Create a gap between ww2 and cold war vehicles and tech

Stop allowing cold war tanks that can throw HEATFS,APFSDS,or any kind of missiles in the ww2 era.Its extremely frustrating fighting something that is multiple times better than you and that you are not designed to fight.The game works all right up until br 5.0-5.3.From 5.7-6.0 upwards you begin to see enemies you should never be seeing.Theres no need for huge changes.Just make 7.7 the max ww2 br and then anything that doesnt fire AP or APHE that wasnt made in the 1940s move it to 9.0.That 1.3 br gap will ensure that no ww2 tech will get beyond its era.

Many Swedish vehicles were made for example in the cold war so what with them ? Theyre clearly ok just remove the APDS from the long 75 ones and keep their APHE or the moment they get APDS move them beyond that 9.0 barrier.After all they have such a good APCBC shell that most (even i) rarely use the APDS.Same goes for other nations in the same situation.

Of course this may mean that we will reach br 15-17 or something but who cares really ? You just change some numbers in an excell sheet and its done (its not that simple but what im getting at is that its not a total rework or something).That way people will finally feel happy playing their maus,tiger2s,panthers,is3s,is4s,is6s,t44100s,m103s,T34s,T29s etc etc.Some nations that miss late war stuff like Japan and Italy could get some paper designs that we mostly know how they would work.For example Italy could get the P43 bis and Japan some experimental heavy.

I would also like to propose something similar for air rb but im not a huge expert of that.

Of course i would love some TO game mode to come hand in hand with this but thats another thread on its own (which already exists).


I share your sentiment, although I am not exactly sure how it would be balanced and implemented best. Atleast it is important to discuss.


It would be adequately balanced.Heavies would fight their respective heavies,mediums their respective mediums etc etc.Tiger 2 vs t44100 vs T34 vs whatever else in that category.Maus vs is4,is6 vs m103 vs tortoise vs whatever else in that category.Light tanks would not be an issue since most of them can be used vs most other ww2 enemies and they dont need to be able to pen that much stuff.Light tanks are for scouting and maneuvering not killing everything in their path like it currently is the case so people shouldnt use them with the mindset of carrying the game but to support others in the process of doing so.

1 Like

Sounds like decent points to me


There doesn’t need to be a gap in cold war and late ww2 vehicles just the same as there isn’t a gap in pre-war and early ww2 tanks. Yes, technology improved and vehicles changed, but the way they are laid out now keeps balance within the late/post war heavy tanks. The Maus for example is an absolute powerhouse at 7.7 and those atgm carriers and heatfs carrying vehicles help keep it in check. Same with all the other heavies. There has to be an overlap somewhere for every era to create progression in a way that makes sense. Also, throwing paper vehicles into the game to fill gaps created by this change probably wouldn’t go over well. You’re trying to solve a problem by making other problems and then trying to solve those problems with horrible solutions. I’m not saying how they do it now is perfect, but it does pretty well. If you want to see how it would be with heavy tanks with no counters, go play World of Tanks and watch the lame, campy, boring ass gameplay that develops because of an unshakeable heavy tank meta.


Heavies get rolled by everything now, you can overpressure a Maus from the front with a 6.3 HE shell.


I disagree.Heavy tanks have plenty of counters.Theyre called broken gun barrel and broken track and use your tank and flank.Theyre also called smoke them,mark them on the map and talk to chat,throw some arty to disorganize and move from your current position to one closer to them.If you cant do those and you need a tank that is 30 years more advanced then youre the problem.Also this is not WOT.War thunder gives you plenty of tools to deal with anything and guarantees that if the players know what theyre doing the game wont end in a campfest.

The maus is not kept in check the maus is made borderline useless and this is coming from someone that played it for 4 years straight.Also pre war tanks dont suddenly fight the tiger 2 or the t3485 they fight tanks that were early war at best contrary to what late ww2 tanks face which usually isnt just 2-3 years more advanced but 10 to 20 to 30.Also you dont want to admit or frankly you dont understand that not all is the same.The change from pre war to ww2 was mostly in armor and gun.Which means that even with some prewar tanks you get some kills fighting ww2 ones.The difference in late ww2 and cold war is literally on a whole another dimension.Guns and tech dont evolve linearly.Having a stabilizer,a dart,a missile and a HEAT shell,rangefinders is miles ahead from having the 37mm and then having the 50mm or the 75.The Swedish pz38t overpeforms compared to the historical pz38t just because it has a better shell whose not just penetration values but also in general material properties and capabilities change.115mm of pen is not much but you keep it over distance and it reliably pens anything mostly flat or slightly angled.Now give that thing a stabilizer,a rangefinder and some armor and you have a point and click tank.


Considering we have this modern Vidar with the ability to one shot everything, high mobility and top speed, laser rangefinder, thermals, 6 second reload at only .3 higher is evidence enough as to how broken the current situation is.


I will say I hate the overpressure mechanic for the howitzer platforms.


Definitely the current meta, it’s a different game if you don’t get screwed by volumetric, spalling, commander control and all kinds of nonsense and if you shoot first you get the kill.

Using the Type 99 my k/d ratio goes up massively because it actually rewards being aware and shooting first, opposed to playing most other things where the first shot just alerts the enemy because it doesn’t kill more often than not.

Generally I think it’s offset by the fact they’re more difficult to use, I don’t mind most of them as they tend to be on a bad platform, low shell velocity, long reload etc, but the Vidar has none of that and has no place at 8.0.

1 Like

Disagree, era doesn’t matter. There are plenty of really good WWII vehicles and really bad post-war vehicles. Do you really think an AMX-13 FL-11 deserves a higher BR than a Maus? What about nations like Italy, Sweden, or Japan that didn’t have competitive tanks during WWII? Vehicles should be balanced based on capabilities, not an arbitrary line between 1945 and 1946, unless we’re talking about a historical game mode with some other form of balancing.


AMX-13 isn’t firing APFSDS or Heatfs or something

You are quite incorrect. The change from interwar tanks to ww2 tanks is one of doctorine. The interwar tanks were designed for infantry support based on the lessons learned from ww1. That is why they have howitzers and not high velocity at guns. That changed in ww2 when it was realized that tank on tank combat would be what tanks would actually see in combat and doctorine was changed. That change in doctrine resulted in the changes in gun type used (howitzer to high velocity at guns) which resulted in armor profiles becoming heavier.

The Char 2c is a 2.3 vehicle made after ww1, and it faces the T34 and Panzer 4F2 both made in the 1940s. So they do suddenly fight tanks 20 years after they were produced. And those tanks use better technolgy in the form of high velocity anti tank guns. Sooo I think I do understand a bit, and you should probably take another look at how things are laid out.

The difference between interwar and ww2 was also a whole new dimension, thats the reason everyone changed their designed after the start of ww2 because the interwar designs were the old doctrine and technology and they needed to improve it.


Dont get me started on doctrines and such cause they dont matter in the game and i know all too well why tanks changed the way they did.Also this game is not ultra realistic cause wed have 5 times larger maps,infantry,proper artillery etc etc

The thing is that purely in game interwar tanks only fight enemies which have undergone minor changes.Even if you fight the t34 and panzer 4 f2 you dont have huge disadvantage plus the fact that you dont see those tanks really often.When i played low tier France t34s and shermans and long 75 panzer 4s were very rare.When i play the maus i see and face multiple vehicles 10 to 20 years more advanced than me almost every game.

No.Late war ww2 tanks and cold war vehicles are a whole another dimension which is not comparable to interwar and early ww2 changes.Just like ww2 planes and cold war ones are vastly different.A guided missile,better G tolerance from the plane and far greater speed is the equivalent of APFSDS,HEATFS,missiles and rangefinders.

1 Like

So in other words you dont want to be uptiered with WW2 heavy tanks…

And ww2 mediums and ww2 lights

Sorry but now we are getting closer to WoT gameplay what you suggest. Nobody is waiting for WT become WoT style. I understand that Cold War tanks vs WW2 tanks are problematic but don’t mean you can’t destroy it. Every verhice has weak point and you need know the weak spot.

1 Like

M103 is not a WW2 tank.

Well i certainly can ! Just like i can kill a helicopter with a P51.But that doesnt sound right does it ? Also no it wont turn it into WOT but into a better tank game.

1 Like

Yea but it works more like one plus i said that if something works then it can stay (without its HEATFS shell though) thats why i mentioned the Swedish tanks