Create a gap between ww2 and cold war vehicles and tech

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
225

Not true actually .I say it and I say it under certain conditions and that is the reason I think for the OP in the first place.
So for example I can accept the uptier that maybe puts my Sherman up against a Tiger2 of Elephant or even a 4.7 German against an M18.
It can be annoying but does not leap out and scream surprise at you in an shocking and totally alien manner as being whacked by a 70s/80s beast.I can be annoying when turning a corner to face a full uptier of like-minded WW2 or late cold war but I can take that and have from day one.

Where 6-7 BR comes in the whole feel of the game falls apart for me and presumably others. We suddenly have this feeling of being in the wrong vehicle in the game.
Nowhere is this more pronounced that the 6.7 to 7.7 uptier where we really do take 22 to face the odds in the late 60s or even 70s.

That is the childish WoT scenario I went out of my way to avoid when choosing War Thunder and up to about 6-7 BR I pretty much got it

No doubt from what I hear but as I said can the game not work without a tier above? What would Gaijin say ?

There does and so many are asking for it have been for a long time.
Accepting every issue with the game does not solve issues.

Cutting the game in half gives you no more issues than you currently have as you already have a bottom tier and top tier with nothing below or above.

With newer later and faster vehicles (filler) clash with the established doctrine/meta/canon whatever, the gap is getting more and more pronounce and the game in heavy tanks less and less enjoyable.

Is the forum here to try and make the game better or just proudly announce how you support every long-term fault with it?

OK so run a thread claiming top tier is utterly broken and watch as the forum scream skill issue at you.

1 Like
226

Yes, I get that, but the problem is that this is completely subjective. Therefore Gaijin will go for the option that is the minimum common denominator and pisses the least amount of people off, and it works.

An example of this subjectivity. Yesterday I spawned in a Nashorn and there was a Paladin next to me and I was like man, this is some Twin Peaks fever dream shit. But then in a match after that I killed an ASU-85 with the PAK Puma and that was “normal” because of course the ASU-85, like the JPz 4-5, looks a bit like a StuG, and so the instinct part of my brain feels that it “fits” aesthetically.

That’s so arbitrary.

Now, I will make a different example which I hope will explain with absolute clarity what I mean when I talk about selective realism. For you, it’s seeing a time-travelling vehicle that is out of place. For me, even if we had perfect historical matchmaking…

I would, at some point, end up playing the Tiger II on American Desert.

Please understand. The idea of a Tiger II fighting in Nevada is, to me, more outlandish and implausible than a literal alien invasion scenario in which we have to fight sci fi tanks from an alien invader.

At least an alien invasion as a speculative what-if exercise rests on things that are simply unknown, but theoretically are physically possible (other life exists and has the means and motivation to come here).

Whereas the idea that a middling economy like Nazi Germany could crane the Tiger II onto a ship, then sail across the Atlantic, land it, operate it in a full combat scenario and then supply and sustain it, not just close to the coast, but inland, in fact deep inland into one of the most inhospitable areas of the continental United States, is simply ridiculous. There is no scenario starting from 1939 or even 1933 real world conditions that could ever possibly deliver you that result (and any radically different scenario would simply not lead to the Tiger II as we know it).

We could make a literal “strictly-by-date” matchmaker and eventually I would spawn in American Desert and remember, ah yes, this is a fun and silly game about vehicular combat and nothing more.

They’d say people play it and pay to get there faster even if it’s effectively an unbalanced open beta mess. And they’d be right.

It does though. I’ve listed some above, which haven’t been addressed yet, primarily surrounding research, progression, and balance of bad vehicles.

It got much much better after the summer decompression.

I’ve said it before and I’ve said it again. I am not a good enough player to compensate for the shortcomings of a bad tank. If the Tiger II really was so bad and out of the meta, I would not be dropping nukes with it, much less in uptiers.

The forum is an echo chamber, by and large. Remember the forum contains an infinitely minuscule minority of the wider player population. By, like, several orders of magnitude.

The overwhelmingly vast majority of players doesn’t bother with the forums, reddit, or even CCs, they just get back home from work or school, play the game for two hours, and move on with their lives. I was doing exactly that for the first year and a half I spent playing WT. Then I started lurking the old forum because I wanted to get better and learn. And only in Sep '23 I started writing posts here in the new forums.

This isn’t just a casual vs hardcore thing either. The tournament player I mentioned in my earlier post? He’s not on the forums. He learns of BR changes when he boots the game and sees that his Panther II is now 7.0 and needs to be swapped out if he wants to play 6.7 with me.

I have a few IRL acquaintances and three close friends who play WT and have for years - two of them since before there was such a thing as ground vehicles in the game… None of them frequent the forums, I’m the one sending them news and info that I read here first in my spare time.

The forum is useful to Gaijin, but not in the way you think. It can be very misleading to overstate its importance.

I could. But why would I do that? I took the much easier option. I concluded that top tier isn’t for me, so I don’t play it, and if people enjoy it, good for them. Simple as.

5 Likes
227

Many of the reasons given for quitting the game for good are subjective reasons. CAS, Cheats, Era mix ,BR etc it’s all subjective. What is of concern to one-person is of no concern to another.

Yep that’s it. Agreed. We have a forum to bitch about it and we are. Make no mistake I know full well that is all we can do and I am under no illusion that its something Gaijin will never change.

It’s a just a shame like many aspects of the game and something to be discussed on on a forum which in itself is just a useless way to kill a bit of time.

I don’t think there is any real disagreement between us as ultimately, we both accept the game as it is and still play it as it. The OP made a point and I agree with him and suggested where (if anywhere) I think the game should be cut. I don’t think it ever will be. Doing so would highlight the games faults even more.

War Thunder is like a pet snake that got too big for it’s owner to manage years ago :)
Like I said elsewhere.

Might as well paint your tank or plane red or blue and just go out and see how many kills you can get and forget any and every other aspect of realism. Spawn camp if want and use CAS just so long as it gets you there. That is all War Thunder boils down to and its all you have left after a couple of years playing. You might as well only play up to 3 BR because nothing changes after that. Its shoot and scoot, rank up the kills on the same old map whatever BR.

Like you said few of the players even use the forum, why spend time discussing a game without substance?

1 Like
228

Another way to solve this problem?

1 Like
229

How to put things out of context easy ^^ … how dare you :-P

2 Likes
230

Decompression is the answer. Not every nation leapt to HEATFS and APFSDS at the same time. So having some early cold war vehicles between WW2 and cold war proper is fine.

2 Likes
231

I think we just need every round to be as effective as APHE. If a light tank like the M41 actually takes out vehicles 90% of the time with side shots instead of merely 30-50%, it would be 8.0 just like the Leo or Char 25t.

Penetration might go up, gun and vehicle handling increases but that doesn’t mean much when a WW2 vehicle firing APHE is able to kill other vehicles much more consistently.

Of course it a also has benefits. Because of the low post-pen damage some nation can have much more vehicles available at lower BRs, complementing the few they have.

However this could be made invalid by simple giving infinite “back-ups” so you are not forced to use another vehicles after getting killed twice.

1 Like
232

There you go misquoting me again. Don’t try to cherrypick what I said. Unlike some people in this thread, I use puncutation to mark where my ideas end, and you seem to miss that every time you try to use that quote. If you want a gap for WW2 and early Cold War vehicles, then you need to do the same for Interwar and early WW2 vehicles. Maybe actually talk about that instead of trying to misconstrue what I say.

This, this has already been done. It doesn’t work no matter how you try to slice it. Major Warthunder Conent Creators have done videos talking about why you can’t do it. You can’t even decide which date (production, prototype completion, adoption, ect) to go by because each one matters differently for each vehicle. Beside the fact that you will artificially create a new bottom tier (early cold war) and top tier (late ww2) that will wreck the matchmaker and vehicle balancing. You can say it won’t create issues all day long, but your opinion isn’t factual. You don’t want to address anything anyone has said about those problems.

3 Likes
233

Nah, because of a major reason, balancing, and being able to have a counter to something, like say, the Maus, would (while being separated from CW vehicles) only be able to face the Super Pershing, which will only be able to side shot it if my memory is correct. I’m sure there are plenty that can side pen, but, matter being, most will not. Having more armor, and a worse gun, is an inherent part of heavies and worse guns, because better armor.

234

And some of these heavies have fantastic guns, like the Maus and Tiger II.

1 Like
235

I agree with you. They should change BR with better ammo too…

236

Punctuation marks are secondary to the point you are making, and you struggle to stick to yours irreverent of how we edit you. Stay on topic, keep it simple, make
your piont.

er… no we dont not at all…Next!!

1 Like
237

You must not know much about how grammar works. Puncutation is used for marking the end of a thought, aka a sentence. If there isn’t a period at the end the quote, then you haven’t properly quoted the idea. It’s called cherrypicking, and ignorant people do it all the time.

But we do, in fairness to all the vehicles with a gap in design philosophy and technology. The interwar vehicles have to face the overpowered early WW2 vehicles that they weren’t designed to fight. The warly WW2 vehicles have better armor, more advanced guns, better and better shells. So if we seperate late WW2 and early Cold War, then Interwar and early WW2 needs to be seperated too. If you disagree with that, then you basically disagree with your own idea because they follow the same basis.

5 Likes
238

Im not here to debate Grammar. I’m here talk about a possible way to make the game work better.

I am not saying you are wrong I just don’t take a split that lightly and only really thinking at Tier IV does it realty become an issue. Prior to that it may be an irritant to some but not a gameplay issue.

Maybe a couple of years ago I might have said that 6-7 was just an immersion irritant to me but now I see a game becoming pointless at a Tier level to the point I am staying away from what was a Favourite BR.

2 Likes
239

I hope they do change APHE and make it far more realistic. It’s going to cause some chaos for a while, but it will be better for the game overall.

1 Like
240

Yes, but they also have to correct the damage of the other bullets. As I wrote in another post, once you go from Br 6.7 and start using only HEAT, APDS and missiles, you stop depending on the skill to a large extent and you depend almost completely that the game wants you to kill or die. With the APDS a little less because their damage within the low range is a little more consistent, but with weapons with HEAT damage it is a real lottery where the game decides your destiny completely, regardless of skill. or whatever, for example in a game that I have played right now, a 90mm HEAT-FS has not pierced the front of the turret of a T-54 (1947), but it turned the turret and killed me in the second, in another I killed only the driver of a single tank, the second died, in another that same HEAT-FS bounced off the front of an M47, in another a Milan missile did no damage when it hit the rear of the turret of an American T34, and so on. All this is somewhat frustrating, the only thing I have learned from this is not to give importance to statistics, because as I said you have no control over them and the game decides whether you kill or die, at least from Br 6.7 upwards.

1 Like
241

Never killed a t54 with pzgr43 either on the maus or the jagdtiger by firing it on the UFP of the t54 that protection analysis is a total joke.Also i can play that game too.Have you ever heard of object 268 ? Have you seen its massive gun and its extremely potent HEAT round ? Do you know that it has a 14.5mm mg that can kill most light tanks and planes with ease ? How many German tanks can it head on ? At what BR does it also sit ? How many are its actual weakspots ? Just because its strong frontaly doesnt mean its unkilable so stop perpetuating this stuff.

Plenty of US tanks have APCR that can pen the sides of the “turret”/superstructure of the jagdtiger even from range and then theres tanks like the m103 that without the HEATFS cheating shell can UFP it from many distances and angles.I have used APCR against soviet tanks on lower BRs and somewhat higher ones when playing my panzer 3 and if you truly know where to shoot you are pretty ok

If i see any similar post im not replying.Learn to play

242

sure, Type62 is absolutely a T54😅, seens that you doesnt care about the “small countries club”

1 Like
243

Thank you for you long and polite post.Due to you good manners i will reply

While the 75 on the maus is very very potent it should not be used as the excuse so that the maus fights cold war IFVs with ATGMs.I have killed BMPs on a good day even on 1000+ m with the HEAT on that thing but 90% of the times unless theyre bumrushing you dont stand much of a change and you will get penned and damaged either way.

I cannot enjoy a br if 70-80% of my games are pure suffering due to technology clashes that shouldnt even be there.

Pattons are average i agree but still much more potent in the right hands and are still more advanced than the average ww2 heavy.

I had the same mindeset back in the day when i played the maus.If i couldnt kill absolutely everyone with it even on a bad day i wouldnt stop playing it.But i got bored of playing repair and fire extinguisher simulator and i went to low tier :D

Still BR1 is far more fun and ok even with those anachronistic designs with very few game braking vehicles compared to 6.7-7.7

Regarding your story with the tiger 2 i can agree that if you play extremely well you can do a lot of stuff but i dont like sweating in the games i play.Even if its not sweating that kind of gameplay requires a lot of energy to pull off which i cant put on the game constantly.Im not asking for war thunder to become brain dead and an easy mode game (i mean top tier is that) but the amount of vigilance and readyness required in 6.7-7.7 is unreal compared to that required in 3.7-5.0.In higher than low to mid tier brs you have way more mobile and strong tanks in very very small maps so you have to be extra speedy to a point that is impossible to consistently keep up.I want to play a game and have a balance of reaction times,strategy,vehicle is fighting where and what it should fight.Currently at 6.7 upwards the balance is broken and all points go to reaction times and playing at 100%.
I could also go in the tiger 2 p (i have more games in this one) and get regular multi kill games but id leave my pc with anxiety and feeling tired because theres no balance like i mentioned earlier.

Yea heavy tanks are really good anti flankers and thats in what i excelled as well.I also agree with the flank thing you did since ive done it too plenty of times :D People underestimate the speed of the maus (yes it 20km/h but its consistent).

Man the IKV is bad but that doesnt mean we should have it fight toddlers.The gun is too good for its br and that shouldnt be the case.People bring ww2 vehicles to fight mbts im certain that they could make the IKV work against the t54 or the leo1.Many vehicles in the early cold war have mostly just HEATFS going for them what difference would this one tank make ?

Yea i was being hypebolic (no joke) but theres a dose of realism in that.Why is the t55am1 at that br ? Why does it have the ability to go all the way to 7.7 ? Isnt that a tank that outclasses everything in those brs that shouldnt be there ? Why is the t114 6.something ? Why is the m56 scorpion 6.something ? Those vehicles can perform perfectly fine at 8.0-9.0.Shall i also bring the leo2a4 to fight the t44 ?
Youre smart enough to understand what level of realism im advocating for and ive stated that before.I dont want tiger 2s vs shermans or ultra realism to the point of calculating armor quality and deficiency in spare parts.
CAS is broken on 5.0+ and we could have a tank only game mode but thats another thread which already exists.Especially on top tier theres people that play their ground vehicle for maximum 3 minutes and then proceed to kill half the enemy team with a ground stricker (same goes to more than half the american playerbase playing the shermans that once they die spawn multiple p47s and what not killing everything in their path).

No the game started as historically accurate.Planes would fight planes of their era and the same went with tanks.It wasnt 100% accuracy because that doesnt exist in any game unless players make some custom mode/battle.

Sim battles are accurate for the most part.You could face late shermans and IS1s etc etc with the late panzer 3s and the opposite which is how things were.You may do that in totaly unhistorical places and also have some fantasy vehicles here and there but it mostly works.I dont play regularly sim cause the brs i like are not that often available.If it was 24/7 available i would rarely leave it

The discrimination of perfomance is the joke.The t114 doesnt need to be low yet it is.The t55am1 doesnt need to be that low yet it is.The japanese ww2 medium designs dont need to be that high but they are.The panzer 4H doesnt belong to 3.7 but to 4.3 yet thats where it is i could go on and on and on.Performance supposedly is the filter but it honestly isnt.The filter is whatever gaijin wants it to be.

I had forgotten this kind of discord servers/groups exist.I will take a look at them and may join for some games once in a while.My hypothesis is mostly tested in sim though and in the fact that i intentionaly uptier vehicles that most wouldnt uptier just to fight what they would fight.I have killed jumbos and is2s with panzer 3m and i have contributed to the team.It is doable and i enjoy the challenge.After all you dont fight ungodly enemies,they just have more armor and sometimes more gun with overall simmilar fire control systems,speed and survivability

The game will be made far harder if my idea is implemented.People in those late ww2 brs will have to relearn how to play (especially if we remove CAS and a get a seperate game mode).Currently if you own anything with speed and HEATFS in 6.7 all you need is to flank and shoot people gun mantles/guns like in top tier and then UFP them till they die no matter their vehicle class (light,medium,heavy) and get away with it.And if they die they can always spawn a fully loaded with bombs plane and kill you again and again and again with no punishment.Tank rb by the way

1 Like
244

You barely see type 62s anyways