I recommend you play the two game modes so you can come to a conclusion.
The game has been running up a blind alley for a long time by relying on the introduction of new vehicles to keep it exciting while using those vehicles is done on a lame and ancient playing field with the same old format.
Many of us don’t care if we never see a new vehicle again and most of those new vehicles have been modern rubbish thrown into WW2 to fill gaps, where they a have no place.
We just want good gameplay on the old vehicles first. Maps made for WW2 and maps made for fast modern vehicles and Supersonic jets instead of Modern tanks on WW2 maps.
Get the BR mess sorted as I am tired of seeing the Down tier get 10 for 0 every time (unless it’s me of course).
The business model is how to keep good players in the game and keep the spenders spending. Premium time has to be the big one and previous premium time regulars like me do not have the confidence in the game to commit to another year.
3 Likes
Like I said, I have done so and I already have a firm conclusion, which I told you multiple times. Why do you keep asking me the same question over and over that was already answered? You have anterograde amnesia or something?
tl;dr: One small part of the game running out of content is not a big deal for War Thunder’s longevity, when:
-
Not a lot of people even have access to it
-
Fewer people care about it or play it, even among those who can
-
And it’s not clear whether there’s even anything all that special about it vs other parts of the game (not necessarily the “highest skill ceiling” or anything else)
What is your conclusion?
In any given match, a maximum of 4 people can be top BR in a team.
4 out of 16 is 25%.
All else being equal (and it rarely is, because of the way player population is distributed) you will therefore be in a full downtier circa 25% of the time. The rest will be uptiers ranging from 0.3 to 1.0.
The upside of that is that even if you’re in a full uptier, say, 6.7 to 7.7, there will only be max four 7.7 tanks in the enemy team.
Logically, if you want to be downtiered more often, you need to raise or eliminate that limit. This would mean that full downtiers are more frequent, but it would also mean that in full uptiers you would face way more players that are 1.0 BR above you, making you experience the feeling of being unfairly outmatched far more often.
So the question is: are you willing to take that tradeoff? Will you take more downtiers in exchange for potentially hellish full uptiers? How will that impact the playerbase and their behaviour?
2 Likes
I don’t see that giving the maths for the issue helps with the issue
This is what I am seeing, so often it’s ridiculous. I would love Gaijin to take wagers on this. We would all be SL billionaires. Lets see what the lineup is and guess who will win. I can’t even say it’s due to Player level because it does not seem to be.
My point is I see a phenomenon happening and you trying to justify the phenomena does not alter my observation of it. I hope that makes sense, it’s hard to articulate.
I can only play a game and look at the end results. In so many cases the runaway winner often on both sides is the Down tier. It is almost like it is the vehicle that has won not the player.
Now you may say OK but you need skill though to get ten + a game and that is true but then I could use myself as a fine example of an average player who gets 3-5 a game then gets 11 or 12 only on a down tier and I do and I notice it. I see the vehicles that roll out Infront of me.
This is not opinion but observation of the end results and watching replays.
What is the minimum?
Also my point is, what percentage of the games top 3 in each team come from those 4 people? Any stats around on that?
1 Like
It does, because it furthers understanding of the tradeoffs that go into this.
In my experience, that’s not even remotely close to being true. I say this with the utmost frankness - there have been full downtiers where I have dominated, but a lot of the time, I actually dislike them because I feel extra pressure to carry the match or feel like I’ve “wasted” it.
In my Tiger II, I’ve died after one kill in a recent full downtier on Normandy. But on Fields Of Normandy, I got within 35 spawn points of the nuke when playing 7.7…
Of the five nukes I achieved in the game so far, only one has been in a full downtier (Jagdtiger on Mozdok). The other four have been, respectively, one at 7.0, two at 7.3, and one in a full uptier from 5.7 to 6.7.
Of course, not all BRs are the same, and not all tanks are the same etc etc. But still, it’s nowhere near as predetermined a thing as you make it sound, my friend.
Justifying does not come into it. This is why I phrased it as a question: would you be willing to take that tradeoff?
I’m not sure that I would. From 6.7 to 7.7, if the limit of 4 players was removed, you could potentially have a really really bad time, for example.
Then there is the other element of this, which is, how would it influence player behaviour?
You need to think about these things. There’s many changes I’d like to see in the game that I’m still somewhat sceptical on overall, because so many people play this game in so many different ways that you have to try and anticipate the unintended consequences; especially because this is a game you cannot structurally play on your own. If you make uptiers much more difficult for players, there will be an impact for sure. Which one, is hard to say.
Eh, it is opinion, and so is mine. Only Gaijin has the full numbers. We have no real way to scientifically approach the issue in a way that makes sense.
Zero. Sometimes that happens, in asymmetrical situations for example, where you may have a team with (to continue that example) one 7.7, and the other team has no 7.7 at all.
Do note that I’m only saying this is technically possible, but there is no real way for you and I to know if it actually happened, because someone may have a 7.7 in their lineup and just not spawn it. That’s also a thing that happens and can have a big impact on the team.
That said, it does bother me that there is potential asymmetry. If both teams had two 7.7s, for example, then it would be fairer. But that is putting extra steps into the matchmaker, which is anathema to any MMO, so there it is.
At the end of the day, you need to take a holistic POV of the game to, if nothing else, manage your expectations, even if that might not invalidate your critique - it at least gives you perspective on why things are set up a certain way. I would strongly prefer BR symmetry between the two teams (prior to player choice of what to spawn in of course), but I understand why it’s not in the matchmaker.
Only Gaijin has them, and they won’t publish them. There are really no stats in WT that you can see other than the players’ own. It’s unfortunate, because I’d love to dig into that stuff and understand things better, but it’s also not uncommon among MMOs, given historical precedent of people weaponising information for competitive reasons.
1 Like
This is imho the key - as long as the technical / performance advantage of an enemy vehicle can be countered with skill - there is no problem having full uptiers.
But as soon it get’s impossible to circumvent technical advantages with skill you have frustration. You see this in Air RB when jets with AAMs farm jets without CMs or when you get outranged by stuff with ATGMs and you can’t even shoot back…
So the only logical conclusion is that the claim “all BRs are set to give somebody in a full uptier a realistic fighting chance” is either nonsense and the “imbalance” is fully intended - or the devs don’t play their game…
To be fair - it looks like Ground RB players have much more troubles with full uptiers due to “triangle issues” and the 2 dimensional game play, but in mid tier Air RB (3.7 to 4.0) i actually enjoy full uptiers much more than full downtiers as the conceptual advantages (turn time) of my planes increase. Yes, your enemies get faster, climb better and have more guns, but they start to turn worse.
In full downtiers most of my enemies simply turn much better and i have to avoid turnfights whilst in full uptiers i need turnfights to beat an enemy.
2 Likes
There is also an understanding of what makes a vehicle good and where, for what reasons.
A Tiger II may be less survivable in a full uptier, so you’re paying a mobility handicap for nothing. However, the gun remains fantastic and precise, the rate of fire is high, turret rotation and gun handling are excellent. On that aspect alone the tank can still work.
A Jagdtiger is even less suited to a full uptier in principle. But also at the same time, if you need to bonk some of the heavy armour you can see at 7.7, like M103 or IS4-M, the 272mm of pen and the 800g of TNT equivalent come very handy. The flip side of that is that you’re on, say, El Alamein, you might as well use the Sturer Emil and perch atop the hill instead. It’s no less survivable at 7.7 than it is at 4.3, and the gun will still bonk whatever is in your sights.
Then you start looking into specific BRs because things can change quite a bit. There are so many things that hard-counter armour at 6.0 at this point that even a full downtier from 6.7 is not the same for your heavies as a full downtier from 5.7.
Mostly, uptiers will, in combination with the map, give you an idea of what’s best to spawn first, or even if it’s the same vehicle, how to change its playstyle.
There is a third option, which contains elements of the two, but is fundamentally its own thing: this is an emergent property of how the game has developed over the years.
Players seem to prefer a CoD style shooter with a tank reskin, to something more about, well, tanks. So the meta has been revolving around mobility and one shot potential more and more, for fast “dynamic” gameplay.
War Thunder updates so frequently that getting accurate data is probably impossible. One of WoT’s senior guys famously said they need six months to evaluate balance changes; in WT, the meta can change multiple times in six months. This constant expansion is the game’s chosen equilibrium and unlikely to change soon. It also means that it’s more important to Gaijin to chuck new stuff in, than it is to balance it.
Tank pokemon, collecting over balancing, all that.
Too many independent tech trees were added. Some lack vehicles, but even those that actually WOULD have vehicles, they just haven’t been implemented yet, still experience the same issue: not enough players. The vast majority of players still stick to the big threes exclusively. As TEC reported it, Gaijin itself has commented on it in the past, and most of their decisions revolve exclusively around the big three.
In an effort to fill lineup holes not just with historical options but with “hype” vehicles that will convince people to play these nations, postwar options are pulled downward, which makes full uptiers into era breaking BRs more problematic and compressed in terms of capability jumps.
Don’t even get me started on the planes you see in era breaking full uptiers…
It really depends on the BRs for me, and on specific vehicles. Machines like PAK Puma, Dicker, Sturer, Sturmtiger are basically BR agnostic. Panthers and Tigers are way more sensitive to it/have a narrower “optimal” band. And so on and so forth.
With enough experience and creativity, you learn to navigate these things. At the end of the day, it’s the same for everyone.
2 Likes
I understand the tradeoffs and I accept it as much as I don’t like it. BR up and down tiering for me personally is an era issue and in some ways unrelated. I know Comets faced Jagdtigers and that they defeated them by hopefully out maneuvering them, so I accept that. Understanding the nature of BR does not make it any better.
It is like saying a gambling house on ever cheats in one of three games.
I understand your point and why you are making it. Not trying to be funny there, I understand BR , I wish for a better way but I dont have one. Only thing I would say is that CAS is the balancer there and the those who ask for TO mode will find the BR issue much more pronounced than it is already. I am not sure if some people realize that CAS fills a lot of cracks in this game.
Sounds childish but I can only disagree there :) I wish I had more. My whole observation of this is just that. It is an observation. Came about when I started knuckling down and really trying got learn the game by watching those who win and by a big margin. Nearly always BR related. I include myself in there as running round in a T34 3,3 at 2.3 is like shooting fish in a barrel and I get ten or eleven when I get 4 or 5 generally. I can’t currently explain that any other way. I get more kills in the downier and so odes everybody else. So I can only see what I see. I am willing to look harder into it.
This is interesting. Does my downtier influence how I play? Do I play with more confidence knowing I have an advantage and it is the play style not the vehicle that gets me kills .Maybe , need to look into that. Not a BR issue but a Confidence issue?
Same here.
I am actually happy with where I am in the game, progress is being made, more good games than bad and I am confident that bad games are my fault and mood related more than anything else. I am confident in a 5.7 M18 against a Tiger at 6.7.I do find the era mix baffling and just not any fun. Meeting drones and superfast 80s tanks in an old M60 or Tiger 2 just doesn’t work for me but that is an issue kids today are not going to have, as they probably don’t know the difference between a Stug and a Leopard 2 and I have to accept that.
1 Like
This is brilliant. So nice to see somebody with the same view of the game and its faults. So may time does this logic fall on death ears of the stupid. Part of the reason I am willing to dig deeper into the BR issue points you made. I am always up for reevaluation, only way you get good on this game.
My claim is the player base and often this forum is/are its own worst enemy and Gaijin trip over themselves to appease the player base then get bashed by the player base.
Now is that greed or just a genuine attempt to make a good game? Hard to tell.
1 Like
There are two major problems here.
One: asymmetrical balance like that could work, if there was an ecosystem around it that is missing completely from the game. The example I always go for is this: would I go against a KV-1 in a Pz.38t? The prospect doesn’t thrill me. On the other hand though, if you really do want to recreate Barbarossa, there are elements that make that match up fairer:
I would have the support of towed AT guns that can work in close coordination with me because of radio equipment. I would have a crew with better stats. The cupola would give me access to better situational awareness (however that translates in game). And I could call in artillery.
Plus, I may be drawn in for the immersion alone even if the challenge before me is unbalanced.
None of those systems are present in WT. This is a game with very little combined arms, and way too arcade, to make those two tanks balanced against one another.
It’s also a game with so. many. vehicles. IL-2 Tank Crew has it “easy”, they’re just recreating Kursk. So the “lineup” is very simple and if you notice imbalances, you can correct them. Imagine how much work it would take to do it for the 2000+ vehicles that are in War Thunder.
Then take the business perspective. How many players play IL-2 Tank Crew, and how many play War Thunder?
Therein lies your answer.
It’s why I would find it preferable if CAS balance problems could be solved inside the Ground RB mode itself. Although it is possible for TO to work if you had different BRs for it than you do for GRB, different spawn costs, stuff like that.
It fills some and creates others - WT is a permanent construction site, and usually what happens when a change is made is that you’re screwing up Peter to pay off Paul, sadly.
These are all data points at the end of the day, right? Especially when you move away from the lower BRs, where “downtier” also means a higher chance of facing inexperienced players. Like for example, I have the VK.45.01, which sits at 5.3. It’s a pretty bad version of the Tiger, because it lacks the uparmoured UFP of the magnificent Befehlswagen (the one at 5.7), so you end up with a 102mm front plate that you can’t angle unless you’re taking cover next to a solid object.
And yet I’ve done very well with it in full downtiers, because many inexperienced players are uncertain about where to shoot it.
Usually when you go higher, that’s not really your experience. I’ve seen many people say that they don’t do very well in full downtiers, and I haven’t watched their replays, so I don’t know, but I can definitely say that at my BR of choice (6.7) I disappoint myself a lot more often when I’m top BR, than any other configuration.
So, I still judge myself as a very average player and I’m trying to improve. Going from bad to average is easy, but taking the next step up is a little difficult, in part because there is no real “recipe”, just experience.
YouTuber Ryanberry boiled it down very well imho when he said that it usually comes down to map knowledge, vehicle knowledge, and situational awareness.
What I’ve sort of realised lately is that, once you have those three more or less nailed down, the next step is something I like to call “controlled aggression”. In WT, you win by pushing power positions at the right time, without over- or under-extending.
The judgement call of knowing when to push, and when to sit still, is usually what makes the difference, especially in drawn out matches that go down to the wire.
Downtiers and uptiers influence how much controlled aggression you can get away with, and the timing of it. Although that is also heavily context dependent. For example if you’re in a full downtier Tiger II, you can honestly be very aggressive a lot of the time, but if the enemy team has three M-51s and three M109s, suddenly you have to tone down the aggression or it will end up very badly (extreme example but it’s to illustrate the point).
That said, I was actually talking about something else. Remember it’s not just people like you and I who play WT. All sorts of people do, with all sorts of goals. So when you introduce a new system, you have to ask yourself, how will people break this? How will they seek to exploit it?
TEC in one of his videos said that you need to consider how your idea would be received by a moron, a normal player, and a sweaty player, and see what the outcome is. That was a really good point. All sorts of good ideas have been ruined because of exploits etc.
And it’s also one of the reasons why stats aren’t public.
I don’t play postwar, so I won’t comment on drones, though people’s opinion seems very negative, which is telling in and of itself.
About Tiger IIs and tanks from the 80s… honestly if I can beat it in a fight, I don’t care what year it was built in. If I came to WT for the immersion, I would have left long ago, because it doesn’t resemble a real battlefield at all, even if you only do era-appropriate lineups. What worries me is the capability increase, not the date.
One of my favourite quotes goes something like this: “the worst thing about life is that everyone has their reasons”.
It’s not just disinterest in history that leads players to want stuff like this. I mean, just look at my example. I can shake my head at the idea of tanks from any era going into downtown Seversk with no infantry to be seen anywhere, or I can go out and have fun. I chose the latter, and I’m very much one of the more history-oriented players out there, so what does that tell you?
Because the logic is good in isolation, but is not necessarily good business logic. Which is why I started out with the comparison between WT and IL-2.
Look, you said something very poignant earlier, the gambling house example, yes? Now, obviously we like the game, or we wouldn’t be talking about it, much less playing it. So we want the game to continue being a thing.
The way MMOs work (you need a high number of players and you need to avoid a death spiral at all costs) comes at a price. Even a simple alteration can break a fragile equilibrium that the casino relies on, in order to function.
Were you around for the last season of World War, December 2022? It recreated Operation Nordwind. Playing the Jagdtiger in there was hilarious, nothing could frontally pen you, while you in turn could just point and click on pretty much any American vehicle. The only real dangers were P-47s and a flanking M18 you’d failed to spot.
Best Jagdtiger time I’ve ever had in WT.
You know what the result of that was? Everyone was queueing up to play Germany. Queue times were often above five minutes and it was impossible to get into games unless enough people were willing to play US. And then, some of the matches that did start, had an imbalance with like 12 German players to 7 American players, reversing the intended historical balance of numbers I might add, because there were rarely enough Americans to go around.
To make it less OP, only one Jagdtiger was available per operation, which led to the people with the best internet connection snatching it up first, and it also led to people joining a match, seeing the JT was not available, and immediately leaving the match to go find a better one where they could be top dog.
Fun, right?
It’s been a year and there’s been no mention of a new season of World War. Ask yourself why.
All of this, from a frankly quite minimal lineup change. I’m as critical of some choices the snail makes as the next guy, but it’s easy for us to talk about this and that feature; for them, this is their job, and you can’t really fault them for being incredibly cautious. Especially when, as we speak, War Thunder is one of the most long-lived MMOs in the history of the industry.
2 Likes
Totally agree as unusual. I do wonder if WT would be a better game if it just turned off the forum and broke links with the player base and did its own thing instead of trying to appease a fan base that has no idea what it wants.
To bad this discussion focussus on ground warfare.
I started playing WT 10 years ago when air warfare was the only game mode. I participated in the ground CBT but did not like what I saw. I still play only air arcade because ground an sea warfare do not agree wtih me. I am happy to play the 4.0/4.6 bracket although I have higher ranking aircraft. The game is about enjoyment, not about acomplishment. Just enjoy the game and take the grind for granted.
2 Likes
The forum could be closed and replaced with those words. I hope I am slowly moving towards that kind of enlightenment.
Take Care.
2 Likes
We are now May 2024 and the same applies
I believe that there is potential for revenue generation for the WWM in particular. Not what we have had in the past, but a more Open World/Arena style format. Tie some of the already existing maps together, at the borders. Put in Supply/fuel depots at certain spots for players to rearm their tanks and replace crew members. Airfields for planes to take off from, go do a sortie and return to for repair/rearm/refuel. And beachfronts to land tanks, open water & ports for ships to go in and out of . . a massive “campaign” of territorial acquisition. With a time limit of sorts, if players leave, others can take their place up to a point, then it becomes attrition . . . these sorts of aspects. 2 or 3 maps of this nature, available only on weekends and having a meager GE cost to enter and play, like 100 per round, 250 for a day/500 for the entire weekend kinda pricing . . . or something. As long as it was done properly, the players have fun, there is no reason that it could not go on as long as the game itself was active. . . . just some thoughts I have had ever since WWM came out in the first place. Seems like that is more what a lot of players wanted/expected from the beginning anyway. Once the initial work is done, very little “upkeep” would have to be done for it over time . . . as long as it worked properly. Add some FREE prizes as well as decent rewards for time played and you could have a “jackpot” . . seems like anyway. A lot more details besides what I have given, but that is the rough idea I have had . . .
1 Like
I remember, before the Maus & t-54’s were introduced, when tanks were primarily all WW II, the Jagdtiger was indeed, “King of the Jungle” and great fun. Not completely invincible, but close . . lol. To me that was the peak of tank game play in WT and I do miss those days sometimes. You make what I consider some good/valid points and I would like to see some WWM return, but not the iterations we have had in the past. Hopefully some better will come along . . . but it has to be a LOT of work for them . . no matter what it is, even if it doesn’t change that much.
2 Likes
The JT is my favourite vehicle, and probably the one I play best on the whole, purely because of how much time I’ve spent with it. I think it’s seriously underrated even in the current meta.
But yeah. It’s not invincible and it shouldn’t be, because that means other people around me playing other things can also have fun, which is the point after all.
Have a good one, mate!
2 Likes
Looks like Enlisted is the future, but I’ll keep playing War Thunder for as long as it’s around. SA server has been busy today!
I’m 3 years in and just getting started. I play 6 nations but barely have any rank 5 vehicles lol
1 Like