Ground SB has to be more immersive

I do.

They are definately much closer together than Air AB and RB.

And compared to Air the differences between GSB and GRB are a joke.

@_ShadowFang Oh oh there are really people thinking that way huh what a surprise.

@_ShadowFang Oh so Im the one trolling right?

How is that surprising?

The differences really are marginal in terms of gameplay in the strict sense, i know there are differences in the periphery. Hell even the missions are shared.

You think that GRB and GAB are more distinct from eachother than the equivalent Air modes?

I somewhat don’t agree with his viewpoint, if that’s what you’re asking. I still stand behind the observation of Ground AB and Ground RB are significantly different. If you want justification you can read in the spoiler. I will also add similarities to Air RB where appropriate.


-Tanks have reduced horsepower (Reduced Aircraft Thrust)
-Tanks have reduced turret rotation (Aircraf turn rate reduced)
-Visual aid for shell drop removed (Lead indicator removed for Aircraft)
-Removed player markers (ARB no change)
-Tanks Spawn points replace spawn limit (Aircraft has 1 spawn only)
-Personal aircraft can be used for SP, but tank must be destroyed to use them.
-Artillery usage is now time based, not kill based.

Where I can agree that ground changes aren’t as “significant” is how aircraft can destroy themselves from AB to RB. They can overheat their engines (tank’s loss of a radiator somewhat copies this) and completely break off their own wings and control surfaces through user negligence, a trait not found at all with tanks. I don’t agree with him about the differences for GAB and GRB being mostly peripheral. The changes are quite similar to aircraft for these modes. Otherwise, I do agree with him that aircraft suffer more consequences with realism settings, tanks feel the same outside of what I had listed.

To add to this: you have also mentioned there is a marginal difference, but through all three modes. Controlling the tank is the same through all modes, but gameplay from AB to RB is distinctly different compared to RB to SB. Compared with air, control and overall gameplay changes at every difficulty setting.

So, again, tank SB is not unique enough to tank RB for me to move over, considering all the problems. But I have focused too much on dumb semantics with an opinion that doesn’t matter anyway. This topic is about immersion, and GSB lacks it. Tanks need to start throwing their tracks during hard turns and extreme terrain, guns should only be fired in gunner view, optics should be a weakness, overrevved engines should cause breakdowns or fires. Simple stuff to make it distinctive from RB in terms of difficulty. The GSB system as a whole needs to be restructured, as it is too restrictive with how it is currently. Either that, or change it to a historical event mode that excludes personal vehicles.

1 Like

The aircraft changes arre peripheral to gameplay as well.

Notice that i said it’s in the periphery of gameplay, not that they aren’t significant at all.

For example, air rb has a completely different mission structure as air ab, whole the Mission structure of ground ab and rb is mostly the same. However, os mission structure gameplay? Nope, so that cant even be counted as in the periphery of gameplay at all. It has nothing to do with gameplay.

Gameplay is defined as anything the player is directly interacting with. The map is something you indirectly interact with, through the vehicle. So only vehicle aspects should be considered gameplay if you apply the meaning strictly as you should.

So where are the big gameplay differences? How do you interact with the tank differently in AB than you would in RB? The tank reacts in the same manner in AB as in RB. Slightly faster in AB sure but the behaviour is the same.

Tank behavior is essentially the same, absolutely agree. The biggest difference is the lack of player markers, as it reduces the situational awareness of the player vs enemies. Now it requires them to find targets by eyesight only excluding the times the targets are shot or spotted. This can allow for aggressive flanks, as map bushes can now be used as adequate concealment to move.

To directly answer your question, tanks don’t have any significant differences when played as you said, the difficulty mode itself gives more options for tanks to be effective. At least, from my perspective of it.

Sure, but you misread my post.

I said there are almost no differences in gameplay. Defined as how the player directly interacts with the game. Markers aren’t gameplay, they are UI.


Here are a few suggestions to make SB more realistic (I hope these will be passed on to Gaijin for development)

1- If possible enable 1st person view from the machine gunner and driver and commander. Just like a real tank. This would be really immersive. And also being able to see 360 degrees inside the tank.

2- Ability to view a real tactical map instead of the standard map of War Thunder.

3- AI flak → this would add to the immersion. Of course these would not be dead effective, but contribute to the ambiance.


Ground SIM is dead to me because of Copy paste being present.Having no markers is fine but throwing in the same tanks in on both sides will lead to plenty of teamkilling and who needs that in a game that can ban you and fine you for tesm killing.No thanks.



  1. yes sim tanks for sim. I see it the same way. The problem is that there are so many tanks in WT and it would be a lot of work. but it would be possible. and in other games there are mod builders who can also build incredibly good stuff. it would certainly be possible and would totally upgrade the sim tanks.

  2. yes, just like in DCS, IL2 and Arma.