What is the second rule? People who claim there is no interest in a particular aspect of play often ignore the fact that there are 4 similar threads on this running concurrently ?
2 Likes
Here is a real world example.
Did you know that no Tiger 2 has faced PT76 in combat because they are eons appart?
Did you know that the speration will work because of simple reason that diffrent tanks have diffrent tasks to perform.
It was said many times in this thread how make it work. All you wirte over and over again, “I dont want to be it the way you want it keep everthing teh same” yeah change is scary, get used to it. You try as hard as possible to discredit every user who is for a speration of eras.
Maybe for achange wirte how one could make it work.
Same as the first - Rule #1 & 2 are the same in the the movie “Fight Club”…
Yeah - i follow all of them.
Some guys are arguing in circles like in a discussion about BRAWNDO -
you know, it has electrolytes…
1 Like
Oh yeah of course…Doh !!!
1 Like
Its even more funny that this discussion is as old as WT it self!
This is not a new topic.
3 Likes
That is demand for you.No doubt.
1 Like
Exactly. Gaijin created a garbage event does not prove era based match making would fail. It just shows that garbage events are garbage.
3 Likes
How would era-based matchmaking be any better? The same problems would exist.
2 Likes
What problem? Gaijin forcing 75mm Shermans to fight Tiger Is was the issue. The majority of the vehicles would stay at the same BR. Tanks like the German M41 with HEATFS and the M36 with HEATFS would go up.
You literally describe the problem:
Why should these go up?
1 Like
Like I said, a poorly implemented event doesn’t mean it won’t work.
Why wouldn’t they? They were intended to fight a different class of vehicles.
1 Like
There plenty of fixes in this thread for the problem.
Calling someone a troll is actually a insult.
They are literally intended to fight heavily armored vehicles, that’s the whole point of HEAT. Moving them up for doing that they’re supposed to do doesn’t make sense.
I looked through the first 200 comments in this thread for suggestions, fixes, and/or comments on the problem and found no good arguments:
- Make light tanks useless for everything except for breaking barrels (which is incredibly inconsistent), tracks (which doesn’t do anything to stop from being killed), and flanking (which Gaijin has been consistently been making harder and harder with their terrible map changes)
- Make HEATFS give negative SL against WWII tanks - Obviously stupid, why should someone be punished for using a round that can actually pen an armored vehicle? Is APCR next? AP?
- Extend the limit to pre-1953 and post-1953 - Again, just makes vehicles after those years that should be lower BRs useless
- Make the post-WWII tanks that should be at WWII BRs reserve tanks - Again, this just makes them useless against ANY uptiers and also makes gameplay incredibly stale because of the limited types of opponents you can go against
- Remove the post-WWII tanks that should be at WWII BRs - Legitimately just making them unusable, wow
- Remove the HEATFS from the post-WWII vehicles - Why? Also, some of the vehicles only use HEATFS
- Just ignore the problem, they’re glass cannons - Glass cannons need to do excessive damage (or penetration) at their BR, moving HEATFS tanks up past the BRs they should be at means they will do at best average damage (which is not what a glass cannon is)
- “Heavy tanks shouldn’t be frontally penetrable by everything” - Yes, they should. Weakspots should exist, nearly all HEATFS vehicles are easily penned by MGs, and heavy tank gameplay should be harder than sitting still the whole match
- “You don’t need to kill everything right away, let the heavies push to get the kills” - Heavies should not being the only things that are able to kill things (the comment I paraphrased it from even mentioned mediums don’t need to be able to kill things)
- “HEATFS vehicles would actually do better at higher BRs due to overpressuring lightly armored tanks” - HEATFS overpressure is incredibly inconsistent in my experience, and the spall pattern on lightly armored tanks is bad (and HEATFS spalling is already terrible)
- Cut the game in two with a <=6-7 BR and a >6-7 BR group - This just punishes any nation with 6.3-7.3 lineups, nor addresses why this is necessary
3 Likes
No all you did show your bias against a Cold war serpation, you simply dont want change because you feel comfortable how it is now.
Nothing of the suggested solutions is indicating to make anything usles.
To the nations that dont have vehicels in said time period, they simply dont fight there and skip it. Simpel as.
2 Likes
I don’t get why there’s so much hostility on the forum towards any kind of efforts to make the mm more immersive.
Every time historical mm is mentioned everyone absolutely loses their shit:
-says it’s been proven countless times to never be balanced (no one has proven shit)
-describes the person who proposed it as a bad, blind, stupid german main that watched history channels too much
-proceeds to stat shame
-uses straw man arguments like “you want a historical mm, how about panzer 2 vs kv1”
-mentions post pen damage
-mentions minor nations having gaps (as if that was players’ problem, that they can skip some grind)
-mentions a cold war apc with a 50 cal or a 20mm on top not being able to kill mbts (as if that was it’s job)
and more endless lame excuses to keep some niche cold war tanks meta, which the majority have never heard of, and ruin the experience on some actually famous and relevant tanks like t34s, shermans, tigers and panthers.
Is it such a difficult concept to understand, that historical mm doesn’t mean all WW2 vehicles being at the same br? Here, have an example to outline how it should look like. It will be for Germany and Russia, because surprise surprise, they have the most extensive history of tank usage.
BR Germany Russia
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1.0 Panzer 2 C BT-5
Panzer 3 B T-28 (1938)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1.3 Panzer 2 F T-26
Panzer 3 E
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1.7 Panzer 3 F
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2.0 BT-7
T-28
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2.3 Panzer 4 E T-28E
Panzer 3 J BT-7M
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2.7 Panzer 4 F1 T-34-76 1940
Stug 3 A T-50
T-70
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3.0 KV-1 L-11
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3.7 Panzer 3 J1, L T-34-76 1941
Panzer 4 F2 KV-1 ZiS-5 (without additional armor)
Stug 3 F
----------------------------------------------------------------------
4.0 Panzer 4 G T-34-76E STZ (60mm front)
Stug 3 G KV-1 ZiS-5 (with additional armor)
Panzer 3 M, N
Marder 3 H
----------------------------------------------------------------------
4.7 Panzer 4 H T-34-76 1942
KV-1 S, C (should be added)
T-34-57
----------------------------------------------------------------------
5.3 Tiger 1 H1, E IS-1
Panther D, A KV-85
Sd.Kfz.234/2 Puma (yes) SU-85
SU-152
----------------------------------------------------------------------
5.7 Ferdinand
----------------------------------------------------------------------
6.0 Panther G T-34-85 ZiS-S-53, D-5T
Tiger 2 P, H IS-2, IS-2 1944
Panzer 4 J (yes) SU-85M, SU-100
Jagdpanzer 4 (yes), 4/70 ISU-152
Hetzer (yes) ISU-122, ISU-122S
Jagdpanther
Stug 4 (could be added)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
7.0 Jagdtiger T-44
Panther F
----------------------------------------------------------------------
7.3 Maus T-44-100
Tiger 2 105 IS-3
Panther 2 IS-4
Was it really that hard? Historical, fun, no bs with cold war tanks. Keep in mind that it’s a rough idea of how it should look like.
Is it balanced? Depends on the definition.
If balance means every vehicle is competitive, then no.
If balance means every vehicle is usable, then yes.
If that’s too much, minimal adjustments can be made, for example moving Panzer 4 J next to Panzer 4 H and it still will be mostly historical and balanced using both definitions. However, I see no reason why for example Panzer 4 J should be competitive, there are a lot of competitive Panzer 4 variants and the J is a late, simplified variant, representing the collapse of the third reich, but even in this chart it still can easily kill most of it’s opponents, if not frontally, then from the side.
If historical mm works for WW2 BRs, I see no reason why it would fail for cold war BRs.
Edit: I know Tiger 2 105 and Panther 2 didn’t exist, but this BR is already alternative history anyway.
2 Likes
Balancing Russia and Germany at WW2 Br is relatively easy but what about the minor nations?
2 Likes
Minor nations should not dictate balance.
2 Likes
Minor nations should be thankful they are even in the game. I wish there was a Polish tech tree, even if it had 2 tanks (1 tank and 1 tankette to be exact).
No.