I believe so. Nobody plays redfor anyway, I look in the queue and it’s like 15 blue to 2 red lol
Game of detail? Yes, I’d agree there are lot of well modeled details when it comes to War Thunder, that are the reason I keep playing it (like the fact that when the M163 barrel heats up, the next barrel to fire is visibly cooler than the one that just fired, which is really neat).
But War Thunder is not “historically accurate” and does not pretend to be. That’s why in RB you have many games of Germany + America versus Russia + Britain, for example, even though this is obviously not how WW2 happened.
If you want more historically accurate matchmaking, play sim.
How do you propose getting rid of cold vehicles in ww2 matches?
If you want 2 different matchmakers for RB, how do you suppose that will be implemented? If there is a “cap”, kind of like 11.7 at the moment, that would lead to 6.7, or whatever “cap” you choose only getting downtiers or games at its own BR which would heavies very overpowered.
And even then, it doesn’t actually solve the issue because there are Cold War vehicles that should absolutely not go to high tier, things like the Pvkv IV or ZSU-37, or M109.
Well, then you might say there should be exceptions, such as those vehicles, and you’d be right, but again, you haven’t solved your problem, and you’re actually just doing what Gaijin does (balancing vehicles based on effectiveness, not era) just in a more roundabout way.
If you’re arguing that these Cold War vehicles are too efficient to be facing WW2 vehicles, that should be done on a case by case basis. Most of them aren’t. For example, M109. It has a quite powerful gun, but terrible targeting speed, is slow, no armor, and long reload, not to mention the “derpiness” of HE at times.
3 Likes
Facepalm Do you people just ignore previous comments and only read the latest one?
@BalticSAS let me make this easy for you. I already referred to what you wanted to bring up.
My response, the only advancement we have gained over what was done back then was getting the job far faster than before what may have taken 15 may only take around 10 or less.
For your video and the one I’ve posted all we did was make the job more mechanical less manual labor, instead of 2 or 1 strong individuals bringing up the rounds to the breach. You have a machine that does that part for you.
Or you have a Semi-Autoloader type mechanism. Such as in the M109 Paladin Video. Which cuts down on the amount of crew needed for the reloading process. However, this technological advancement isn’t that different from back then.
What makes Modern Artillery nasty is the reliance on drones which can allow the crew of set pieces to hit targets far better than what was possible back then which could be remedied by a spotter or a spotter aircraft however even those may not be entirely accurate to the same extent.
Okay but counterpoint- 3.2s HE spam is really, really funny.
2 Likes
So why bother doing that ? Why bother if War Thunder is a childish game for kids.
Would you suddenly play a Barbie Jeep in a table top War Game?
Of couse it pretends to be ,it pretends in nearly every advert made where it shows the eras as sepertated. It pretends but recreating the decals and the camos and it makes the vehciles as they were but for what reason I dont know any more.
Who care how thick the armor was on a WW2 tank? why does it matter? Who cares if the UK have APHE if history is not relevant?
it’s a let down element of the game ,always was always will be and its getting worse.
Just get rid of them .Have two or even three divisions and move vehicles up and down accordingly.
Non Canon rubbish is just that ,non canon and rubbish.
I will never understand why play with vehicle A, B or C, if everything is the same thing, everything has to be so balanced, put “Humvees with missiles against vehicles from 1941 because of the lack of armor”, this game becomes lazier year after year, and for children… I wish I could choose to play in Korea, with Korean tanks, fuck if they are more frank, I want to play in the Cold War, fuck if my fighter has less ammunition than the enemy, but don’t put me next to nations that were not allies at that time… give that choice to whoever wants that kind of game, and whoever wants to play in that arcade RB can play… The only ones who seem to understand this are the people who make the game trailers, I’ve never seen one where they put an American vehicle from the 70s next to the USSR from 1945 attacking a vehicle from Japan from 1960 together.
I actually get your point…i PERSONALLY would like to play more historical scenarios even if some unbalance existed…PROBLEM is not lazyness AFAIK…it is getting OTHER players to play with you and keep playing the game.
Players will NOT play with inferior vehicles…so ANY scenario where one side has inferior vehicles will end up with that side having no players…
Only possible alternative would be to limit scenarios where HISTORICAL forces were ALSO evenly matched…which reduces the game variety A HUGE LOT.
YES…it is “simpler” to match vehicles by BR (i.e. effectiveness)…unfortunately it is also what MOST players want.
Past events and modes were created more historically…and were eventually ditched as players complained they weren’t balanced and would simply not play.
I think it would be simple to leave the option to play realistic battle for those who want to play realistic, and change the name of the current realistic battle to semi-arcade
It is possible…but it is NOT SIMPLE, not even close.
You may have vehicles from the same time, or that shared a battlefield (it is not the same). For full realism you should also consider maps and ammo…players often complaint that WW2 tanks get ammo that was used only AFTER the war…
And dozens other variants…vehicle models, operational versus introduction year, crew, air support, numbers, victory conditions, etc…and bear in mind…these^^ are NOT my problems…only those mentioned by players in past discussions…
The SHORT version…a matchmaker based on YEAR would be somewhat simple and perhaps good enough…
The MAIN problem remains…it WOULD NOT WORK as players would not play it…using the simple example…Tiger was around at the same time as 75mm Shermans. and 76mm T34s… (almost) everyone would want to be the Tiger. (Same for some MBTs versus lighter modern vehicles).
EDIT:
If you really want something like the “Korea” scenario above…you would need a “list” of vehicles for each possible scenario…then perhaps maps…and the worst part…balance it so players would play. The irony…tank battles in Korea were very very rare :) and i am guessing impossible to balance…US has better tanks, better air support…only by having more T34s perhaps.
2 Likes
I love to see the excuses given by somebody for not having any historical relationship in the game, then see the same person trying to defend the UK not having APHE without being able to use the word historical.Like one rule for one and one rule for another.Like wise I just wish Gaijin would make their minds up.Is this game factually correct or not?
1 Like
That’s like asking why Call of Duty has guns. War Thunder’s entire identity revolves around accurately modeled vehicles and whatnot.
Notice how I said vehicles, and not matchmaking. Yes you can play World War 2 vehicles, but that doesn’t mean it’s a World War 2 game, and it never was. Why do you think King Tigers can fight in Korea with Chinese against Russians and Americans? Or what about the same scenario but in the American Southwest, where a war hasn’t happened since the 1800’s?
Well, no, but in War Thunders case they remove inaccurate vehicles such as the Panther II or Tiger II 105.
Again, vehicles in War Thunder are accurately modeled, but they don’t always fight historically accurate battles. If you want that, play simulator.
The fact that these things are modeled in War Thunder proves my point. War Thunder is an online MMO with accurately modeled vehicles.
Wait, so remove them from the game or make different matchmakers for different eras? Obviously Gaijin will never do the former, and I’ve already explained why it’s illogical to do the latter.
There are a lot of Cold War vehicles that absolutely do not deserve to be facing M46s, T-54s, Leopard 1s or whatever. Stuff like the Pvkv IV, M109, M42 Duster, or ZSU-37, M36B2, etc.
To be fair, the M36B2 was built in May 1945, a few days before the war ended, so it could technically go to that BR, but what about the French or Japanese variants, who were delivered well after the war ended? Should they go to the Cold War matchmaker simply because their respective countries didn’t receive them until after the war? Or should they go to the World War 2 matchmaker anyway, which would be ahistorical?
1 Like
I sure love it when people don’t read what I say.
War Thunder accurately models vehicles, not matchmaking.
As a side note, have you seen the sim queues? It’s always like 5 “Allies” to 20 “Axis”.
1 Like
Cos its a stupid game in places 😆
It is also a great game in places but for how much longer? What horrors will the next update bring?
Yes we know,that is the issue not the answer : )
Yes that is what the OP is complaining about ,it’s not a remedy or a solution
is it?
Yes keep going with highlighting all the bad bits of the game,I’m loving you doing my job for me lol . Yeah the ridiculous fantasy maps ,another issue for the stupid bin of War Thunder.
After all you just said it begs the question …Why? You just pulled off a list of fantasy issues where reality means nothing then drop the realism bomb on two vehicles that are not in use due to historical accuracy supposedly.The Maus would never have crossed a bridge anywhere in Europe possibly yet there it is in the game in all it’s ridiculous glory.
So why bother to model them accurately ?
Which is a poor version of GRB with a bad view.Rammed with copy paste but with the team kill aboity still on.No thanks,I don’t need a band from the game for team killing a Sherman with a Sherman when the enemy are using Shermans : ) .That is a War Thunder bad point discussion for another day.
There is a long list of things Gaijin will never do to make this game better ,we all know that but still we are on here.
I think we all know that Gaijin want nothing more than a quick buck but certainly Gaijin apologists like yourself make it easier for them to throw out poor quality updates made not to improve gameplay but cash flow.
You will never have a strict cut off date for WW2 but I dont see anybody raising an issue with the ARL44 or Centurion as canon breaking(no pun intended).
Gaijin would need make a cut a tier IV and make two divisions and it could do the same later with late cold war and top tier if it wanted,move some vehicles up and some down.It could overlap BRs as the vehicles wont see each other.Div 1 goes 1BR to 6BR ,Div 2 goes 6BR to top or what ever.
You will have divisions with no tier below which we have at 1BR any way and maybe none above which we have at top tier already.Gaps in the tech tree we certainly already have.
Many UK mains moan like hell about SA vehicles in the UK line up and think British alternatives should have used and would have fitted the canon better such as the Saracen for the Concept. I’m sure it is possible if Gaijin wanted to do it .Only way that would ever happen is if serious competition cam onto the market and even then I don’t think anybody has much confidence to do ti right.The player base could probably make it work but he negative people like yourself always try to shoot it down.
The idea just like losing CAS is to give all things to all people for the good of the game.
Nothing to do with skill issues just hoping one day that the game might reach it’s potential but after 13 years or what ever that is extremely unlikely.
No harm in dreaming and no harm in complaining to stop the game rotting any further.
Sorry for the novel but at least you know I at least read what you write even if others don’t.
2 Likes
old WT is better than new WT so thats wrong lol
1 Like
“Old WT” had lore regarding players being mercenaries buying up beat-up vehicles, which is why we have stock grinds (Besides Gaijin needing to make money).
Old WT also had post-war tanks and jets fighting WW2 vehicles from the very start. Patton, T-54, Sabre, MiG-15 ring any bells?
2 Likes
yeah idc about any of that, I care about when the game had some integrity regarding its theme and immersiveness. The game was at its peak in 2017-2020 for me.
1 Like
Pattons in WW2 Berlin? Sabres fighting Messerschmitt Jets? This is what immersed you?
I suggest playing Enlisted if you actually want WW2 Immersion™️.