In real life tanks do not time travel, a heavy in real life was a legitimate threat because the armor was relevant for the time period, in Warthunder this is not the case.
Nor would a light tanks shrug off a shell from a heavy tank.
Nor would two dozen vehicles fight in a 2x2 square.
If only Gaijin would create a damage model that doesn’t award less armor and punish actual armor we’d be making progress.
Is4m immune to 105 CHEATFS ? Since when ? I rarely see anyone drive that tank and when i do they max get 1 kill cause all the leo players snipe them from a km away or just straight up head on and kill them.A trio of is4s would very happily fight mauses or T34s and they would die the moment one of the two teams took out their tracks and gun.Then someone with 100mm of pen needs to flank and shoot their side and vouala you killed them.YOU DONT NEED 30 YEARS MORE ADVANCED TECH TO DO THAT ! T54s with a normal shell were fighting tiger 2s when the game was still fun and people were pretty ok with it.Both tanks have small weakspots,both tanks are fast,both tanks are not stabilized so i dont see something problematic here.Especially if Russian armor gets the same angled multiplier as every other tank out there t54s would be perfect oponents especially for jagtigers,mauses,T34s etc etc
Do i care if the Swedish couldnt make the ikv 103 be a proper tank or if its in game role doesnt fit its irl one ? No i dont give a damn.If it was made in the 60-70s it should stay there especially if it fires HEATFS.Many 70s vehicles can be killed with mgs that doesnt qualify them to fight the panzer 3.By this logic every bad vehicle should go even more down in br.So whats next ? We are going to make the israeli sherman fight the panzer 2 ? Thats not balance thats destroying everyones fun just so that one vehicle can work.
National balance ? Many nations can take part in this thing im describing without much problem.Can anyone fit into it ? No but thats life and we should not pull down everyone for the fun of few.The Chinese,Iraelis and Swedish have no reason to take part in this 7.7 late war fun but why should they ? China wasnt even a thing like it is now,Israel didnt exist and Sweden could barely make a tank prototype.So why should 3 nations bring down the rest ? Which actually makes them 2 nations since Israel doesnt have anything proper in the ww2 arena
Also Britain firing APDS is ok since its not that balance breaking as CHEATFS or missiles and required actual aiming.Plus APDS doesnt penetrate ridiculous angles from what i remember especially the early versions of the shell but i could be wrong
Aren’t those demands a little too high for the average player’s understanding of tactics?
Buddy the char 1 c dies to the panzer 3 with the 37 and the panzer 2 with the 20mm with ease and that 1 panzer 4 f2 you will see once every million years doesnt make a difference.If it was at 3.3 and saw them every game then yes that would be problematic.Personally i would have no problem if tanks like this faced reserve vehilces aka their historical oponnents.Doctrines change and so should which tank faces which.I faced Sherman using the Char with the small 75 on its chassis (cant remember the name) and it was a pain.But they were so rare to find that it wasnt much of a problem.
I have played 3 other nations other than Germany and soon im thinking of playing the US.I never go beyond the 5.0 like because after that i die from CAS almost every game,people start bringing magical 20-30 years more advanced rounds that make me irrelevant and because most nations rarely have anything that is domestic beyond ww2.Yes they may have 1-2 designs but those dont create a lineup.Why should i play the 6.0 Italians ? To fight with American tanks that have an Italian flag on them ? Or use the skiless armored cars and kill helpless ww2 vehicles ?
I just came back from 6 games with the maus and i only managed to exit my spawn twice cause the rest people with cold war rounds obliterated me and didnt allow me to play the objective.And those 2 games i got some action some noob with bombs killed me.I hadnt played it in months and now i reremebered why i stay at 4.0 3.3 with almost all nations i play.
One of my favorite tanks is the arl44 with the 75 and you know why ? Because its the only heavy tank that i know of that i can have fun in.Maybe the Jumbo will be fun but i dont have it yet.I wish the same went for all other heavies especially the ones higher up.With the ARL44 i can takes some hits and it feels amazing ! Very vehicles can one shot me be just seeing me and the opponents of mine actually have to know where to shoot.
All the tanks in that BR area are balanced just fine as long as Gaijin doesn’t need to sell any more Vidars any time soon. All the other heavy tanks in the game at lower BR’s get countered by big gun TD’s and flanky boys and no one complains there, the fact the fundamental mechanics are wrapped in newer tech changes nothing about how the tanks are meant to play.
You are smart enough to understand im not advocating for a full on realism.If i wanted so i would go to reenactment groups or join the army.Yes fighting a helo with a prop is and feels wrong.Try attacking me with a musket while i hold a Steyr AUG and well see how much right it feels.
The pt76 would be fine fighting anything cold war just like the ikv.Very few cold war designs are so amazing and broken that those vehicles would struggle plus half the cold war lineup consists of lightly armored heat slingers that can be one shot with CHEATFS due to overpressure but if you shoot APHE you just overpen and do nothing.
Fighting anything with guided missiles while you only carry mgs and cannons should not be allowed.If you like torturing yourself and consider it ok that should not be the case for everyone.
Tanks dont 1v1 each other but this is a game so what im advocating is that at least they fight what they were made to fight not magic enemies due to balance.
We are smart enough to not allow pz38ts to fight KV1s.You are all perfectly capable to also understand im not advocating for such changes or super historical accuracy.
For many reasons,i dont have time to list,ill say that heavy tanks are not a thing mostly because theyre not needed.But modern mbts are borderline heavies with how things are going.
Things will work exactly like they work with the top top tier and the way they work for reserve tanks
No opinion on naval since i havent even touched it
If it doesnt fire guided missiles and its speed is not phenomenal then i guess it could fight props.But i dont know the strikemaster that much
Yea sorry youre right.Let me buy the t114 and kill of helpless late ww2 tanks and anything in that category
Hahhahaah nice
Yea but heatfs users need to aim far less than aphe users especailly when they face raw no composite armor.
HEAT rounds tend to cause little spalling (less than some tiny autocannon APDS rounds), so aim is absolutely essential in most cases. Sure soviet designs for example might have crew packed so tight that a single hit to the center takes out 3/4 crew, against those HEAT is great and your average round has 15 soviet tanks in the enemy team even if you’re not playing against USSR.
I’d say the actual advantages of HEAT are it’s ability to penetrate thick armor that might cover the ammo, and the low shell velocity which allows cheap lobbed shots in maps that aren’t just completely flat.
That’s a bad comparison and you know it. Performance of the two is not the same IRL. But performance-wise, a Tiger II can absolutely be competitive against an M48. How do I know? Because of their BRs, which are set by their performance, and because I do play the Tiger II and I do encounter M48s and I do know they die in one hit in their frontal weakspot(s). Simple as.
Well then. Play a few matches with both at a tier closer to their time period, and show us empirically that this is correct.
The PT-76 has one of the worst HEAT-FS rounds in the game. It would also be way less survivable against HEAT-FS than it is against WW2 ammo. It has zero gun depression. It’s huge and not even particularly mobile.
Gun handling/target acquisition, shot velocity, profile, all these things are important at every BR but get more and more important the higher you go.
For example, the JPz 4-5, which I feel could very easily go to a higher BR than what it currently has, still suffers from a glaring issue: it has incredibly atrocious gun handling, and that’s something you have to keep into account if you want it to face things with excellent gun handling.
How many ATGM carriers do you see in game? Very few people bother to play them, with the exception of BMPs, because they are crap. I don’t know how else to put it.
If I had to name the things that powercreep late WW2 vehicles and that should probably be sent up, ATGM carriers would not be on my top five list.
No, but you’re advocating for Tiger IIs to only see Shermans and Pershings. So what happens if everyone tries to play the Tiger II because it’s the stronger side? Again, this is not a theoretical question, it is literally what nuked the latest season of World War, everyone wanted to play Germany so they could have the Jagdtiger, which no American tank in the field could penetrate frontally.
The Char 2C could be killed with the 37mm on the Panzer 3, but the Panzer 2 can’t kill it frontally. And just to add to this, the Panzer 3 is still 10 years older than the Char 2C, which you say it bad for late/post war heavies but not the interwar tanks. Your logic still isn’t adding up.
You’ve done nothing but prove why you have the opinion you do with these heavy tanks. You like heavy tanks the most and want them to be king, you don’t play light vehicles much, and you don’t play many vehicles past 5.0 so you wouldn’t care what happens to them anyway.
The gap idea is the same as historical matchmaking, it is not a viable option because it will destroy dozens of vehicles. People have explained this already. The battle ratings are the way they are to bring counters and balance to each br. Destroying the early cold war vehicles and making a solid heavy tank meta is not good for this game. It would be great for your German heavies, at the cost of ruining many more vehicles.
Now you care about different doctrines after you said they were irelevant, which one is it?
Cold war, ww2 etc are just dates, just like pre war see ww2 and early war see late war etc. Had ww2 not finished that date the cold war would be ww2 still etc. They balance the same.
They would not. They have pen and that’s it.
HEATFS has almost no post pen. It requires precise aim to kill things in one shot easily. APHE on the other is pen=death lots of the time.
I agree in principle the game falls apart at 6-7 BR it is a hideous overlap.
I agree in principle, but it fails as anything but a nice idea. There is a hell of a lot more post war stuff in low BR than many people realise.
Trouble is some nations rely on the junk to get it past late WW2. Too much post war/Prototype garbage already in the game that Gaijin would simply have to scrap such as the WW2 Swedish tech tree and most of Italy after 4 BR. Much of France is 50s and 60s at WW2 BR. Gaijin would have to remove many vehicles from lower BRs such as the South African rubbish at 4-5 BR in the UK tree and what would it do with them? I can suggest just scrapping them but it would be unpopular for so many players.
I hate the overlap BRs 6-8; they are ugly and particularly frustrating in what is already a frustrating game and offensive to anybody who has an interest in Armour history but War Thunder has driven itself far too deep into the quicksand to pull out now.
Infact, I don’t think War Thunder even see a problem. They are making money how the game is at present. They will just keep filling it with new vehicles and new premiums.
The intelligent and educated may leave and the window lickers will take over but who cares so long as they are paying?