I personally want to at minimum actually test the stun mechanics (and would like to see crew “roles” expanded alongside adding more modules with more gameplay effects), but as a whole, this is a good post. :)
Two separate games can have terrible but different implementations of a similar mechanic. Not only does it not negate the terribleness, it doesn’t matter if its similar to WoT or not.
A bad mechanic, is a bad mechanic, we don’t need stuns in any capacity in this game.
1 Like
i would have voted yes to stun however i can see the visual and audio effects described causing issues,
the other 3 are a yes as long as the internal fires arent way to easy to start since they make repairs impossible. also if theyre easy to start make repairs pause when set on fire instead of restarting it
“When you throw a skinny metal dart through aluminum foil into air and do no damage it can be frustrating” And? How exactly is this a problem? If you miss, you miss. APFSDS is not APHE. Good aim is rewarded, bad aim is punished. If I shoot an MBT-70 in the empty hull, should that hurt the crew? If I shoot a kugelblitz in the hull and do no damage to the seperate turret compartment, is this a problem? Sure, having a stun mechanic would be “more realistic”, but if this game was trying to be realistic the M109, FV4005, sIG, and 2S3M would kill everything in one shot. Tanks do not survive 155mm HE. That is the end of my rant. Also concussion is bad.
2 Likes
Instead of having an immediate stun effect for the crew there should be a total level of cumulative stun and only after that has been past then there will be the actual stun. The level of cumulative stun taken will gradually decrease over time as long as the tank isn’t taking any new hits (like the proposed crew healing) and the total amount of “pre-stun” for each tank should be different depending tank classes. Heavy’s are meant to be tanky lights tank aren’t.
Think of this as like stamina for tanks but instead of pulling Gs it’s stun. If the stun mechanic is implemented like this it is basically the ground version of losing control due to an over G. (Might just be me but I don’t really see people raging over losing control from an over G and I don’t see how this would be any different)
I’m fine with vision being blurred but please make the camera shake toggleable.
I want there to be a stun mechanic, but I agree about the motion shake so it should be toggleable/optional
the proposed stun effect will be very bad at top tier since getting shot by something like a type 90 means instead of 4 seconds to get your gun on target and fire you effectively have 2 seconds putting japan players at an even bigger advantage
The purpose of stun is to create an effect for when crew members are injured but not killed, so some sort of cumulative effect doesn’t make sense; even at max vitality they simply can’t take enough hits for that to happen.
Unless a crew member is injured, stun doesn’t happen.
My take on ideas:
- its a huge amount of work and somehow I believe russian modules will be smaller and more difficult to damage (dont know where it is coming from…). I dont believe Gaijin will do it right.
maybe just add increased damage cubicle representing internal modules and troop transport area where the large, unused voids are in IFVs? - fire rate is already a winner in ground (and naval). crew stun will just add another layer of advantage. very subtle blur when hit would be ok, but rng aim drift is not.
- different fires… I honestly dont know. maybe yes, maybe no…
- crew healing - yes, but not on demand. make it available on cap and spawn. spawn area should have additional benefits for players, like the cap does - faster repairs, repairs without the kit, ammo replenishment…
the spawn point ammo replenishment would be huge for top tier spaa where going to a point to restock in anything thats not russian is basically certain death
This is an actually GOATed idea, most of these comments are just people talking about how bad stun would be even though only penetrating shots would stun and if it was implemented like stamina and G-force tolerance but for stunning instead with toggleable camera shake then it would be really immersive and realistic.
Why would stun be like g force tolerance?
Done the survey so you have my opinion but if you do implement this please do not make the tinnitus effect forced, the fact that you can turn it off in game currently is genuinely great, tinnitus is an absolute misery and the noise reminding me drives me up the wall.
Camera shake is pretty awful too if you get motion sickness and still infuriating even if not, I voted no for the stun effect but if it were implemented these two parts would make it infuriating, one thing not covered, if version 3 is implemented, will we get more FPE charges or perhaps a way to replenish them?
the fire goes out on its own like ammo detonation in blow out panels, problem is if you have to wait for it to go out to repair stuff then its gonna make autocannons alot more frustrating to face since theyll just set you on fire alot eaiser and deny repairs
i see people supporting the stun based on the fact only penetrating shots will cause it but seem to not be thinking about what thats gonna do when facing a 2S38, your small chance of surviving it is now even lower since you cant even aim at it with these changes
2 Likes
Maybe also add some kind of buff to some of the personell carrier vehicles that improves teammates healing of the crew. Kind of like a medic or evacuation vehicles.
Well we do not have any firm idea as to what will cause stun.
They explicitly mention hits to crewmembers, but also potentially may involve hits to modules or high caliber HE even tho not explicitly mentioned. We are voting on ideas and not implementations.
Anyways i can see the 20/30mm coaxial vehicles like the AMX-30 and AMX-32 getting a bump in BR with the potential tickle damage against crewmembers may have.
It is somewhat suprising a deeply frustrating and unfun mechanic is managing almost 50% saying yes.
i can see a big problem with all of these changes looking further into it, your proposing making it “easier to fight IFVs” by making it easier for any IFV with an autocannon to incapacitate you. the fact your focus is on making it easier to disable the M1 and leo 2 tanks first shows this. this isnt a nerf for IFVs these are all a massive buff for them
1 Like
The higher the rate of fire, the less stun is actually going to affect the outcome, at least when you get to things like autocannons; crew is squishy, and they’re basically just going to die anyway before it really matters.
It’s much more relevant for average-ish reload rates of single shot cannons, be that WWII or whatever else, as it gives them more time to complete their reload without retaliation.
On the defensive side, light/thin vehicles are (intentionally) in reverse hit hardest by this, as they’re the ones most likely to have crew damaged while not being killed, and also that hit not doing much else (“no armour best armour” sort of stuff").
Also, using a “top-tier flavour-of-the-month” example doesn’t tend to work well when considering gameplay effects across hundreds and hundreds of vehicles, despite that being so many peoples’ constant go-to.
1 Like
theyre focusiing on top teir they specifically mentioned M1 and Leo 2 series, the first part also makes it easier to incapacitate with an autocannon since theyre making it easier to disable turret drive