That’s completely beside the point. The Ha Go being at 1.0 is reasonable for its design and performance. The Ikv103 being at 4.0 is not reasonable for its design and performance.
Terrible vehicles should not be given favorable BRs because they are terrible.
Literally the Ha-Go.
Literally a lot of other things.
This is quite literally the core of WT balance, do you want the Pbv 301 at 8.0?
The Ha Go doesn’t bring Cold War tech to a BR it doesn’t belong.
Neither does the Pbv 301.
Are you intentionally missing the argument I’m making?
I could argue the crewless turret counts…
Whether or not it ‘belongs’ at that BR is irrelevant, historical matchmaking was tossed out a while ago for good reason. If its capabilities dicate it has a low BR- it will have a low BR. The Ikv 103 has high pen, yes, but it also has horrendous gun handling and velocity. Plus, it can quite literally be killed by .30cal.
That is why its at its current BR. Yes, its different. Its wacky, has absurd pen, but is balanced at its current BR and adds something unique, which is good for the game.
Another example:
ASU-57 has NVD, and:
Without CAS it is very likely the down tiered monsters would rule the game even more than they do already,that may well be why Gaijin refuse to bring in TO.
It would highlight an inherent fault in BR and that is down tiers in the hands of a good player totally dominating the game.A newbie in a PE8 can change that drastically as we all know and it lets Gaijin of the hook.
CAS is a great leveler in terms of skill and BR and it fills many cracks in War Thunder ,I think that was what was being said.
I have to say that I did also expect WW2 to be separate when I stated this game, just as a matter of game quality and its also what I saw advertised.
I think as much as it would be expected and needed it will never happen as the engine is just far too old and the game too far gone.
I am baffled as to why people are offended by tank enthusiasts wanting and expecting correct era implementation when they appreciate detail elsewhere in the game.
If I suggested giving WW2 UK tanks APHE and roof mounted MGs to balance the UK in early tiers then the likes of Laserdestroy and Mahiwew would be the first to proclaim that historically the UK did not have APHE or roof mounted MG ,after just telling us that War Thunder does not do WW2 or Historical accuracy,you have to laugh at the hypocrisy on this forum.
Yes I would love the UK to have APHE and roof mounted MGs at 3 and 4 BR now then please 😆
I am looking forward to this as “Historical Accuracy’ went out the window long ago”
We will certainly cope better now lol
Because it doesn’t fit well with the overall progression of the game. This game is by no means a true to life simulator, and it shouldn’t be approached as such. Some things are more true to life, and some things are not. Era is NOT more important than balancing, and since this isn’t a full simulator (more like simcade) then it makes sense that the progression isn’t segmented when they go through the effort to balance things throughput the BRs.
I wouldn’t say they didn’t. The M61 Shell/Shot is an example of a gun/ammo that they had access to APHE with, but instead of Britain getting that APHE shell added, I would rather see APHE not nuke the insides of vehicles like it does currently. The current performance of APHE is rediculous in terms of real life performance and balancing with in game vehicles. I could care less about British tanks getting rooftop MGs added, go for it.
You try to make these sweeping assumptions like you’re all knowing about others, but you aren’t. I recognize that some things on this game are more historically accurate and some things are not for gameplay reasons. I just want consistency in decisions. If there is a late WW2 and early Cold War split, then there needs to be an Interwar and Early WW2 split and a Cold War/Modern split to be fair to each Era’s divide. That is beyond the belief that I think Era splits are dumb because of the plethora of different dates that coild be chosen, all of which would have vastly different results after implementation.
As a side note, I would be 100 percent willing to discuss anything like the British APHE thing or anything similar with you. I enjoy discussing, learning, and progressing my knowledge with discussion because of the overall complexity of Warthunder andwarfare in general. If you have interesting things you’d like to discuss please PM me. I quite enjoy discussing all aspects of warfare.
What rubbish,where did you dream that one up? Tell it to the guys who update the game because they made the front armour on the M1 2mm too thin.We should all strive for realism in every area of the game
Really? Realism for every part of the game you say? You want APHE fixed? Do you think the “realistic” changes for missile handling was a good thing? Do you think it’s realistic that tanks/planes/ships should fight so closely every single time in such a small battlefield? Do you think it’s realistic to make depot level repairs in the field? Do you think it’s realistic to shit vehicles out of thin air into the middle of a battlefield? Do you think it’s realistic for planes to appear in the sky above the battlefield instead of taking off from a protected airfield dozens (if not 100s) of miles away from the battlefield?
Again, Warthunder is not a true to life Simulator. Otherwise you wouldn’t control a 5 person vehicle alone with 3rd person view from the rear of the tank. The only vehicles that could exist as single player vehicles would be single pilot fighters.
Fifa isnt a simulator but they pride themselves on getting the squads right for the corresponding season as a default.As I said I fail to see why you support the areas of the game that fail.
Fifa isn’t Warthunder, comparing a soccer game to a vehiclular combat game is a pretty poor comparison since they have almost nothing in common and require vastly sifferent philosophies.
Could you answer these questions on the realism of the game? Id really love to see where you draw the line on how realistic Wartgunser shpuld be.
These “areas of the game that fail” are all opinion based. You don’t have any actual information about the game’s success or failure in any aspect and can’t make an accurate judgement past your own ideas of what is right and wrong with the game. You may think that having Era splits is a good thing, but I hold a different OPINION on the matter. The fact of this debate is that Gaijin obviously doesn’t like the idea either (for whatever reason), otherwise it would have been implemented already.
No its a fine comparison when talking about quality and expectations, Im not suggesting tanks in WT shoot soccer balls,dont be so pedantic and silly.
I agree with the OP and dont need your permission to do that.
So I’m assuming by your repeated responses ignoring everything except comments made about an irrelevant soccer game that you are unable to discuss things you’ve claim led and are merely a troll. As a counterargument for your soccer fiasco: Pong wasn’t realistic and Warthunder shouldn’t be either.
I didnt once say that you did need my permission. I have disagreed with the premise of the OP and you this entire time.
This is what I’m trying to discuss with you because it holds relevance to the discussion because if realism is a reason for Era matchmaking then answers to questions like these:
Helps me judge how much realism you would actually want. But it seems like you don’t want to discuss things, you just want to talk about some soccer game like it matters in a discussion about a much more complicated game.
I don’t see resorting to shouting troll as a discussion.I dont see the need to take analogy literally as a sign of intelligence or intelligent conversation.
Again, back to the FIFA thing again… I am willing to discuss why FIFA is irellevant to this discussion, but I would much rather discuss Warthunder since we are in the Warthunder forums.
Were the questions I asked too difficult to answer? Do I need to reword them? I’ll try my hardest to help you get answers out in any way that I can. I am actively trying to get your opinions and you seem disinterested in sharing. Are we not in the Game Discussion section of the forums?
The reason I called you a troll is because of your refusal to address the topic before you without brining up irellevant information over and over again while ignoring actual talking points.
Its baffling that you fail to understand the use of a comparable in the English language.I dont wish to appear rude but sometimes talking to an American is like talking to somebody remedial.Maybe its a language barrier?
Again, fixed on an irellevant game comparison instead of discussing the game of the forums you are currently in.
How about discussing the realism you claim Warthunder should strive for?
I dont see what points you have actually laid down other than just shaking your head when somebody mentions era seperation.My attitude is that I can suspend disbelief but only so much.Its no doubt taste, maybe I might prefer Saving Private Ryan and you might prefer The Avengers or Barbie.Yes, I know those are films ,its another comparison…sorry.