Spot on
What does history have to do with this? Can “history” explain why the Ikv 72, Pkv 301, M36B1, M109, etc. are somehow not worthy of their current BR placements?
“Rank 1/2” does not exist. Its a figment of Gaijin’s rationalization of lazy game design.
Logical.
If 2 tanks have nearly identical capabilities, then they would be the same BR, and would face/fight with each other right? Not with historical MM. The M24 and Amx-13 (FL11) have identical capabilities, yet with a hard date split, they would be facing vastly different enemies.
3 Likes
Are YOU sure you play WT?
Again, what do chronological dates have to do with a vehicle’s raw performance?
Right now, both vehicles have even odds of being able to beat any other tank in the BR bracket. Neither tank were designed to be used as an “any tank”. They were specifically designed for the recon and screening role. Fighting their own kind.
If you use either to go head on with a medium or heavy tank, in any era, you are going to lose. That is why this argument is a non sequitur.
So where, then, would you put interwar/early WW2 vehicles and their equivalents?
Like the sample above with the early AMX-13 and Chaffee, historical matchmaking would screw these vehicles harder than Gaijin’s screwing the EJ Kai by putting it at 12.7.
2 Likes
M24s or AMX-13s would have a hard time against 1.0 BR vehicles?
Yes, let me use an AMX against a T-55, I’m sure that will be a balanced and fair matchup, Don’t forget that it can barely penetrate the side of one.
Introduction date based MM will only benefit the big 3, and screw over everyone else.
2 Likes
And how would you even create said historical mm? Should T-54s face everything from M48 to Leopard 2A6, because that is historical. Should the M8 grayhound face everything from Pz 2s to King Tigers, because that is historical, should Pz 2s face everything from T-26s to IS-2, because that is historical. No matter what you do, even if they existed in the same era, you will end up with vehicles with massive advantages over others, simply because both existed at the same battlefield at the same time, even though one would curb stomp the shit out of the other one 99.999999999% of the time.
Or do you simply want to limit it to vehicles with similar capabilities? You know, like the BR system we have right now?
1 Like
More 2D thinking…
You don’t. Because an AMX was not designed to fight T-55s. It was designed and existed to report it and to pick off the lighter vehicles that came with it, not cosplay as a time machine.
You know all that history stuff…
Except everyone else uses the big 3’s stuff, so no.
Move to its sides and shoot him.
And that’s why I don’t suggest a hard date split.
That is the price you have to pay for immersion. You cant have immersion without putting a focus on it.
Because it is in this middle spot. It isnt super arcade like WoT but it isnt historical immersion like squad44 and hell let lose.
I see war thunder like tankery but with some form of balancing. Modern setting on man-made maps but they put rules in place to balance the teams out.
Which games are those? I have yet to find another game that is this area between arcade and sim.
Because some people can like history and also be fine with not playing a historical sim constantly. When i want to play history sims, i go play those.
2 Likes
Are infantry in this game? Are there a swath of incredibly light vehicles, as something like the AMX would be literally useless against its chronological “peers”?
Most minor nations would like to have a word, lol.
2 Likes
These vehicles you’d have the AMX-13 FL-11 facing due to time period would pretty much outdo it in mobility- If not at least keep up.
2 Likes
Then how is historical MM supposed to work? Am I not able to use some tanks?
1 Like
I can answer that for you. They will say something like “then it will suck because it sucked irl. Then dont use it”
5 Likes
Ansewers V
Or more directly, there are dozens of game that have vehicle combat set in one era or are entirely (sci)fictional.