Ground SB has to be more immersive

Good lord you do have the most wild takes, dont you?

Based on what I observe of human nature and a big dose of reality.

I do and it happend a few days ago!

I was stuck in river and could not get out, sliding slowly back each time i wanted to drive foward. Engine each time blacking out becasue its submerged. Belive it or not. A Player on big ass map did come and get me out!!! he left his sniping postion to pull my sorry but out of the drain!

Dont talk bad about WT Sim players, 90% have comon sense.

That’s a map bug that deserves to be reported.

Again repairs are not removed, you just cant instant repair in open field. The point is to encourage tactical play and team play. You have to be pulled back in to your spawn area to comence repairs. If you engine or rtacks are out. If you can do it by your self even better. This way you would nto have to over kill some hardy sniper guy on hill and would get rid of him even if he is in a hull down postion. He as to drive back and repair or be usless.

If your spawn is overrun you dont need to out right kill enemys tanks, just make them combat inffeicent.
Spawn camping would be combatet. People that are in there own spawn can repair while the other guys would have to craoss the whole map.

I dont know where you get the no repairs at part from?

Nope i don’t expect the general WT Community to do this. I expect the sim Community to do it though.

Those are two different audiences.

Which is kinda my point from the beginning.

It works fine for Air SB. I don’t see how it is supposed to be such a problem for ground SB.

Why does everyone think SB should be aimed at the se audience that plays AB or RB? This isn’t the case for air battles, why should it be for ground?

4 Likes

I agree with you, 100%. But another factor is, when the main two alternatives of the game are “either you rush or you end up with 0 points” and “5 minutes into the match, your whole team has vanished” it is hard to get someone to help you. If the games were longer and on bigger maps, surely people would need to cooperate more and they would actively help others.

It’s a shame the game has some great mechanics that never get used because the playstile has turned into a MW2 private lobby free-for-all on Rust.

1 Like

I do not necessarily agree with the paywall, although it would surely remove a good 60% of the trash.

Hey, let’s face it, the reason why sim mode is completely abandoned is because the skilled players that prefer realism and understand war mechanics are less prone to throwing 60 bucks at gaijin in exchange for an overpowered vehicle to solve their lack of skills.

Sim mode is more serious + takes more skill = people that spends money won’t play there because not even the most OP of the vehicles saves them from doing a complete ridiculous.

Now that I said this, I feel way better, I’m a new person LOL. The amount of times I get shot down on missile thunder on air RB while when you get into sim battles the same players just fly in a straight line clueless that you are about to rip their plane apart from behind.
It’s a free to play game, I get it, they have to make money somehow… but that’s the main problem of the game, everything is precisely calculated for you to “have fun but not too much”, you always have to feel like you are in a slight disadvantage. So to sum things up, sim battles are and will be abandoned, no changes will be made. I hope Gaijin proves me wrong, but I HIGHLY doubt it.

3 Likes

And its also that the majority of casual players, lets be real, give zero shits about sim

1 Like

And this is relevant why?

Since when do casuals play Simulations?
They aren’t the target audience, so who cares what they think. You said it your self, they don’t care about sim. Why should sim cater to these people?

By that logic flight sims need mouse aim and 3rd person view.

Dumbing everything down to the lowest common denominator is a terrible idea.

2 Likes

It only proves the point that ground sim needs changes. These changes should be targeted towards people who aren’t playing this game, because this game has pretty much only casual players. People who would be interested in ground sim aren’t playing this game, because it doesn’t offer anything for them.

There isn’t a single tank game on the market, that is very realistic and has multiplayer. It’s a great opportunity to fill this niche and gain a new community.

What needs to be understand is that WT is Vehicle collection game, where you can play team death match in order to unlock new vehicles. And we have been doing this for 10 years while thousand vehicles were added but we are still playing the same “minigame”.

What sim fans requires is simulation of something what at least resembles a real combat, but what WT do ? Spawn you form a thin air 1000m away from enemy to combat in environment which does not exist irl and all you can do is a shoot enemy vehicle or drive to circle.

So what WT sim needs is foremost larger maps where you can do a bit more, like recon, clearing minefields, building bridges, transporting infantry etc.

Why GJ did not implement something like the battlefield system, is beyond me.

1 Like

No they don’t.

Almost no simnoffers that. DCS missions don’t resemble real combat either. They resemble the vehicles though. That is the point of a flught sim to emulate flight itself, not the missions that are flown. Because if that is the requirement even DCS would fail.

Tank sim needs to simulate the vehicles first and foremost.

That is what the mission packs and campaings are for. And they reasembles actual air campains quite well, even old Falcon 4.0 did.

It would be like building perfect Formula 1 sim but all you can do is drive around Wallmart parking lot, entirely pointless.

Only falcon 4.0 did.

DCS is no where near falcon 4.0 in that regard.

No it wouldn’t be pointless. By Definition it is a simulation of how a formula 1 car drives in a parking lot. It would simulate that perfectly.

The idea that sims need to simulate historical events is dumb. Most sims are created specifically for hypotheticals. It’s actually the original point of having a sim… For situations and creations without (!) a precedent.

And it would be entertaining for like 5 minutes.

Idea is realistic combat scenarios. Fighting pitchfork battles when enemy suddenly appers 1000m from you with zero intel or preparation is not realistic at all. its like those guys dropping bowling balls from a tower on a car. Perfectly valid experiment but pointless.

SIM needs to offer more then gocarts around parking lot. So no, perfectly simulating just vehicles won’t make a good sim, not even close.

1 Like

Sure, but that wasn’t the point. I was talking what sb needs for being a sim, and to atteact a sim audience.

That is sim mechanics, not Mission design. You can have the most accurate f1 racetracks, but if the cars drive like in mario kart, you won’t get a sim audience.

Maybe a arcade racer audience but no sim audience.

And don’t kid yourself, current tank gameplay is to proper sim tanks what mario kart is to iRacing.

Bjt it would at least make a sim. While mission design will not. Then you have an immersive arcade game… But not a sim.

1 Like

SIM audience is generally quite small worldwide and WT will never offer better vehicle simulation then other specialised simulators. So why would any sim enthusiast want to join WT ? Not mentioning guge grind wall which can by to some degree bypassed by purchasing super expensive premium which offers very little compare to simmilary priced DCS module.
So no WT won’t be able to attract hardcore simmers any time soon and if it does it won’t be a large crowd.

What can SIM do is to offer iteresting gameplay to attract RB players who already have all necessary vehicles and are looking for some greater challange, realism or are sick of RB due to various reasons like cold war vehicle circling their WW2 tank.

But again any improvement to vehicle simulation would be in vain if the combat envrinment and “mission” objectives does not improve as well.

SIM which noone would play.

1 Like

Because most pnly need a basic sim, after that the game aspect becomes impirtant. This is why falcon 4.0 is still a thing becauce of the excellent campaign. It is also why wt air sim is one of the kost popular combat fight sims.

But first you need the sim basics down. Wt ground doesn’t have that

Noone said hardoce. Basic simmers are a larger demographic than hardcore simmers. There are more people playing wt sim than dcs multiplayer. Just check the servers.

So you are putting words in my mouth. Noone said hardcore. I said basics.

This is BS. Few people play air sim that came from RB. There is little to no overlap.

And there doesn’t need to. Ground sim needs to be like air sim.

Sure but a sim. The Definition odlf a sim doesn’t require it to be a game. So that is irrelevant to how good a sim is. What you wnat to improve is the fame not the sim. I want both but i wnat to start with the sim, so we get the correct audience first. Otherwise we build missions for the wrong demographic. A mission design build for shooter player which needs to be scrapped after the sim audience comes in. That’s stupid. You are puting the cart in front of the horse.

But let’s be honest that’s not your goal. You are not interested in improving the gameplay after the mission design is done. You want just a different pew pew shooter

1 Like

I agree with both of you and I think there is a misunderstanding between you. Both vehicles and missions need to be realistic, but on a basic level.

Vehicles should be more realistic, but not to a point where you need to click buttons with a mouse, like in DCS.

Missions should be more realistic, but not to a point where you need a squad leader, like in Squad, Squad 44 or Hell Let Loose.