 

Of course this is my humble opinion as a player that is to stubborn to accept this game isnt what it used to be. ;)

 

I acknowledge that the devs wanted this to change, but having some consideration to the old players that still stick around would a kind move on their part, at least some events or something that resembles reality. I don't care if the majority of newer players like this kind of War Thunder, fine by me but at least give us something with historical settings

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Stona said:

 

No.

How can that be said with any sincerity where there are vehicles with complete made up stats or using simplistic ballistic formulas already in game and now the future addition of others coming with almost all stats completely estimated at gaijin discretion

 

If you can list them, please submit a proper bug report in Technical Section. 

have you seen the bug report section? just about every known bug or error on every tank in game has multiple threads already, why bother making more clutter on what already exists.

 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Stona said:

No

Let's agree to disagree

 

The moment a tank has different armour values or shell pen values from the real one they did.

And we all know for instance many shells have totally different pen values in game now than in real life. Or even if a tank doesn't have its real life ammo because of balance then it's not accurate. 

Shells which were bugreported in the path, accepted and values changed after the bug report now has totally different values because of the use of the calculator.

 

As i said i do understand that balance is a need in the game, but i'm not fan of vehicles being inaccurate on purpose for the sake of balance.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 5
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Stona said:

No.

Yes.

 

The casus with AP slope modifiers is definite proof of that.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 18

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Stona said:

If you can list them, please submit a proper bug report in Technical Section. 

The very starting post of this topic notes an irrefutable bug report to enhance the realistic statistics that was turned down, and your response is "just bug report it".

 

"Just bug report it" being Gaijin's standard go-to get-out-of-jail-free card is becoming very tiring when bug reports are being ignored, rejected, or undone with no opposing evidence. Just look at the Cromwell turret bug reports. We've submitted it 2-3 times now with primary blueprint sources, it gets accepted every time, changed in the dev server every time, and then never makes it to the live server every time after one guy on the Russian forum opposed it with zero evidence supporting his claim.

Edited by TheFuzzieOne
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 4
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Rodrigo_Pericles said:

I agree, realistics battles dont have a single aspect of realism nowadays.

Such a shame, im sick of mixed battles, Japan vs USA on Berlin and this kinds of strange "balanced and fun" crap. 

I would vote for realism all day long

There is much lumped together here under the term realism.

 

Should certain tanks not be allowed on certain maps?

Should certain tank types not be in the same team?

Thats only relevant if you are looking for "reenactment" type of "realism.

 

I too prefer games that don't give a *ff* about "balance"...but that's not War-thunder.

If you have same size teams, a form of balance in vehicles is needed.

 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As TheFuzzieOne said what's the point of making a bug report?

 

The Challenger 2 reload bug report was denied based on "there's no need to change it, it's in line with the Challenger Mk2 and Mk3" whereas  we know one of the upgrades on the L30 gun was the new breech over the L11A5 for faster reloads. Plus video evidence was shown in the bug report topic...but it was denied becuse Gaijin doesn't feel like correcting it?!?!?!

 

  • Upvote 7
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Worth noting that I have no problem with the map locations, only the map designs. Hell make a map in Brazil. Make a map in India. Make a map in Dover called Sealion. Go nuts. Locations are fun.

 

But at the same time, I don't think we should read this as "People don't mind any maps". I'd also love to see more maps based on historical battlesites so that we can do these historical battles.

 

So long as there's a mix it's all good. And right now I think people want more historical battlesites. Of course with how long it takes to make a map (something I am intimately familiar with) people's perceptions change by the time it comes.

 

tl;dr - Map locations, themes, and visuals are fine so long as there continues to be a mix, map designs for gameplay need serious work.

Edited by TheFuzzieOne
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheFuzzieOne said:

Worth noting that I have no problem with the map locations, only the map designs. Hell make a map in Brazil. Make a map in India. Make a map in Dover called Sealion. Go nuts. Locations are fun.

 

But at the same time, I don't think we should read this as "People don't mind any maps". I'd also love to see more maps based on historical battlesites so that we can do these historical battles.

 

So long as there's a mix it's all good. And right now I think people want more historical battlesites. Of course with how long it takes to make a map (something I am intimately familiar with) people's perceptions change by the time it comes.

 

tl;dr - Map locations, themes, and visuals are fine so long as there continues to be a mix, map designs for gameplay need serious work.

 

The map are pretty arbitrary.

Given the size of the "battles", which is pretty much company vs company on 3x3km(???) size maps, I doubt there are historic maps with this small size and high resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Stona said:

If you can list them, please submit a proper bug report in Technical Section. 

Without to attack you Stona or the Staff... but there where/are Bugreports that now are nearly 2-4 years old but yes "Make a Bugreport to let us fix it"... IF they consider it if its not a favored nartion but nono im Quitet now...

  • Upvote 7
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/03/2019 at 11:04, Stona said:

 

No.

 

If you can list them, please submit a proper bug report in Technical Section. 

 

we have and the response we got was almost on par with what EA said about battle field 5 and blizzard with the new diablo

Edited by JP_MR_Wiggles
add last bit.
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Godman_82 said:

Yes.

 

The casus with AP slope modifiers is definite proof of that.

and that's only the tip of the iceberg....

a massive one...

  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/03/2019 at 20:04, Stona said:

No.

 

I really don't understand how you can say that, I really really don't.

 

On 07/03/2019 at 20:04, Stona said:

If you can list them, please submit a proper bug report in Technical Section. 

 

As @Royal_Jellybags points out we do this every time, but it just never seems to matter.

  • Upvote 3
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.