Allow Bushes to be Turned Off in Graphics

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
469

That this is the rebuttal you lead with, when it’s rebutting something I didn’t say, don’t agree with (well, partially) and isn’t in the comment you’re replying to, is quite something.

I’ll quibble on the realistic aspect a bit though. Using bushes/foliage/etc to disguise your tank is indeed realistic. Said bushes magically adhereing to random parts of armor, blocking viewports/hatches/etc with no ill effect, and retaining their full bushiness despite being thrown around as you drive a tank cross country at speed, is unrealistic. There’s a reason historical photos of bushed tanks almost always feature tanks in static, concealed ambush positions, or trundling slowly down open hedgerows.

I’ve already covered this, fragile tanks can use just about anything to hide before shooting (Including the concealment that’s already baked into the map and is actually balanced). They are in no way reliant on bushes to be useful.

On occasion, my eye will catch what seems to be a misplaced bush and spot someone who’s relying on them for concealment. But remember, that’s just step one. Step two is actually identifying the tank, and good luck with that when all you have to go on is a slightly miscolored bush. Blindly firing at a tank you haven’t identified and don’t even know if you can penetrate is generally not a good idea.

470

So the enemy use the bushes well… You can’t expect to have advantage over everything

1 Like
471

The thing with bushes, is that you can gain an advantage by paying $$$. You can earn it for free, but it is very time consuming and difficult.

You shouldn’t be able to purchase an advantage that is locked behind that much time and effort.

2 Likes
472

So I’ve successfully spotted the enemy player (Who is in fact not using concealment very well since I’m able to spot them at all), while they haven’t spotted me (Implying that my usage of concealment is as good or better), and yet this shouldn’t give me the advantage?

Simply having bushes is reason enough to hand a player an advantage that relies on them misplaying to consistently counter it?

I repeat, this is your idea of balance? The player who wins isn’t the most skilled, but the one who loaded into battle with more leaves strapped to their tank?

473

Not that much.

And in your mindset, all time consuming things being able to pay instantly is P2W? For example crews and squadron vehicles?

474

Crew skills are also pay to win. Squadron vehicles don’t take effort other than finding a squadron and playing the game, and they also don’t give you an advantage over other vehicles.

1 Like
475

The problem is that you only consider YOUR skill being “real skills”, and the bushes are considered p2w instead of actual skill.

476

Things that require equal skill, apparently:

  • Spotting a slightly miscolored bush in a sea of foliage, and knowing that likely indicates the presence of an enemy tank
  • Whipping out a credit card (Or grinding for an excessive amount of time), slapping bushes all over your tank, and parking up in a forest.
477

It’s not the time consuming part.

It’s the FOMO/limited time part.

Bushes only appear in a specific part of the year, where if you don’t play during the first 2 months of the BP - you’re SOL. If you don’t play until the end of it - you’re SOL.

You need to log in every day for 30-50 days straight and play 1-3, if not more hours if the daily task demands something incredibly improbable.

Give me a long and ardous grind for bushes, but not this fomo bollocks.

Give me something like “get 250K rp * tier to roll a random bush available only for the chosen tank” or however the ace qualification scales (it asks for 250K RP for my rank 3 P-51 mustang, let’s do triple its rate for all I care).

I shouldn’t be punished for having an irregular schedule that has me disappear for months because that’s how lab/wfh lines up. I should be able to log in, progress towards the thing that gives me a gameplay impact, and have that progress persist even if I only log in 2 months later.

Right now, battlepass is all gone to dust if you don’t get all 57 levels in a single bush period. You might as well not bother if you cannot guarantee 570 battlepass levels - say joining too late or knowing you wont be able to play for the next few months.

Let’s look at another super grindy game, OSRS.

I want a bow of faeridhinen and full crystal armour. I could drop 70 euros for 10 bonds to outright buy a BowFA. Or…

I could take a weekend full-sending CG for a 1/400 (no pity/dry prevention) chance to get one every 10 minutes of high-effort gameplay that might fail and not even give me the chance. People often end up farming this single bit of content for months - going 1400 kc dry (probability of not getting a drop by 1400 kc is 3% - a very likely event given the large player numbers) (that’s a 233 hour grind btw, assuming zero failures).

But that’s OK. Why?

Because if you do 300 CG clears and get no bowfa in January, take a break and try again in august… you get the same 1/400 chance to get one! That’s fair. Hell, even if you quit for a year and try again next august, it’s still a 1/400 chance.

Bushes?

Well, you didn’t play during the northern king bp enough (I showed up from my break at its last month)… you get 0% chance to get it.

2 Likes
478

Its never going to happen as the money for them was taken and will never be returned.I imagine they do next to nothing for a modern MBT ,they only completely cover a tiny rat tank you would never spot anyway.

479

I love how everyone is making up an excuse rather than just answering. XD

“Please activate windows before asking me to do anything.”
^
This one might be among the stupidest.

480

You meant to say. “They make tiny and fragile tanks near invisible and big tanks that are hull down in a field cannot be spotted when scanning the area.”

481

It is pay 2 win and a bad form of pay 2 win if it is time gated. Crew skills and squadron vehicles are not time gated.

I can start researching both now and if I quit the game for 9 years the progress is still there.

482

Or a squadron research styled unlock

483

…It has a weak spot…?

484

They could if they wanted to.
And define, doing next to nothing.

image
image
image

485

Idk, but the guy I replied said that bushes made him unable to shoot vulnerable spots on the Su-122-54.

It’s a completely ridiculous excuse. If he is actually very skilled, the bushes won’t have any effect since they neither change the location of weakspot nor add extra armor to the tank.

1 Like
486

Definition: these ARE Next To Nothing.

Fact: 1. The cannon can’t be covered by bushes. 2. The bushes won’t block the shells. If you have already identified the tank, the bushes shouldn’t make you miss your weakspot shot.

You complain that bushes make you unable to identify the tank? Well, it’s NOT your right to identify every spotted tank. And even without bushes, some tanks are already hard to be distinguished in some cases (for example shermans) Finally there are weakspots available for all tanks, for example cannon breach in higher tiers.

Bushes really don’t affect the gameplay that much and they even make the game more fun. I guess you guys just want a gameplay which everyone use the same tank and same Lvl 150 crew, yeah comletely Balanced, Fair, and boring.

487

meanwhile me using bushes to break up my tanks outline

488

Ah right, because requiring inherent knowledge of weakspot location relative to other features of the tank opposed to not needing that is not a blatant advantage.
Or being able to identify or not identify the enemy tank is not a blatant advantage.