Sounds like they are using that old-era websites strategy, which you spread the data across multiple pages, so the user have to watch a lot of google ads to reads.
Again, going against wath the whole community wanted.
If you move back, you see that people previously where asking for the Profile page to be more important. The Dev team done exactly the oposite of people want.
I am havily disappointed “The Devs” entity just confirmed that they Do Not play the game or even read what people ask in the forums.
There is not a single point in the new profile that I liked. It is clunky and it looks awful. Im not playing a mobile game. For me, they could just rollback and leave the old one. They proved they cant do better.
Q: Are there any plans to implement naval for China, Sweden and Israel in 2025?
A: No, in 2025 we plan to focus on the logical completion of Bluewater fleet trees by adding the most famous and powerful battleships. In parallel, we’ll work on the implementation of other types of ships and weapons that are not yet presented in War Thunder.
this is fantastic news for us naval players, by chance is there any news about decompression for naval? the level of power differences within 1 br is absolutely crazy, even within .3br or on the same br things are highly uneven.
if we already need more like 8.0 for top br now i worry about what happens if stuff like north carolina comes in at 7.0/7.3 and stuff like yamato comes in at 7.3-7.7. by the time we get to yamato we really are going to need a solid 9.3+ high end. (as well as more sensible battle ranges and maps that dont spawn us in sight 8-12km away from each other of course)
Who would’ve thought that if you keep adding better and better planes with more and more capable air to ground ordnance and FnF helicopters yet not a single better toptier SPAA, the balance will shift in favor of aviation and helicopters?
As an occasional naval player, decompression would be terrible for naval. It is already hard to get into naval matches, especially arcade or low tier. The mode doesn’t have enough players to allow for decompression at the moment.
low tier is not what needs the decompression, its not hard to find matches at high tier, especially with multiple servers selected, it is hard to do much against ships MUCH MUCH stronger than yours tho. better games are worth the extra time it would take.
also, solving problems such as this and the map/spawn locations would bring more players back to naval, helping to alleviate the issue.
Asking for Soviet top tier jet improvements: Currently regarding statistics US aircraft are in the lead with Soviet aircraft slightly behind, though not significantly enough to where they require better weaponry. From looking at the preliminary data, the addition of advanced weaponry as suggested by players would tip the scales drastically in the other direction, here we’re talking about the RVV-MD close-range missile. Also brought up were R-77-1 medium-range missiles, though regarding energy these don’t differ much from the R-77 already in the game.
So are we using winrate to calculate this? Why not break out the actual data being used to make this assumption?
Is Gaijin considering mitigating factors? Average player level, RP vs GE used to obtain top tier vehicles, overall average number of games of the players flying each vehicle, etc.
We all see how many sub level 100s are in F15s, clearly having GE’d their way through the TT.
If less skilled players are still beating players that are, on average, more skilled… would that not suggest that the American air tree is vastly superior?
A lot of us realize that the real data is that - the favorability of the US tree, both based in idealism/sentiment/desirability and the IG superiority of the tree, makes it the most common tree for new players. They will sink money into the tree, moreso than they will others. Naturally, giving them an advantage will make them more inclined to spend more money then they would if they were more likely to lose games. Simple BI always points to incentivizing consumers to your largest revenue source, which in Air, is undoubtedly the US tree.
Also ik new nations arent the focus but subtrees, I really hope Yugoslavia becomes separate nations and doesnt get its nations ripped apart into different subtrees.
Yeah, I’d imagine they’re not using winrate at all, rather average frags and considering revenue into their viability analysis.
Now if they considered average frags, using average games and average player level as a modifier, it would very likely show that nations outside of the US TT have more average games and a higher level on average per frag.
if we are getting spaa’s that can counter the KH-38MT’s and their respective carriers, it would only be fair for other aircraft to get similar weapons. If this does not happen , it will be something like:
You can only use russian CAS in most situations.
NATO CAS will be utter useless if there is an spaa around.
Don’t get me wrong. I would love to see gaijin give some love to other countries spaa line. My point is that if we get spaa that are able to counter the KH-38MT then the AGM-65 (for example) will be useless.
