So you agree the marketing lead you and many other people to believe this game had historical/realistic mm. That’s false advertising.
They put so much work into it, that it’s managed by bots, not real people.
This thread is about creating a hard split, but I’m more for just making it historical, without any splits/gaps.
Enlisted died, because the changes they made, made the game less immersive, which was the main selling point of this game, highlighted in many ads.
It isn’t false advertising if they don’t state it. You said yourself that it was “safe to assume” that it was that way. If you assume that the game is historically balanced because they say historical a couple times, that is your fault.
A rediculous claim with no proof to back it up.
It isn’t going to be more historical than it is because, as I said earlier: gameplay is more important than historical accuracy.
Yep, Enlisted had a completely different progression system implemented that changed how players could progress and how they played. That is what making any sort of a split will do to Warthunder. I am quite sure that Gaijin has learned alot from that situation with Enlisted.
Immersion has nothing to do with history.
Otherwise people wouldn’t be immersed when playing Senua’s Sacrifice.
In fact, they did the exact opposite of what people in this thread want. They merged everything together and introduced a BR system we have in WT, and the game died. It’s quite funny.
That might end up being worse than a hard split, depending on how it is implemented. You’d have early T-34s and Kv-1s facing the rank I/II German tanks, with stuff like the M24 being an absurdly high BR relative to where it is now.
A hard split would make the top tier tanks be spammed, and make everything below it bad to play. The bottom tier tanks would only ever be uptiered, which isn’t good for gameplay.
It died because they changed the already tried and true system that the game had been designed on the entire time, not because it was a BR based system.
Remember when Call of Duty did that whole 3d movement thing for a few years and then abandoned it? People don’t like massive changes to their beloved games. Happened with Halo at one point too.
V
M24 is a light tank with scouting, killing heavy tanks is not it’s main role (which it still could do), killing other reacon tanks/vehicles like a Puma and scouting is.
In this context immersion also means history.
Are you back on the Whisky again Alvis ? I thought you promised us a " New you"
In a history based combined arms game that models its WW2 era units to be perfectly historically correct I would say History was part of the immersion.
Why bother to model aircraft cockpits to look exactly as they did in WW2 if not create immersion ,that immersion being that you are back in WW2 as a fighter pilot in your chosen WW2 plane.
It’s not a difficult concept to grasp for any normal person.
.
Meanwhile War Thunder had the opposite problem:
War Thunder’s early historical push was hated by the few people that played this game.
War Thunder with a population less than 1/10th what it is today were hating the modes cause it was unfair, unfun, and not immersive.
So War Thunder correctly introduced the BR system, which ended most OP vehicles from existing saving the game and exploding the game’s population.
Sim EC even became a thing and gained popularity thanks to the changes.
Then Gaijin removed Warsaw vs NATO and the game once again grew more, and the OP Japanese vehicles were finally getting balanced.
War Thunder is the most immersive its ever been, and the playercounts show this as a secondary effect.
Realism and immersion matters more to War Thunder’s playerbase than LARPing as a grandparent.
It could certainly use more immersion. But as for the split between say WW2/Cold War/Modern the question is where would that split be?
T-34/85, IS-3’s, Shermans, Chaffees, Hellcats and even things as obsolete as Renault 35’s fought in the cold war era battles and by the same measure even the terribly obsolete T-54/55 tanks can be seen on battlefields today.
I’d be happy enough if events with historical lineups were brought back in a new format for those who greatly enjoyed them.
Obviously not or Warthunder would never have taken off as a game.
Which everybody hates
Which everybody wants to see the return of it seems
It is the least immersive its everbeen and the evidnce is the comments I just quoted you on.
1 It was historical at one point,
2 It had no crummy BR system
3 It had Nato vs Warsaw pact once
Sounds fundamentally like a better game in theory .
Tier IV I guess. Move a few up ,move a few down,lose a few.
Create two divisions .Some nations would have mighty gaps to fill but I am sure Gaijin would find a way.
No, look it up.
Correct, I don’t have any proof. That’s just what I’ve heard.
I’m not that sure about bots, but I’m much more sure about them balancing vehicles based purely on players’ statistics. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was automated in some way, for example if a vehicle breaks a certain threshold, a BR change by 0.3/0.4 is automatically added to the next update or employees get a notification or something.
Edit: There are some exceptions of course, I never said BRs are never changed manually. The simplest example can be a BR decompression.
War Thunder didn’t take off until the BR system was introduced and historical battles was replaced with realistic battles.
Nearly all players love the BR system, that’s why the only consistent complaints are air BR compression.
War Thunder was unbalanced garbage in 2015 outside arcade battles.
Ironic that in 2015, the most immersive and realistic game mode was the arcade battles game mode.
I don’t want to relive my grandfather’s WW2 naval career, I want to create my own stories.
And people envious of their ancestors have ruined enough games in my life so far.
If the milsim community likes it, it’s a garbage idea.
Nothing made me love realism more than milsim commanders forcing people into unrealistic situations.
I don’t regret much, my milsim clique for 2 years is one of the things I regret. Nothing arcadier and non-immersive than those milsim groups.
You seem to be complaining about lack of immersion and realism. I suggested you play games that do this.
These flaws are not objective. I came to war thunder because i enjoy the middle spot between arcade and sim.
It seemed like your post was just ripping on people who dont want era seperation. If that isnt the case, i appologize.
To be fair, i dont think they hate the system. Just hate that gaijin can seem to actually use correctly.
I wouldnt mind it returning. The only issue is the first week or so after an update will have long queue times.
I imagine WT took of because of its pew pew nature.If they had of played their cards right they could have kept all the good bits about the game.
So are you suggesting WT scrap the entire WW2 era from this game?
You seem happy with this game making 60% of its player base happy but show no concern with making the 90% of the player base happy.Yet you are a Gaijin servant.
You are just a bizarre person Alvis and because of that you are a poor sales man for Gaijin
.You also have Narcissistic traits in as much as you lack understanding of others view points .That is a real warchunder forum thing it seems.
WW2 is huge in this game yet you miss that point as a self appointed WT expert.
create my own stories get some dopamine hits
In this context “creating your own stories” sounds like “changing the course of history”, which you can’t do without a historical setup.
Edit: If anything, it would be creating your own reality.
No.
Then it must be the amount of damage it does in one shot, is that it?