From what im hearing, US dds and the skr7 are going to having a field day soon.
1 Like
With new system Scharnhorst will going to sunk Yamato with ease, you just have to break two unarmored part will fast reload! Wait, not only Yamato, entire game is going to be sunk by Scharnhorst!
Please don’t make this kind of system. This is just hull break Mk.2
30 Likes
I agree, it is really poorly implemented currently, especially for small boats
1 Like
Speak of dying with 70% crew, I think the new mechanic practically leads to the same result as what we used to have in the past, where the majority of crew are sitting at the upper deck so that capital ships can be sunk by fast firing guns hitting the unarmed part repeatedly. As the much welcomed change where more crew were relocated into armour citadel took place, this was resolved. But once again the new introduced mechanic brings us back to the very same (probably even worse) style of gameplay, so I don’t understand why bother relocated the crew in the first place? This adds up more complexity to the game coding but literally do exactly the same as the much simpler system implemented 4 or 5 years ago, and both were unwelcome by players.
4 Likes
It’s not really realistic either. If a compartment in real life had so much damage it would simply be sealed off
7 Likes
I have added a poll to vote your opinion on this mechanic.
3 Likes
Voted
New mechanics are NOT realistic. Despite it may give some chances for cruisers to kill a battleship, the cost are too heavy.
6 Likes
Gaijin should balance big and small ships by gamemode, at least in RB, but not by this silly mechanic that turns the game more and more arcadey.
If Gaijin plans to make WWI battleships rank 1 and have WWII destroyers fight WWII battleships, this is not the way. I would rather give an extra respawn to uptiered ships for free…
4 Likes
Voted, I like the idea of a more consistent way to defeat the heavily armoured ships (like scharnhorst) and I dislike the ability to infinitely repair major battle damage but this implementation is so unrealistic it anhililates war thunders core tenants of being realistic.
4 Likes
I really liked the previous “unrepairable breach” mechanic instead. Real holes in the ship being computed at real time caused by torpedoes, bombs, and underwater AP shell hits. It’s realistic and real-time. Ship even sinks faster if you are going full steam ahead with a hole.
The new mechanic is horrible. All ships now have 8 compartments and turning 2 of the 6 middle ones black = insta death within 30s. Like what? I mean this is better than what we had in Beta where there are only 3 compartments, but 8 is still too little, especially for large ships. And the compartments are only lengthwise, there’s no division from port to starboard (because IRL one of the main flooding mechanism is for ships to capsize). I think this mechanic could work but it would require a complete overhaul and significantly much more refinement than just 8 simple compartments.
I’ve also tried out ways to black out the compartments - for destroyers and some CL all you need is a sufficient amount of HE, and two compartments would be blacked out in no time. This will make TTK in 5.0 DD games even shorter than before and it’s no fun, effectively turning them into top tier coastal where the armament far outmatches the armor. For larger ships (BBs) it’s somewhat reasonable, as HE could not deal any hull damage and it requires AP or high caliber bombs/torpedoes to deal compartment damage, but once again the idea of bombarding compartments above the waterline would cause it to sink because the entire segment is “black” is absurd.
I think it should either be reverted, or significantly revamped. Add port/starboard compartments so ships can capsize again. Differentiate between compartments above and below the waterline so shooting at the superstructure won’t cause a ship to sink. And finally, don’t make 2 (or any for that matter) black compartments insta-kill, instead make each blacked out compartment worth a certain % of buoyancy. Say you hit a central, large compartment near the boiler room, that would rob you 40% buoyancy, whereas if you have a small stern compartment flooded it’d be 5%.
Just my two cents from someone who preordered Pr.1124 MLRS eight years ago.
8 Likes
The development team needs to stop implementing intelligence-insulting methods to nerf dominant warships like the Scharnhorst, as this only damages the game’s ecosystem. The current naval combat mechanics suffer from “meta shifts with every update” syndrome - the core reason for player attrition. Each mechanical overhaul forces casual naval players to relearn fundamentals, while veterans master new systems during test server phases and dominate on live servers, inevitably driving newcomers away. It’s absurd that by 2025, the devs still haven’t recognized this recurring pattern spanning multiple updates.
Regarding Scharnhorst balancing, the solution lies in overhauling naval map design and victory conditions rather than tampering with vehicle mechanics. Historically, the Scharnhorst’s 283mm main guns were outranged by contemporary battleships, yet in War Thunder’s top-tier matches, spawn points are consistently positioned within its optimal engagement range - a fundamental design flaw that should have been addressed during naval mode’s initial development. And the cursed victory conditions - particularly these endless capture point objectives - mechanically funnel ships into concentrated zones, creating scenarios completely divorced from historical naval engagements. This forces players into a lose-lose dilemma: either sail straight into Scharnhorst’s kill zone to contest these asinine objectives, or be branded a deserter by the game’s flawed victory system. It’s precisely this design that amplifies the Scharnhorst’s artificial dominance while punishing players attempting to employ historical naval tactics. Despite minor map tweaks over the years, the core issue remains: players routinely face Scharnhorsts at 10km engagements from match start. The current poll results conclusively prove this isn’t a ship balance issue, but a systemic failure of map layouts and objective design.
18 Likes
I don’t understand why Naval gameplay needs to be nerfed when it’s already a difficult and unfinished mode.
Kills and kill assists are credited arbitrarily—you shoot at a ship for 5–6 minutes, single-handedly take out 70% of the crew, and then one shot from a teammate comes in, and at best you get an assist with 10 RP. The standard outcome is nothing.
Why is the hull being nerfed for all ships, which only buffs spam ships even more? Mid-tier cruisers and weaker battleships will become unplayable since the current mode already nerfs them enough.
This change must be reversed, and the real Naval issue needs to be addressed—reworking and fairly balancing kills and kill assists.
Additionally, bots should have ghosting mechanics for the player so they don’t ram, block, push you into torpedoes, or block your path.
These two issues should be the main focus - not the hull nerf
13 Likes
I feel like I’d just be echoing what many have said here, so I’ve issued out my hearts to people and made my poll choice. I’m glad to at least see a poll on one of the bad naval changes gaijin seems to want to force on us, but I do need to request a similar thread and poll be made for the aiming system for arcade. It is, as I’ve brought up repeatedly in the changelog thread to much support but zero comment from the devs, an awful change that is only going to break and dumb down NAB even more than the last couple updates with rangefinding speed changes has done. Make the poll and let the community again answer with a resounding no.
Listen to your naval community. It is small but it is here and cares. All you’re doing by ignoring the naval community is killing what should be a solid part of your game.
7 Likes
They should make the “severe damage” mechanics for naval.
The thing you describe is so frustrating
13 Likes
It’s still something to get used to, but after some testing on the dev server I do have some thoughts.
First of all, two compartments are way too few. A suggestion I have is that it should require the majority of compartments to be knocked out. blue water ships have 6-7 segments (excluding the bow and stern which do not count towards this mechanic. Requiring only 2 of these to be knocked out is inadequate. I’ve not yet had the opportunity to really try out how much damage a compartment can take in a “live match” so I’m not sure if this is adequate or not.
The replacement of “perma flooding” but the addition of hydrostatic shock is something I need to look into more too, but I can already tell that some torpedoes (like the long lance) will be really lethal with the current two segment requirement.
One of my main concerns of this system is that it’ll become the new “optimal” way to sink a ship, drastically changing the meta and confusing people as to what shell will be best used, especially with the new HE pen. So for me this system ideally should offer a way for suboptimal ships to still form a threat to targets they previously couldn’t damage due to lack of pen or the way crews are spread over a ship. Which in its current state, this mechanic is not that.
I’m not sure if this is the appropriate thread for feedback on the new coastal hullbreak mechanic, so I won’t comment on that.
9 Likes
I really don’t understand what the reason for adding this mechanic in the first place was
4 Likes
Sharnhost being unkillable, probably
But as with every mechanic designed around one single vehicle being broken OP, it doesn’t shift the meta because it makes every ship worse, not just the Sharnhorst
But hey, at least Sharnhorst players won’t have a 30:1 k/d anymore !
1 Like
I think its meant to simulate permamnent waterline damage and the flooding that would cause buts its wierdly done.
But I do wonder if the intentions of this are more for future weapon systems like ASMs rather than Battleshp vs Battleship combat
1 Like
I feel like AShM would create much bigger holes than 20mm/400mm cannons