I don’t know about you, but I think all tanks and planes should be kept in the same Time period as they fought in don’t you it’s just like some World War 2 tanks go up against M48 & M-60 this is crazy, and it shouldn’t be. It should be the battle rating should be kept in their Time period I think it’d be more fun playing a more realistic game than the way it is now. You know what I mean! It’s like F4 phantoms going up against Mig-29s Lol the Mig-29 air-to-air missile will shoot you down before I can even get a lock on the Mig-29 with your missile the last F4-G wild weasel phantom was used in Desert Storm and had advanced radars jamming gear to jam radars and incoming missiles So what do you think?
2 Likes
There are already a couple theads on this.
1: No, making more “top tier” brs is not a good idea
2: if you go by year of production, you get imbalance
3: if you go by years fielded, you get imbalance
4: go by “era”, also imbalance
4 Likes
It’s unbalanced now and that’s what sucks. And if War Thunder goes by Time period we will have more balance in the Game! When you have M47 to M-60s up against World War 2 tanks that’s unbalanced and not fair to the players that are in World War 2 tanks I remember when War Thunder first put the German mouse in the game and it took three or four tanks to knock it out and kill it and we had a lot of fun doing it but now you hit it with a missile and that is BS! Because there were no missiles in World War II you see right now the game is unbalanced and unfair to the players that are in weaker equipment than what’s in the match! When they should be the same on both sides with the same battle Rating
1 Like
Honestly I agree with you but the reality is that this will never happen unfortunately.
1 Like
M48s and M60s vary from rather mediocre to actually bad, why would you even bring stinkers like them up. While the system is an absolute mess, it’s not like the BRs are decided randomly, well looking at the helicopter trees… some of them definitely are and devs clearly don’t care.
Many WW2 vehicles work fine, and sometimes actually better at much higher BRs due to armor still being just plain steel and thinner than what you would find at lower tiers. Early cold war vehicles though are at pretty big disadvantage when they have to deal with tanks that seem to be 50% ERA and 50% bullshit composite
3 Likes
Aaaaand here we go again. You dont want a historical MM, what you want is decrompression.
5 Likes
Would you like to tell us what we should do with all of the post ww2 vehicles at lower ranks?
For example: where would you place the ikv 72?
3 Likes
Paraguay still uses M4s and M3s to this day. Have fun playing them.
2 Likes
Basically this is a very complex problem and solution is anything but easy.
Yes we all have that sentiment when our WW2 vehicle is destroyed by Italian Star trek car … but again, it is not as simple.
If you wanna play “historically” you could play only certain periods (like sabres vs mig-15) and very strict machine /version profile.
Remember, tiger was supposed to fight sherman.
Remember, when IS-3 was introduced, it had no competition.
As the guy up said, what you really want is decompression.
3 Likes
Cant wait for israel with french reserve tanks face off T-55s.
1 Like
The IS-3 appeared too late in World War II to participate in the fighting. When it finally did see major combat, the results were unspectacular. Soviet IS-3s took part in the 1956 invasion of Hungary. Local forces lobbing Molotov cocktails managed to destroy several of the tanks., And the IS-3 would not have performed well in Korea, simply because of its weight. North and South Korea are dominated by mountains so it would not be in the game I mean it’s just like they stick the M109 a mobile field artillery piece in this game as tank destroyers and they are not tank destroyers even though they could destroy a Tank if the round came down on top of the Tank 155mm round but they were not made to go toe to toe with Tanks they have no gun depression. None of the tanks was on drawing boards only the actual tanks that fought in World War I WWII Korean War Vietnam War Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom War and New Modern Tank and Planes that’s the timelines I’m talking about
Dude doesn’t realize that post-WW2 USA would basically dominate much of the BR ranges afterwards.
Dude also doesn’t realize that mechanical design flaws and failures aren’t modeled. Thus all vehicles moreorless perform without any breakdowns or shortcomings based on those historical flaws.
Bold strategy, cotton. Let’s see how it plays out.
If you think so buttercup but this just goes to show you, you don’t know much about Jack Sh-t all vehicles more or less perform (You said without any breakdowns or shortcomings mechanical design flaws!) Really this whole game is a mechanical design flaw being able to take out the main gun and if you take out the breach it would kill the crew in the turret (Do you know how far the breach is from the front slope of the turret inside of the turret of the Tank in feet?) now that’s a design flaw of the game when it Would or should kill everybody inside the turret, especially with a Two man crew in the turret of a tank and have you ever been inside Abrams Tank are a T72 and a T55? I have Buttercup
Do we need to remind another one of these idiots that timeframe has nothing to do with capabilities?
Put a Tiger II against an M48A1. Tell me who wins.
Oh, right, it’s the one with the better survivability!
The Tiger has more armor than the M48 in quite possibly any spot you look at, as well as better ballistics and a cannon that’s capable of penetrating it anywhere.
Should we start putting the Maus up against M4A3E2s and M4A3E8s?
Turkey is currently using F-16 Block 50+ aircraft. Greece is currently using F-4Es.
Be glad this game isn’t realistic.
How so? I see it working decently fine, apart from the jumble that is 9.0-10.0 air. I wish they’d bring back the 9.7 hard cap.
How is it fair or unbalanced? The M47 is quite literally a modernized Pershing, while the M60 is a new frontal hull design of an M48. Both have piss-poor performance and are quite horrible vehicles when seen in their own era.
Can you tell me what advantage an M60 has over a T-62? Hell, what does it do better than a T-10M? It lacks a stabilizer and has a mediocre cannon, as well as having armor that, again, can be penned by any vehicle 6.0 and above.
Hell, give me a T-34/85 and I could 1 shot it.
And before it was unbelievably OP. The only thing you had to fend it off was HEAT, and its contemporaries (IS-4M and IS-6) couldn’t kill it from anywhere but the side.
It makes no difference when or where they were made. Its effectiveness is the sole factor in determining its placement.
The SUB-I-II and Pbv-301 are both 1960s-1970s vehicles. Can you give me one singular reason as to why it should face T-64s, T95E1s, Leopard 1A1s, Chieftans, ZTZ-69s, OF-40 Mk.2s, or Magachs?
Oh, right, there isn’t one. Because the point at which a vehicle was made is no factor in its effectiveness or purpose.
Again, this is entirely how it’s based. To put vehicles against each other era/era promotes weak and one-sided equipment. F-4Es would be facing MiG-15s and MiG-17s on a 15 minute basis, while the MiG-21SMT gets ruined by the F-16A.
Don’t even get my started on ground/air balancing. IF era-based matchmaking were implemented, we’d have F-16Cs fighting against Leopard 1A5s. We’d have Pantsirs fighting F-35Cs.
2 Likes
OK you tell me how the Sherman Tanks in World War II knocked out a tiger tank I can tell you it was from behind or the sides of the tiger tank same goes with the Tiger 2 or the back of the turret and it was usually done by more than one Sherman and as far as Turkey they’re not even in the game when it comes to F4 phantoms but they’re don’t have the wild weasels F-4G We have so on that note. Now on Maus up against M4A3E2s and M4A3E8s when War Thunder first put the Maus in the game, it was going up against Shermans and it was fun because we had to shoot it from the rear to kill it and it took more than one Sherman to do it. As slow as a turret is on the Maus anyway it was four or five Tanks to kill, it was and it funnier than hell to do it we’d be running around that Maus like a chicken with their head cut off
The Maus had never seen combat there were Only two Maus tanks that were ever created and tested in late 1944. The two prototypes were later blown up before the advancing Russian army reached the testing grounds in 1945,
Yes, and with proper grammar. Unlike you…
And that’s why the Shermans are 3.3 - 4.0, while the historical vehicles they fought are 5.7 - 6.0.
This isn’t rocket surgery.
And the Tiger II is… What BR? Oh my, 6.7?!? You mean to tell me that a vehicle with >180mm of frontal armor can only be destroyed from the back by shitty 76.2mm guns??
Wow, this is news to me!
This is why the Tiger II is 6.7 and the best Shermans range from 5.0-6.3.
It doesn’t matter if they’re in the game or not, they’ve historically fought F-4Es with F-16C Block 50+s. If you want historical, be prepared for that.
Even then, the F-4G was a late 1970s aircraft. It features the same radar found in F-4s in-game that are at 11.0. It lacks a gun, modern air-air missiles, and gets no more than what could be found a decade prior.
When the Maus was introduced it was a R5 tank. The vehicles it would have faced in its timeframe were R3, and instead, the M60, M103, and M47, were all at the same exact tier as the Maus.
Nothing about it has changed. It is the same exact tank with the same exact enemies as before, except now it has a mock-sabot shell, as well as PzGr 43.
All it went up against was the E8 and E2, and it was blatantly unfair. In no way was / is the 76.2mm cannon capable of penetrating the minimum 250mm of armor on the Maus. This is still true to this day, and that’s why they are vastly different BRs.
2 Likes
Who gives a shit.
There you go again with that proper grammar look I’m 65 years old and I’m old school anymore just because I don’t use grammar BFD get over it! I’m not in school anymore and if you can’t read what I write that’s your problem so don’t read it’s getting back to this Maus when it first came out for players that didn’t have the M103 which was the top of the US line when the Maus first came out in the game let me see here we had to go against yeah M4 /T26 and an M43E2 now they are Shermans and it wasn’t fair in the game but we coped with it and yes we took the Maus out with them and M-26