I haven’t, and I don’t need to. That is another point of mine. None of those single player campaigns, World War Mode, or Pages of History is required content to play and enjoy Warthunder.
The fact you are claiming that any gameplay in this game is historic without the presence of Infantry is quite dubious. The primary fighting force of all nations for all of time being left out is “historic”. Care to tell me in which WW2 battles infantry didn’t fight along side these tanks? If I wanted historic battles from WW2, I would play a different game like Hell Let Loose or even Enlisted.
I’m going to leave this excerpt from the website for clarity:
“What is War Thunder?
War Thunder is the largest free-to-play multiplayer online game featuring military vehicles from a period spanning from the years before the Second World War until present time. Aviation, ground vehicles, and naval forces fight together in one game and even in one battle, just as the real-life battles were fought. The appearance and characteristics of the vehicles in War Thunder are historically accurate, and their damage models are physically based.” Source: FAQ - Game - War Thunder
“The appearance and characteristics of the vehicles in Warthunder are historically accurate, and their damage models are physically based.”
This explains it just like I did. Doesn’t say that anything past the vehicles is historically accurate, nor does it say the game as a whole is realistic.
3 Likes
Era doesn’t quite work because of date selection and service end dates. The BR system does decently well with technology transitions already. It could be improved with decompression, but witha few exceptions it does quite well.
1 Like
Not really. HEATFS can be used against 3.0 BR vehicles.
I mentioned exceptions because no system is perfect. Those vehicles with HEATFS at such low battle ratings are terrible vehicles overall and that is their only upside. The Ikv 103 gets a normal HEAT round first and then gets the HEATFS as a tier 4 mod. The biggest difference is penetration, which means nothing for a base pen of 250 on the first shell, and the secpnd difference is velocity and it isn’t even really that big of a difference. What is the huge problem here? The HEATFS more than likely one shots less than comparable APHE shells around 4.0 upon a successful pen. Same for the PT-76 and M-51, their HEAT ammunition does less damage on a pen than APHE at their BR. Yea it can pen more, but that doesn’t mean you are going to be getting first shot kills like you do with APHE and weakspots.
3 Likes
With enough exceptions, you open up a can of worms that allows for more “exceptions”, which would allow weirder HEATFS slingers to be at lower BR as well.
1 Like
Where do you think the exceptions begin and how many are there?
Those excuses are the point. The IKV103 is a terrible vehicle. Moving it up to a BR where other HEATFS vehicles belong won’t make it worse.
1 Like
Moving it up to a BR where vehicles that are faster and have better gun laying/traverse rates will make it worse. Firepower isn’t the only balancing metric. It makes sense that it faces vehicles that are slower to move and slower to target so it has a chance to be successful.
I don’t understand why people fixate on firepower like it is the only thing that matters. There is more to this game than big gun go big boom. Tanks like the Ikv 103, PT-76, Object 292, and VIDAR have massive disadvantages to make up for their firepower. That is also why light tanks can be lower in BRs because of their mobility and lack of armor while still having workable guns. We are talking about the entire vehicle when we talk about balancing, not just the cannnon and round it uses.
5 Likes
In some way yes. Cause who would play it? But this isn’t even as unbalanced as T34(US) with a lower battle rating than the ASU.
Do people seriously play it now? Other than for the lolz of using the gun?
Ok, even less people would play it.
Im going to go play it today just because you said that.
The problem is now we have the usual two camps in this argument.
The dreamers who hope Gaijin have an interest in immersion and history and know that nothing will change but still cling to a dream ,which I see as worthwhile.
Those who rightly see the truth ,that Gaijin have boxed themselves into a corner and spend their time jumping on here to tell us the blindly obvious like we cant see it ourselves.They try to tell us a bad thing is a good thing or its a good thing simply because that is how it is,a bit like accepting Taxes.
WW2 tanks vs more modern is a pain for sure but that is how it is unfortunately but wanting to change that is not a crime.
I suspect many of those who defend the current idea are those who love to jump into a fast modern dart thrower and seal club old tanks.They dont want to lose their meal ticket.
3 Likes
Basically everybody likes down tiers but definitely not because of the heavy tanks.
Kinda. The only reason I’m even here on the forum is because I know there are no other games like this.
We already have anime body pillows for example, that is not the path I want War Thunder to follow.
1 Like
Cosmetics can be disabled
1 Like
I see this almost daily when i watch my son playing tanks - totally fantasy and borderline stupid game play mostly on CQC maps in urban environment without any recon or infantry / artillery support.
Those “defenders” love the game as they can play it like a plain shooter (with CAS as power-ups) - but they simply don’t care about armored warfare from an immersion and accuracy perspective.
The whole point of immersion is to create a kind of somehow realistic atmosphere - fighting other tanks from the future or ancient past kills immersion - and subsequently atmosphere.
There is zero realism / immersion in ground warfare:
-
With a lot of goodwill you can create the illusion that this “capturing A-C point game play” somehow simulates a counter attack, but at the end of the day it boils down to a war of attrition based on spawn points and the main goal of most players is to get as fast as they can in a plane.
-
Irl you have usually an attacking force vs a defending force - with advantages for the defenders as they don’t have to disclose their position. And that is the main purpose of a heavy tank (see parallel thread) - to withstand defensive fire and to break through enemy lines (TDs and AT guns).
-
The philosophy of gaijin to create symmetric lobbies and their BR setting policy somehow balances matches in the way that IFVs or light/medium tanks have somehow the ability to kill enemy heavy tanks - this makes sense from a game play perspective - but it is an immersion killer par excellence.
-
IFV and light/medium tanks are transporting infantry, are covering flanks and are doing recon - what happens when IFVs or light armoured tanks meet a MBT (like the famous 1 vs 8 recently in Ukraine) is similar what happened in WW 2 when they met a heavy or super-heavy tank: They die.
-
So there is just a difference between the approach to wt from both groups - and imho the guys waiting for more realism / immersion (like here era separation) have to wait for a mode like this behind a pay wall - simple because their (=gaijin) main target customers strive to top tier and give a sh*t about immersion at lower BRs.
The whole discussion circles about exchanging opinions often based on straw men arguments - but at the end of the day most of the posts are just repeating the same stuff like in hundreds / thousands of posts from the past; ofc without admitting that they have arranged themselves with the status quo. Therefore everything what challenges the here and now is bad by definition.
3 Likes
Shaking up the status quo is needed as it brings fresh wind and change that review a game.
Players come back to check out whats new what changed.
After thousend of battles and hours of the same modus operandi it get stale and boring and there is no need to play and there fore the enterainment value is gone. You move away. Its like eating the same stuff for the rest of your life. Every day, any day, no change.
1 Like
Anime body pillows are realistic™
1 Like