Jump to content

Would be nice if


"Realistic" in this game means that there are sensible physics and handling characteristics. 

 

What you want is "historically accurate". There is a reason why Historical Battles have been renamed to Realistic Battles years ago. 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the way i see it. the issue is that war thunder tried to be a ww2 tank combat game at the beginning. or at least they made it appear as such.

 

in the beginning most tanks in the game were ww2 era or earlier. All of the maps had infrastructure from 1940s and some maps even tried to mimic a ww2 battlefield.

 

 

even their game trailers are ww2 battles. (or they look like ww2 at least) That was their marketing thingy.

 

I would have zero issues with "time travelling"  tanks fighting "ww2" stuff if the game did not try to be a ww2 tank game.

 

now u see maps with modern infra so the game clearly is no longer trying to be a ww2 tank game.  Tanks from 1970s fit there very well.

 

If the game had this modern look right from beginning it would be a different story.

 

so misleading advertising is mostly the issue that gets peolpe pissed.

 

medal

Share this post


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

the way i see it. the issue is that war thunder tried to be a ww2 tank combat game at the beginning. or at least they made it appear as such.

in the beginning most tanks in the game were ww2 era or earlier. All of the maps had infrastructure from 1940s and some maps even tried to mimic a ww2 battlefield.

even their game trailers are ww2 battles. (or they look like ww2 at least) That was their marketing thingy.

I would have zero issues with "time travelling"  tanks fighting "ww2" stuff if the game did not try to be a ww2 tank game.

now u see maps with modern infra so the game clearly is no longer trying to be a ww2 tank game.  Tanks from 1970s fit there very well.

If the game had this modern look right from beginning it would be a different story.

so misleading advertising is mostly the issue that gets peolpe pissed.

 

yes it was a ww2 based game first, then the demand for modern vehicles increased so agijin had to add them in game

also its not misleading, now war thunder advertise as a modern tank shoter and not as a ww2 tank shooter, still majority of vehicles are ww2 era

 

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes  i agree.

 

nowadays they advertise as a modern game and that is ok.

 

but some players joined when they advertised it as a ww2 tank game so for them the advertising was misleading as the game turned into modern tank game.

 

i can see why some people are pissed.

 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also with the current advertising imagine thinking you can drop into an Abrahams or fly a Phantom, only to find out you have to grind through interwar vehicles, WW2 vehicles, post war vehicles, cold war vehicles with an insane increase in the research point ,silver lion cost and crew improvement cost. So you spend a wedge of cash to start in the era you want only to find you have inferior crew skills and experience, getting killed quickly with little reward to progress and losing silver lions, it is surprising that there are any new starters. 

  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Mollotin said:

but some players joined when they advertised it as a ww2 tank game so for them the advertising was misleading as the game turned into modern tank game.

 

You know you can still play WW2 stuff

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


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

You know you can still play WW2 stuff

its still a modern tank game. playing with a pz iv or sherman does not turn it into ww2 tank game. 

  • Haha 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Mollotin said:

its still a modern tank game. playing with a pz iv or sherman does not turn it into ww2 tank game. 

Its not a modern tank game, nor a WW2 game, its a military vehicle game with realistic elements.

  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, i agree.

 

edit: my point about misleading advertising is trailers like this

 

While basically nothing requires gaijin to include p80s, A2Ds, Asu 57s, PT76s, R3s or E.B.Rs to the game trailer, there is a reason why the trailer is like that. 

 

If u see a trailer like that, is it reasonable to assume that the game might be about this certain big conflict that happened about 80 years ago? Of course not. Some people could be fooled tho. 

 

 

Edited by Mollotin
  • Haha 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mollotin said:

yes, i agree.

 

edit: my point about misleading advertising is trailers like this

 

While basically nothing requires gaijin to include p80s, A2Ds, Asu 57s, PT76s, R3s or E.B.Rs to the game trailer, there is a reason why the trailer is like that. 

 

If u see a trailer like that, is it reasonable to assume that the game might be about this certain big conflict that happened about 80 years ago? Of course not. Some people could be fooled tho. 

 

 

dude, that trailer is from 7!!  years ago (2014.oct.4.), its not false advertising, 7 years ago it was mostly ww2 stuff, and guess what, and after 2 month (2014.dec.19) gaijin introduce usa ground force, it was that long time ago

the first "modern vehicles" trailer was for the 2017 april fools joke

why is it false advertising? i dont know, when was the last cinematic trailer/advertising? the latestst teaser/trailer/adverise video (new power) only showed 1 ww2 vehicle (p-51) only to show new gun effects, every other vehicle was modern(ish) vehicles

  • Upvote 4
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing wrong with how Gaijin currently advertises WT.

 

i just feel like the advertising from 7 years ago is part of the reason why there are threads like this one.

 

and threads like this one:

 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Mollotin said:

There is nothing wrong with how Gaijin currently advertises WT.

 

i just feel like the advertising from 7 years ago is part of the reason why there are threads like this one.

 

and threads like this one:

 

 

Isn't that more to do with "some players are not very clever"?

 

Heck I've been playing since 2015 and never thought it was historical or a WW2 game at all. In fact it was an aeroplane game before I started anyway.

 

Many of the those bringing this up are not even long term players, so that is very much down to the player not being able to read or see and just relies heavily on what the "think" it should be, regardless of the reality.

 

Those that are long term will know when the change from historic happened (and know why historic cherry picking does not work), and it happened so long ago that arguments against the current format using this as an argument are just playing dumb and so aren't going to be considered.

 

The scary thing is there ARE many threads on this and that unfortunately says a lot about a certain group in the community; "not very clever". And I don't mean the OP or yourself, it is a valid question but one with a simple answer that should be accepted and moved on from.

Edited by Deranger79
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Deranger79 said:

Isn't that more to do with "some players are not very clever"?

 

Heck I've been playing since 2015 and never thought it was historical or a WW2 game at all. In fact it was an aeroplane game before I started anyway.

 

Many of the those bringing this up are not even long term players, so that is very much down to the player not being able to read or see and just relies heavily on what the "think" it should be, regardless of the reality.

 

Well I guess i am not very clever. However, something like the ground sim could be made a nice era specific mode with only little tweaks.

2 hours ago, Deranger79 said:

Those that are long term will know when the change from historic happened (and know why historic cherry picking does not work), and it happened so long ago that arguments against the current format using this as an argument are just playing dumb and so aren't going to be considered.

Those that are long term will know when the change from reasonable F2P game to unscrupulous moneygrab happened, and it happened so long ago that arguments against the current format using this as an argument are just playing dumb and so aren't going to be considered.

 

There are many arguments against current format, and the historical angle is as relevant as many others if any bigger overhauls to the format are ever made. Of course the more grinding is done and premium content sold in the context of the current format, the harder it is to make any bigger changes to the existing game modes without making people feel duped.

2 hours ago, Deranger79 said:

The scary thing is there ARE many threads on this and that unfortunately says a lot about a certain group in the community; "not very clever". And I don't mean the OP or yourself, it is a valid question but one with a simple answer that should be accepted and moved on from.

I have adapted by concentrating on the BRs and modes that are most enjoyable, but what makes it hard to properly move on is that I haven't yet found a game that can compare to what WT used to be and the game still occasionally provides small islands of fun if you know how to navigate the current state of the game. The little changes generally go to bad direction, not just for historicality, but for example nerfing people's favourite vehicles, lineups ending in constant uptiers, favourite maps drown in a flood of new horrible designs. I don't see era-specificity in any different light. And even if we throw historicality out of the window, the BRs of the most WW2 vehicles are morphed gameplaywise with the constant increase of penetration, fire rate and movement speed at lower BRs. Historicality can be used as a proxy for the preservation of some gameplay aspects.

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Himish said:

 

However, something like the ground sim could be made a nice era specific mode with only little tweaks.

 

Yes. Its a missed opportunity.

 

Knowing Gaijin it would propably be something terrible.

 

It will require a bit clever thinking to make it work.

  • Like 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/03/2021 at 11:30, ponnes said:

You know you can still play WW2 stuff

 

Well, kinda. If I'm riding into battle with my 1943 tank and a lunchbox from 30 years in the future blasts through the battlefield at mach 1.2 shooting 900 AP rounds/min it breaks immersion a little bit

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dulago said:
On 01/03/2021 at 16:30, ponnes said:

You know you can still play WW2 stuff

 

Well, kinda. If I'm riding into battle with my 1943 tank and a lunchbox from 30 years in the future blasts through the battlefield at mach 1.2 shooting 900 AP rounds/min it breaks immersion a little bit

With a quick glance to the tech trees for tanks, it indeed looks like you can have an WW2 experience at BRs: 1.0-1.3. (Only the vehicle, ammo may be newer design)

 

Postwar vehicles are introduced to tank trees at following BRs:

Sweden: 1.7
France: 3.3

Japan: 3.3/5.7 (depending how you view the JSDF use of M24 and M4A3 (76) )

Italy 4.0

China 4.3

USSR 5.3

USA 5.7

Britain 6.3 (if Centurion mk1 considered WW2)

Germany 6.3

 

So a match without Sweden makes the entire rank II pretty much periodically accurate.

If small trees are excluded it is up to 5.0.

 

If you are extremely lucky with MM, you can get a WW2 game with Britain and Germany up to 6.0.

 

The early French postwar vehicles ar not that bad (performance or appearance). AMX-13 (FL11) and AMX-13-M24 blend in with WW2 tech quite nicely, and Lorraine 155 Mle.50 is not that bad either and M4A4 (SA50) is not that far from firefly. The autoloader on M4A1 (FL10) starts to be a little iffy, but the EBR's mobility combined with firepower is pure scifi in WW2 battlefields at BR 5.3.

 

Similarly, without R3 T20 FA-HS Italy would be OKish up to 5.7, after which M36B1 makes a leap to future with its HEATFS.

 

Usually M42 AAs don't bother WW2 players, since its futuristic hyperspeed is rarely utilized to its full extent, but at 6.0 Bulldog already starts to be a bit too mobile for its firepower, so USA and Japan can be somewhat OKish up to there. The HEATFS vehicles at 6.3-6.7 are already clearly out of place among WW2 tech.

 

HEATFS light tanks in USSR and Chinese trees and Chinese AA are a bit too modern, but vehicles like ASU 85 and type 63-I at 6.3 with 300mm penetration at any range are clearly at the level that they don't belong on the same battlefield as Ferdinand.

 

 

R3 is undoubtly the worst offender in a gamebreaking way, since it is right in the middle of a range that would otherwise be very close to a WW2 setting. Swedish tree as a whole is doing similar thing with multiple vehicles but to a much lesser extent due to the fortunate unpopularity of the tree. :(

 

It is not surprising that a lot of players concentrate on BRs 3.7-5.7 in the current state of the game, since there is at least a chance to have experience close to WW2 (at task friendly rank III) if MM excludes certain nations or the players don't spawn the futuristic things for reason or another.

 

Keeping fingers crossed that R3 and EBR get BR increase at least up to around 6 and Swedish tree would wither away possibly aided by huge repair costs.:)

 

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You cannot expect historical match ups of tanks from the same era.

Because you also have to consider that we have tanks in the game that were never meant to fight other tanks of their time.

All (most) of the IfV or light tanks were not designed to encounter enemy frontline tanks.

 

The problem with light tanks is that they get downtiered vs older tanks, because they lack the firepower to compete tanks of their time, so they get for their small caliber guns modern ammo, with at least the same or even more pen than the older mediums or heavy with higher caliber guns they face.

So a light tank gets all benefits of a small caliber gun like fast rof and gun handling, while the old tanks need big caliber guns to achieve the same penetration with conventional rounds and have to deal with low rof and poor gun handling in return.

 

So for example the US M41,  the IS2 and Tiger 2 have all guns with 220-240mm pen,

but M41 is the only one that has a fast reload, fast gun handling and great muzzle velocity. The only downside is the lack of filler grenades, but in WT you can compensate by aiming at ammo.

 

That's one thing I really dislike about WT, big guns like the 122mm+ are just not worth using, because it doesnt really matter if you have 50g or 1kg TNT filler, the result is 90% the same.

 

Also in warthunder mobility doesnt get taking into account enough when regarding BRs.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Himish said:

R3 is undoubtly the worst offender in a gamebreaking way, since it is right in the middle of a range that would otherwise be very close to a WW2 setting. Swedish tree as a whole is doing similar thing with multiple vehicles but to a much lesser extent due to the fortunate unpopularity of the tree. :(

 

It is not surprising that a lot of players concentrate on BRs 3.7-5.7 in the current state of the game, since there is at least a chance to have experience close to WW2 (at task friendly rank III) if MM excludes certain nations or the players don't spawn the futuristic things for reason or another.

 

Keeping fingers crossed that R3 and EBR get BR increase at least up to around 6 and Swedish tree would wither away possibly aided by huge repair costs.:)

 

Yes, that's exactly what infuriates me. It's nearly impossible to have a legit fun game with ww2 tanks from 3.3 onwards. On 4.0 there's that italian abomination that is BY FAR the thing I hate the most in this game in its 8+ years. A little further you start seeing EBRs by the dozens. And now Gaijin decided to introduce a new kind of disease at 4.7 in the form of the T55E1. At least it's not as annoying and frustrating as the R3 or as broken as the EBR, but it's still ridiculous. And the worst part is that, at least as a mainly soviet player, I'll be facing at least one of them in nearly every match.

 

 

 

6 hours ago, ponnes said:

Also in warthunder mobility doesnt get taking into account enough when regarding BRs.

 

In the current state of things I think mobility is being taken less into account than aesthetics regarding BRs.. hahahah

Edited by Dulago

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Dulago said:

And now Gaijin decided to introduce a new kind of disease at 4.7 in the form of the T55E1.

I did not mention it since it is an actual WW2 prototype, which is much better than time travellers. I don't have a lot of experience facing it yet, but I like the realistic tradeoffs of the period that it's speed requires: no protection even from rifle caliber and no turret. Also its gun is pretty much exactly what you can wait at that BR. Speed is its only advantage when people realize that it can be mg'd dow with almost any vehicle. TDs without a mg need to use HE(AT) or weak spots to deal with it.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Himish said:

which is much better than time travellers

 

It's better in a historical sense, but not that much better when it comes to gameplay.. hahaha. It has such ridiculously high mobility compared to what it faces that it feels completely out of place. In nearly every single match against USA right now you'll have at least 3 of those things crossing the map in 30 seconds and flanking the enemy team before they even get close to a cap.

 

I agree that the fact that it's new just makes it worse tho. Most people (me included) are still not used to the idea of having a TD with 76mm gun getting to your side of the map at the start of the match.

 

If the idea is for it to be a glass cannon they should have taken a few notes from the ASU-57, which is far far more balanced in that regard (even more fragile too).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dulago said:

I agree that the fact that it's new just makes it worse tho.

When people have used its free repairs and the event grind is over you won't be seeing them that much anymore. I don't think they will become a very bad nuisance in the long run.

Its power to weight ratio of 21.6 hp/t and max speed 80 km/h are very comparable to the better armored better gun traversing pak puma with 17.9 hp/t and 90 km/h, that has even better gun and sits as low as BR 3.0 and people have got used to them.

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...