What do you think about this?
6 Likes
Before add new games modes, GJ must rework many things in actual modes.
5 Likes
Something like RUSH in Battlefield games would be nice with moving spawns and objectives mb that would fix spawncamping
8 Likes
I have always wanted to see more meaningful objectives that affect the battle.
For example you could have airfields which must be captured before a team can spawn CAS, or you can capture radar/lookout stations that can auto scout enemies within a specific area for your team.
You could have targets for destruction/defence for example a factory/warehouse where owning it, provides some sort of battlefield boost like repairs/ammo restocking (like normal spawns), destroying it removes that bonus.
Something a bit more interesting.
9 Likes
I had posted a bit before this. I wish they had a persistent mode. Like back in the day with fighter ace 2.5 and air warrior etc. A battle ground where you fight for territory. Planes era locked, nation locked. like Axis vs Allies WW2 era.
5 Likes
Don’t need any of the locking, it’s more about the missions…
BR gaps and such can EASILY be further implemented to make the eras spread out, but no-one ever suggests that, they ONLY ever want that fabled ‘lock’
Fighter ace with the old 4 teams on a map was good times.
3 Likes
those were the days i was with NO_ Flyers squadron.
Yeah something new for Air RB would be nice. Probably something like Air Arcade where you can respawn from your line up, that’d be cool in RB since arcadey is too arcade for me but I like the line-up concept.
SIM EC is already good but tweaking here and there might be nice (which they do, so all good).
At least they need to rework assault mode.
what war thunder needs is that the modes must be very distinct, because the realistic mode is becoming more and more an arcade, and they should start working on fixing the BR compression, fixing the characteristics of the vehicles making them real, and using mechanisms the closer to the real ones to fully render realism, in simulation instead they must be almost like the original, to be the envy of DCS. instead for now we have means with characteristics that are too OP, which fight means that don’t make sense that they are in that historical context and above all against more modern means. It is a concept that has been reiterated for years. after all this is done, then you can think of new game modes, because “you don’t think about the course if the car is not right”
Yes, yes , and YES.
Game mode like RUSH in Battlefield, World War mode using the Battlerate system(historical mm is unbalanced) , and stop the one point conquest maps.
Necro thread revival lol…
But yes it does. We have said this for years.
1 Like
Ground RB or Sim EC using historical vehicles on sim maps would be amazing.
Allow the Wehraboo’s dream of Tiger E vs 75mn M4 while balancing it by a MUCH higher spawn cost.
Somewhat similar to the D-Day event.
The event could change regularly and be based on the Pages of History, making for something more unique than a profile icon for playing a collection of historical tanks.
2 Likes
If you are talking about AB, RB and SB, then I think, they should be more distinct.
One of the suggestions here is to push either RB more towards SB or vice versa. In that case I think the other one should be removed to clean up and help simplify balancing and development.
On the other hand I would like to see more freedom in setting up custom matches and give more options for that. Like inside tank optics only, or minor repairs only or being able to specify allowed lineups, ammo and stuff like that. More freedom in objectives as well.
I guess what I am trying to say is that more casual modes with automatic matchmaking like AB and RB are great for mainstream and keeping player count high.
At the same time WT already has so much content that sandbox like environment could really use it to its full potential. After all, I think that devs would love to see their work to be used and played with as much as possible to make it feel really worth it.
Very much no.
I would say WT atm has too many. At least one is obsolete, that is ground forces Simulator. It’s not a simulator, and it is just RB with a slightly different view and no markers, not justified to be it’s own mode.
What confuses me is that most people here talk about mission types not gamemodes
Game modes in WT are pretty clearly defined
https://wiki.warthunder.com/Category:Game_modes
1 Like
Of course, we need the ground RB with cloud base 200 ft covered which prohibits any aircraft activity. So many battles were and are fought in terrible weather conditions. The game has to offer something on that regard.
Players will just use ULQ mode which removes trees, and clouds.
It had some in the past, but the game is structured so much into conquest that bringing in a game mode where one side attacks and the other defends could break balance easily.
I’m not against it and would actually love to see it, but it’s not the right time for that.
Just divide it into two round where each side attacks once and the other defends. The attacking team that is quicker wins.
That would be an hour-long match and wouldn’t work outside of a special event. Even then, how would you keep the defenders from attacking?