-They replenish their crew in the combat zone instead of back at their base/spawn (which at least would be somewhat acceptable).
Replenishing at caps is fine, even in RB. Crew replenishment for AB is also fine, I dont mind it.
-they have spare engines, gin barrels, gun breaches just lying around in the tank and can repair them in seconds without having to return to a base.
No one wants 10m+ repair times, nor being stuck and completely unable to move. Repairs atm are fine, they even need the time to repair reduced.
-Now they get a hospital as well.
On caps in RB and such its fine, and it should follow crew replenishment in AB in being able to be done off-cap.
And mind you these things are true in a mode that is supposed to be a simulation. With the shooter modes you can at least argue that it’s just a shooter.
SB idfk about, and I can agree on this being more limited there, but not in RB/AB.
Sure, the criticism and pessimism is valid, though if it is the only focus when considering these ideas it is counterproductive. I’m only voting on these suggestions on whether I think they are good or bad by themselves, not trying to interpret how Gaijin will implement them outside of the information they provided thus far.
Fair enough and to each their own. I voted against all of them because I don’t trust Gaijin to implement them correctly or fairly. And they all look like a net negative to the experience. Others are welcome to agree or disagree with that. More information would have been great and useful but we didn’t get it.
so i was discussing this here yesterday, and after having time to think it over, i see why it could be good and bad. i think we would need to see it introduced in a dev server or in a gamemode that has no effect except to test things. but i agree that gaijin really dropped the ball on this. not enough info and caused a lot fights to break out
To me, adding more modules as well as more features to “catch fire” are bad ideas in that they would be: very labor intensive and the chances that they will cause even more problems than they might solve seems extremely likely. All in all, just more trouble than they would ever be worth. Granted, more “realistic” features in general would seem to be a good thing, but when they come at the cost of good, fair & balanced game play . . I vote a hard pass on them.
I voted for the stun feature and my reasoning is that, the single most annoying/rage inducing aspect of playing tanks has to be when you get the drop on a guy, fire first only to have them immediately turn and shoot you(the majority of the time a OHK as well) it not only makes little to no sense, it just drives you crazy and is infuriating. I do not particularly like the idea of the “stun mechanic” as listed. Again, while less work than the other two options, adding a “shake” turret/gun movement and other sorts of “distractions” that might be associated with taking a hit is just adding more things that are not going to be that helpful. I would suggest just a simple “micro freeze” similar to a little lag spike or something. And 1.5 seconds is entirely too short for a stun effect . . minimum 3 - 5 seconds, maybe 6 - 8 for a more damaging hit. Heck, even repairing a plane in Air AB on a Domination airfield . . . the timer runs down to zero, you are repaired, and you have to wait 3 - 4 seconds for it to fade to black and then come back to you being on the runway ready to take off . . I cannot count the number of times I have been killed during this “transition”. So, 1.5 seconds is entirely too short. I am pretty sure actual tank crews would normally have to “take a beat” after getting slammed by anything over 40 - 50mm’s, regardless of actual damage. I did not play enough WoT’s to have any idea how they implemented their “stun effect”(it’s sad to see how many are writing off this option because of how it works in another game . . . makes no sense), but I think, if done properly, this is by far the easiest to put in the game and would be the best for all players concerned . . . but that’s just me.
Crew healing, also sounds like a good thing, but again . . totally depends on how it is implemented into the game.
Advocating for the very thing people didn’t like about this proposal. A three to eight second micro freeze on doing what? Shooting back? Starting a repair? That sounds just like the WoT method a lot of people are quite against.
And apologies, but it’s a bit weird you said you voted in favor of a stun mechanic but don’t like what Gaijin proposed?
“Well, I voted in favor of having you cook that particular dish by the means you listed. However, I don’t actually like how you described how you are going to cook it and that I voted for”. See how that hits the ears? That seems like the reverse uno to what Spanish Avenger has been upset about. You read it, voted in favor of it, but want something not offered and that you don’t like.
I can’t handle with posts about stun mechanics again, Then i won’t ever dare if people look at people in military training to see why it is so basic readjustment from not having ability to read like “MuH BaSiC” trolls. Even if i don’t agree because stun mechanics is what being stunned by 1 second and not 10 seconds from wot game. Please don’t compare Wot to WT before you say in devblog 🤦♂️
I like the idea, just not how they are proposing to implement it. The whole thing boils down to shooting an enemy first and getting nothing to show for it, except a reload time and immediate OHK in return. It’s not very “realistic” in current form and does nothing to improve game play. And yes, I still voted for it, because the other two options, seem to me, to be riddled with adding more problems to the current state of things and in all likelihood . . won’t perform in a manner that will be acceptable to most players. Of course, without seeing how any of these options “might” work, it’s all speculation on our part.
I’m making my decision partially off of how annoying and cancerous the addition of stuns (for artillery) was in world of tanks. This is also gonna be a massive buff for certain autocannon vehicles that will be able to apply those effects permanently (until you die), vehicles that 100% do NOT need this kind of buffs.
Yes, I get that it’s not realistic for my crew to not be affected after watching their buddies die, but I’ve never seen a tank barrel or engine get replaced in 30s while under enemy fire either. We make plenty of tradeoffs for better gameplay and a more enjoyable experience.
I also know it won’t be like WoT’s system; but the addition of anything that makes it harder to shoot back after getting hit is a major no-no. I don’t want anything even close to that.
This will also make it much harder on newer players, who might only spot the enemy tank after getting hit. Being stunned on top of everything else will inevitably increase the skill wall they need to pass.
I get that, but at the same time if I can get a new crewmember I should be able to heal an injured crewmember. Having an injured gunner or driver is one of the WORST experiences ever.
I want the 1st option with detail modules, roll em in slow but sure and maybe the 3rd option too with fire in the compartment, but would like to see it in the test server with extensive evaluation.
DO NOT! I repeat PLEASE DO NOT! bring stun mechanics in War Thunder, I know stun/ear ringing can happen IRL when a tank is hit with a giant HE shot or just metal clanging another supersonic metal but NO… NO NO NO NO.
I don’t want tinnitus in my ear and I don’t want unnecessary shaking from auto-cannons constantly clanging me and thus, I have to constantly adjust aim.
Lastly, the regenerate HP for crew. I feel this is Call of Duty or something instead, just add the option that you can regenerate crew or perhaps just replace the entire crew an indefinite number of times when you enter the capture point.
Furthermore, I would like to see an option that you can J-out of the tank without counting as dying, when you enter a capture point. Kindly consider this point and bring back changing aircraft loadout in ground RB when we land and J-out.