Grind for the concept 3

Game Discussion General Discussion
,
30

If I can build on other discussion points I’ve made talking to you. It seems to me you have problem with how people are playing the game. It also seems like you are pointing to modern tanks and modern ammunition to be symptoms of a problem that you would like fixed in the forms of a rebalance of vehicles.

I would strongly argue that it is not the job of the developer to manipulate the way gamers choose to play. I think it is a bad idea to try and manipulate the mechanical and technical elements of a game to force a gameplay or style of play agenda onto the players.

War Thunder is a vehicle simulator first and foremost, it is not a re-enactment simulator, it is not a scenario based game in the typical realistic battles. I think trying to dictate the gameplay to players will destroy the game not improve it.

My argument against players complaining about HEAT-FS is partly a skill issue argument but hear me out. I think the people complaining are either deliberately ignoring an important fact or deluding themselves.

The kind of player who complains about being a victim of HEAT-FS, is the kind of player that would otherwise get wiped out by the next most effective tank available to players

If it’s not a Jackson firing heat, it’ll be a hellcat, or jackson with APHE killing you. If it’s not the M51 Israeli Sherman, it’s going to be the 90mm Sherman or a T25 that is going to wipe you out.

Even if you guys got the changes you are lobbying for, the next best tank will step up to start the process over again. There is no scenario of a fair battle between tanks because a better player is going to be able to wreck you so long as they have access to shell that can pen you at 500m.

P.S.

I’ll point to a situation in real life for a comparison. In the Iran vs. Iraq air war, F-14s were destroying Iraqi veteren fighters with beyond line of sight air to air missiles. Some of the Iraqi losses were initially notched up to mechanical losses as in most situations the Iraqi fighters being shot down were not aware that they were under attack.

I believe the above is a great example of a situation where a technological advantage posed an insurmountable threat.

A tanker firing a fin stabilised chemical explosive in a static map. A map that is predictable, from less than 1km, out of a gun that still shoots conventional ammo is not an insurmountable threat. Neither is a light tank on wheels that can aggressively push to new and unfamiar ambush points an insurmountable threat.

Realistically, the only reason those positions are viable for tanks like the Concept 3, the hellcat, the puma, etc. Is that there are large numbers of players who simply refuse to adapt.

All it takes is for one or two people to be paying attention and a Concept 3 is useless.

2 Likes
31

No I have no desire to play another game only to make this one all that it should be.
If I wanted to play sim I would play sim and I have never played sim on here.

In fact I dont even expect change ,I am simply talking about opportunity lost and the baffling decision to purposely make an unrealistic game while spending so much time making the playing pieces so realistic.Its like spending hours hand carving amazing chess pieces only to play draughts with them.

The best way for me to explain myself is that a few years ago we had two main Soccer games. Pro Evolution and Fifa .Pro ev ,many said was a better football game once you got onto the pitch but Fifa had the licenses. It had the proper leagues ,it had the proper teams and the porper players and even the stadiums.So due to it’s " realism" it became the dominating game by a mile. That is pretty much my stand point. War Thunder at one point could have had what both those soccer teams had ,the game play and the realism but it elected to go with …well I don’t know what.Laziness? Silliness? Desperation bad direction? You tell me why we have such a jumbled mix of eras and inappropriate maps.

I took a liberty with the editing but this is so true and we are all caught napping killed and react with a tirade of expletives and angry fist shaking : )

I think the issue is that you cant blame a vehicle for being a time traveler if ti isn’t one.
I pdnt think you can feel a sense of injustice from being flanked by an M18 when you are in a Tiger 2 like you might if you are taken out by a IKV 103 with 400mm of pen or an artillery piece which ignores your armour.

See ,its not even about BR and its not even about the Concept 3, I think in a game that loves to celebrate detail all round the game play field should continue that detail on the game play field.

I think you are correct. My WTF moments are 3 years old and I am over it just the same as I am over CAS and all that is wrong with it.People do sleepwalk in this game or they habitually throw it on even if in reality they are not really in the mood.They do badly ,the game is shit and they may jump on to complain.
Similarly they are bright and alert,using the binoculars etc and getting top 3 etc and its the suddenly the best game in the world.Im aware of what you mean.

All I can say is up to 3BR I had no issue really.It was mostly WW2 vs WW2 on mostly WW2 maps and the game was never better.As I progressed it started to unravel for me a little and obviously not just me.I think this why so many go back down to that BR.
I think similarly there are those who are perplexed by Biplanes at top tier or the M22 at 10BR.

Its not even a great vehicle but dont think the 77mm was cruising the battle fields of WW2 at 50mph ,and yes on a map with metaled roads that abnormal speed will brake the game even in small way. You will encounter that at 3.3 BR remember,history or no history ,that is not fair balancing,not if we are talking good players.It gets worse as you progress up the tiers as you know.
How can anybody talk balance when a vehicle can play in 3 BR levels ,one below and one above? None of us can really. In short gap fillers spoiled the game not necessarily the Concept 3.

That is the point pretty much ,Im the kind of guy who spotted the T34 dressed as a Tiger in Saving private Ryan or the bad tactics in Fury.It’s pedantic but that is why I was drawn to this game and in the first 3 BRs the game held up to scrutiny.It only unraveled a little around 4BR and a lt around 6-7.Not a disaster but a real shame certainly.

They seem to be pretty much hated by British mains not just becuse they are SA but ill fitting and ugly and there when British alternative are available. Saracen would still be post war but a much better fit.I’m certainly not the only one with that view.

No I am long over that just as I am over being wiped by the Pe8,it was news 3 years ago not now .Its a fair assumption but not the right assumption.I agree there is too much raged induced belly aching on here : )

Like I said with the football game analogy.You could have Real Madrid from 1955 play Barcelona from 2012 for a bit of silly fun but would it appease the purists if they were in the same division for the main game? I suspect not.

32

Because it is tankery and not historical.

People build a map for the tanks to play on, the teams pick the tanks they want to use (within the limits), and the match starts.

It takes place in modern day. It is completely within the realm of realism for someone to build a tiger tank and have it fight a cold war tank.

You can say it is not historical, which i agree, but it is realistic for the modern day. We have the tech to build all of these vehicles.

2 Likes
33

Then why bother to recreate a vehicle " as it was " . What are you basing it on if not history? Old documentation. Do you see WW2 British tanks firing APHE? Do you see them with much needed roof mounted MGs? Why not? I would love to have them in our fantasy tank game.

34

Some people like historical material in ahistorical, yet realistic, settings.

2 Likes
35

Some of us just want the game maker to decide on fact or fantasy.This isn’t Fallout 4 Bro

36

It isnt black or white. You seem stuck in that mindset and are unable to see anything else

2 Likes
37

You just seem to want to kiss Gaijin ass and guard all that is wrong with the game.Sorry but you are sounding like Alvis Wisla’s alternative account here : ) .

38

Trust me, they do things i dont like. I have been complaining about that chaparral bug for months, for example.

Now that is just an awful thing to say :(

2 Likes
39

Ok Marki that was plain wrong and I apologise : ) That was low : )

1 Like
40

All good

That dude is crazy. I once agreed with him and he tried to argue.

1 Like
41

the baffling decision to purposely make an unrealistic game while spending so much time making the playing pieces so realistic.Its like spending hours hand carving amazing chess pieces only to play draughts with them.

This is where I disagree and I think you’re not understanding the scale of the issue. Realism in the way you are describing cannot exist because there are too many missing pieces to support it, time travellers are the least of the problem.

To use your chess analogy, War Thunder having tanks and aircraft can at best be likened to a game of chess where only the Knight and The Queen are on the battlefield.

(Knights being tanks, Queen being Aircraft and the pawns, bishop, rook, king representing the infantry, politics, fortifications and logistics that form the majority of war)

To my perspective, war thunder being a vehicle sim, is such a limited perspective of war as a whole, that attempting to create ‘realictic encounters’ between vehicles of specific era’s is completely redundant.

At all Battle rating regardless of era, the battle are highly mobile and energetic, the tanks are fighting like infantry or mecha (like mechwarrior or armored core for example). Even the famous blitzkrieg was a static battle compared to what is playing out in ground battles in war thunder. WW2 vehicles are driving around and shooting as if it were the battle of 73 easting.

The most crucial piece of any genuine tank battle is missing from war thunder and that is the fixed/towed anti tank gun. Without this there is no point even considering realism as an option.

In short, none of the tanks in game are behaving anything like tanks in reality in my perspective is not and never has been the capacity in game to accommodate realsitic vehicle behaviour. I think Gaijin has done well to understand this and to allow vehicles to be sorted by player competancy and not by performance or Era.

Tank combat is short, terrifying and frantic exchanges of fire where brave and professional tankers maintain their compsure under fire long enough to survive. In between these brief engagements are long pauses characterised by preparation, tension and boredom.

The battlefields in reality were rarely what could be considered a fair or even match.

42

is it ? If it is then having no game is a missed opportunity. I might agree that the vehicle reproduction is impressive and its a shame the game itself trails so far behind ,true.

You cant say there is no problem then go on to give a list of problems like its an answer to the problem : ) You are agreeing if you do that not disagreeing.

What we need is a game where the on field play mirrors the quality of effort put into the individual vehicles.

Like I said chess pieces on a draughts board.

43

You cant say there is no problem then go on to give a list of problems like its an answer to the problem : ) You are agreeing if you do that not disagreeing.

I’m arguing that you stop saying realism.

My summary of your complaints is as such.

“I have personal expectations, my expectations are that world war 2 vehicles should fight world war 2 vehicles. I think if my expectations were met, the game experience would be improved for everyone”

Realism isn’t a factor, don’t invoke in support of your arguments is all I’m saying, stop abusing the word.

War thunder aims to produce accurate facsimilies of vehicles, it does not aim to reproduce the circumstances or environments in which they fought.

I think war thunder is a better game for allowing accurate representations of vehicles to fight each other. We already know the outcomes of WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Yom Kippur, Desert Storm. We already know what happened when Shermans fought Panzer IVs, Panthers and Tigers.

The beauty of war thunder is that it allows us to experience all of the battles that weren’t in history. Theoretical fights, between vehicles that were produced but never fired shots in anger.

I feel like what you are describing as an issue and trying to fix, would impose unnecessary and unhelpful restrictions on peoples ability to express themselves through gameplay.

I think it’s really interesting to discover a 1980s prototype scout car was a hunk of shit that’s only fit to fight tanks produced 40 years before that. I think it’s interesting to see how titans of armour and firepower are undone my light and agile vehicles, regardless of when they are built. I think it interesting that when used skillfully vehicles from ww2 pose a serious threat to cold war vehicles.

3 Likes
44

Im saying ,Dont spend so long bothering to get vehicles right when there is no reason for it.
Spend the time on making the game play better.Give us better maps ,give us a better aerial tasks ,don’t overburden us with unnecessary detail that is of no value.
Don’t even have an interest in the true thickness of a tanks armour if you are not going to use it in a way that in even relevant.

Drop the pretense of realism when there is none as its only limiting the game anyway in so many ways.
If balance is the king then forget about what nation had what in reality. Don’t bring people into the game with promises of realism only for them to find none.

That is what I am saying pure and simple so you dont have to guess what I am saying.

No the beauty of War Thunder is that its fun to shoot things and watch them go bang.
There are no other elements to the game that is my point entirely.Its about who makes the most things go bang and that is it. The rest of the forum is about all the things that should be in the game and are not.

You support a reasonable version game and I yearn for a brilliant one,that is all.
Gaijin dont need to change much thoguh if they are making the money and I believe they are. Second rate filler is offered and by the likes of you accepted so why strive for anything better?

Incidentally I speak for myself here but I find also that I represent a movement of people who think the same as I do and in rather large numbers it seems.

Gaijin didn’t have to run a forum for our opinions but it has done so here mine are.

45

Stop pretending to be so noble, I’m supportimg the merits of the game as it presents itself. You are arguing for your selfish desires and claiming they constitute a better gameplay experience.

2 Likes
46

I’m not pretending

You are supporting the newer bad direction the game is taking.

No because I invented nothing,I am simply supporting a movement that existed with this game a while before I joined.
You are supporting immaturity within the game and trying to appear clever by doing so but there is nothing clever about lazily filling space in a line up with any old rubbish.

47

I will forever be confused by this statement.

Many people want to play realistic tanks but dont want to play historical mm.

For years, there were two choices
A: play a game with unrealistic tanks but more balanced gameplay
B: play a game with realistic tanks but more unbalanced gameplay

Yes, war thunder is far from historical in its mm. I doubt anyone would disagree with that.

3 Likes
48

Soooooo some people want the Concept 3 to fight the 1980s Abrams M1 just because it was made in the late 1970s? Nah, Concept 3 using WW2 tech. Not 1980s tech…Tank’s Br are set by performance in game, not on their year date.

4 Likes
49

Like who? All I see on here is people complaining about BR and the uptier and imbalance.Facing a tank that has night vision and 400mm of pen when all they have no NV and 200mm or being in a WW2 prop facing a Mig 15.

I can understand the loss of immersion but why celebrate it? Even odbawls the
Youtube hero had to laugh when they put the 80s time traveler into a WW2 game and face it off against Panzer 4s.

How many posts on this forum or the old one do you see making the same complaints about era or some form of issue related to it ?

Why are you telling me this like its a good thing ? I know that and tha is the complaint with the game. I saw WoT had old tanks facing new and I gave it a wide berth early on.I never saw any advert with WT where it showed badly mixed eras and its not really until 4BR that it creeps in in one or two places and by that time you are already well into it.

Its just a general criticism that the vehicle making is good but the game play and maps the vehicles are pretty poor.Maybe while Gaijin has a legion of fans like you to accept that and defend it for them it will never change in any way.