Create a gap between ww2 and cold war vehicles and tech

[Laserdestroy_1]

@BoveyBadBoy69

We should all strive for realism in every area of the game

@Laserdestroy

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?

Here you go once more. Please answer these questions, or even explain what level of realism Warthunder should have. The more specific the better.

[Laserdestroy_1]

@Laserdestroy

Why should the T-80U, first produced before the end of the Cold War face the M1A2 SEP V2 that was fielded in 2004? This isn’t quite fair for a tank to be facing something with 20 more years of technology and development, right? Or is it only a problem when the WW2 heavies face vehicles within the same decade with better technology?

@Laserdestroy

Yes, heavy tanks are bad against vehicles designed to make them redundant. Same can be said about Interwar to early WW2 tanks too. Almost like this argument would apply to more than just WW2 vehicles and would need to be split in more than just that place to be fair.

Here is some more we could discuss if you don’t like the other questions. I’d love to hear your stance about the M1A2 SEPV2 facing a vehicle 20 years older than it is and why that is acceptable but the Tiger 2 facing the M46 Patton from the same decade isn’t acceptable.

[BoveyBadBoy69]

How silly do you want to make this game? Are you fine with vehicles from Star Wars? How about drones and ATGMs at 3BR? Where is the fun in flying a P47 only to be torn apart by a SPAA from the 80s ? Why would I even want to play a game that does that? I have plenty of fantasy games.

[ZendikarHaven]

@BoveyBadBoy69

you fine with vehicles from Star Wars?

Yeah, why not lmao

[BoveyBadBoy69]

How about a kids version of the game just for you 🤔

[ZendikarHaven]

…what?
Like unironically what

aight lemme just get the sw fans on the line rq…

[BoveyBadBoy69]

@Laserdestroy

Why should the T-80U, first produced before the end of the Cold War face the M1A2 SEP V2 that was fielded in 2004? This isn’t quite fair for a tank to be facing something with 20 more years of technology and development, right

Yeah right and…

[USA_PilotsAreBad]

this isnt a thing though

[USA_PilotsAreBad]

@ZendikarHaven

Or how about we just
Not
Swedens like unironically fine around ww2 brs, youve got the pvkvs, stuff like the DT…

People wanted a historically immersive game and by adding these ahistorical nations like sweden you end up diluting that down to water. This game has no immersive or historical elements AT ALL anymore. Like NONE, ZILCH. It used to have many and it was more fun for it.

[Laserdestroy_1]

We should split late Cold War vehicles and modern vehicles since there is a large disparity in timeframe and technology. See how the argument for Era works for more than just late WW2 and Col War vehicles?

[Laserdestroy_1]

@BoveyBadBoy69

Are you fine with vehicles from Star Wars?

That would be a pretty awesome event for April fools. X wing vs Tie fighter in atmosphere would be pretty cool.

@BoveyBadBoy69

How silly do you want to make this game?

I dont want it to be silly, just enjoyable and consistent with the decisions made about it.

@BoveyBadBoy69

Where is the fun in flying a P47 only to be torn apart by a SPAA from the 80s ?

Which SPAA would that be?

@BoveyBadBoy69

Why would I even want to play a game that does that?

I’m not sure, but I’d love to know what SPAA you’re referring too so we can discuss that more.

[ZendikarHaven]

@Italy_Suffers

ahistorical nations like sweden

Excuse me, but sweden does in fact exist. Now italy on the other hand…

[ZendikarHaven]

@Laserdestroy

That would be a pretty awesome event for April fools. X wing vs Tie fighter in atmosphere would be pretty cool.

Give me my cosmo falcon too gaijn rahhgh

[EddieVanHalo]

@Laserdestroy

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.

My issue is slightly different (I think) I simply have no interest or desire in playing modern armour ,I only came here to play WW2 (planes originally). I love WW2 armour particularly German.I had no prior knowledge of the game and like many just stumbled upon it.Up to around 4BR this game is pretty much WW2 no matter what anybody says or at least it was 3 or more years ago when I started with very few post war vehicles dotted around.

We can all see a game of tanks with no troops but for me there is nothing more magnificent in this game than seeing Tigers and Panthers etc rolling out across the plains to do battle,especially when many are correctly marked up, with the Russians or US coming the other way.The battle on the right map with the right enemy is outstanding and that is Warthunder to me.

That is where the true magic is as far as I am concerned and it is for many others and should not be underestimated. When that passion comes in so does the spending. I guess that is more immersion than realism maybe.Seeing a load of vehicles from the 60s to the 90s just utterly destroys all that for me ,a real game killer and its a real shame.

@Laserdestroy

. Era is NOT more important than balancing,

No but why not have both? I dont actually see the M109 or M51 as balanced at 6BR because 6BR is WW2 to me ,it’s the ultimate WW2 as well.I played it long before the M51 appeared and the M109 .I knew how and why my Tiger might get one shotted from the flank by an M18, worked out the time scales and I accepted the damage I took from such vehicles.The real game killer is the fast 70s Italian stuff but its rare.

To get taken out from the front from distance was rare and if it did happen the well done the other guy.If it was a Pershing on a down tier then fine ,its a Pershing,if its a Centurion ,OK its a bit cheeky ,its the defining tank of the Cold war for me but what the hell its only a matter a few weeks and it would have been in action in WW2,it fits the canon or meta or whatever.Suddenly ,I am getting wiped out from the front just like that ,and it feels wrong and odd and I am like WTF,yes the M51 appears and the game stinks suddenly.Then later I am getting one shotted again and again and its the stinking M109 ,the game at 6BR is just done ,its a move too far and now I just play 1 -5 BR mostly 4.7.

So to summarize my long winded diatribe, me and many others just want to play WW2 just like many others just want to play latest and greatest at top tier.

I remember when much of top tier was 60s planes like the Mig 21 and how people whined and complained about it.,all demanding much newer stuff.

I dont see any problem with direct entry to top tier,I fully understand younger players having no interest in WW2 but I have no interest in cold war or modern tanks in what I see as my WW2 game and no argument about balance changes that.You are not incorrect in what you say but you are missing the point many of us are making and that maybe because we are not making our point very well.

[ZendikarHaven]

Tldr:

I keep getting killed in my ww2 heavies so I want them all gone because iMeRSIOn

[EddieVanHalo]

You are a child so I dont expect maturity from you ,but that is fine.

[AurenKarach]

@MiseryIndex556

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.

You have contradicted yourself several times in these statements.

You say the Ha-Go deserves to time travel because it’s bad, but the IKV doesn’t deserve to time travel even if it’s bad, because no vehicle should be allowed to time travel as a compensation for being bad.

You really have to pick one.

When you’re ready to place the Pz38t at the same BR as a KV-1, and the Puma and Pz IV J at the same BR as a Tiger II, we can talk some more about historical matchmaking.

[Laserdestroy_1]

@EddieVanHalo

We can all see a game of tanks with no troops but for me there is nothing more magnificent in this game than seeing Tigers and Panthers etc rolling out across the plains to do battle,especially when many are correctly marked up, with the Russians or US coming the other way.The battle on the right map with the right enemy is outstanding and that is Warthunder to me.

That is where the true magic is as far as I am concerned and it is for many others and should not be underestimated. When that passion comes in so does the spending. I guess that is more immersion than realism maybe.Seeing a load of vehicles from the 60s to the 90s just utterly destroys all that for me ,a real game killer and its a real shame.

I understand, but a game like this thrives on the amount of content. I used to play World of Tanks long before Warthunder because it was a fun way to play those legendary WW2 tanks, and then they went off the deep end with crazy collaborations and stupid mashup monstrosities. That is what drove me to Warthunder. I do enjoy every vehicle type at almost all battle ratings that I have played (high tier bluewater pushes it because it is SOOOOOO DULL). I believe one of the highlights of the game is the 6.7 and 7.7 BR, and I still keep 6.7 and 7.7 lineups for Germany and Russia (and US for 7.7) even though I’ve progressed past that. US 6.7 is ass though; I am NOT enjoying the spading grind for them. I hate that there are some outlying things that don’t fit in like those M109s, but for some ungodly reason Gaijin added them in a direct fire role.

@EddieVanHalo

So to summarize my long winded diatribe, me and many others just want to play WW2 just like many others just want to play latest and greatest at top tier.

I understand, but having a hard split there would be problematic for progression in my eyes. Would be kickass for just about every nation because that is the pinnacle of heavy armor to me, but starting to progress past that (as it stands now) would be terrible. Sort of like the costal/bluewater split.

@EddieVanHalo

I dont see any problem with direct entry to top tier,I fully understand younger players having no interest in WW2 but I have no interest in cold war or modern tanks in what I see as my WW2 game and no argument about balance changes that.You are not incorrect in what you say but you are missing the point many of us are making and that maybe because we are not making our point very well.

This is something that usually isn’t mentioned, and something I’ve not discussed. If entry could be started at early Cold War instead of progressing through WW2 to get there then it would be a different story. I could get behind that happening with a WW2/Cold War split. One of my biggest concerns for the progression piece is hitting a hard wall of WW2 enjoyers that will stomp you out on the way to progressing past them. If you could start progressing the tree at 8.0 while keeping the current RP requirements, I would be happy to see that as long as they don’t do like costal and make a 7.7 tank 400k RP.

[USA_PilotsAreBad]

You know what I mean :P

[AurenKarach]

@BoveyBadBoy69

Its baffling that you fail to understand the use of a comparable in the English language

FIFA simulates football much closer to reality than War Thunder simulates war.

Let’s see if I can make an example.

This is a modelmaker’s recreation of Schwere Panzerabteilung 503 at some point late in the war. It counts 187 vehicles.

Observe the ratio of combat vehicles to support vehicles needed to keep the unit operational.

You will never see something like this in War Thunder. Even if you automated a logistics mechanic implemented through AI, 16 vs 16 would never be enough to fulfil anything more than a company level armour engagement with a unit like this, and that’s assuming that everyone is forced to play pre-selected vehicles only available in limited numbers, and if you end up in the M8 Greyhound having to scout these Tigers, good luck to you.

But this is before you even consider that a unit of this kind would never fight alone.

Where’s the infantry? Planes that exist independently of ground players? Artillery, the biggest killer by far of both infantry and tanks in WW2?

What happens if your Tiger runs out of fuel? If we disable magic ammo resupply on caps?

Fifa has a simplified representation of an actual football match. The rules broadly overlap. The number of players is the same. War Thunder does not reptesent an actual battlefield, and it doesn’t try to. I feel like only people with very little familiarity with the subject matter feel that WT even has the potential to be a realistic representation of armoured warfare.

You complain about the IKV as what breaks your immersion, when there are like 300 priors that already do that and you simply don’t notice in a selective and arbitrary way. Lack of barrel collision. Third person camera over-cover. Mouse aim. Simplified turret rotation system. Irrelevant optics. Complete absence of combined arms. I could go on and on. To me, it is absurd to be okay with all these things, and then draw the line at the IKV 103, as if it’s more egregious than all the aforementioned factors. It’s mind boggling.

You don’t play WT for realism. You play it because it’s fun. Because it’s competitive. Nobody would touch the IKV in a historical matchmaking set up, and that’s not fun, ergo that’s not gonna happen. It’s legitimately that simple.

Maybe that’s not for you, and it’s fine, but there are more hardcore options out there for genuine enthusiasts. Command Ops 2 for example if you want to experience the operational level of WW2.

But it’s pointless to ask WT to be something it’s not.