yes yes exactly. there is also enough space…
but…
Almost forgot about that… realistic sounds, graphics… Graphics are really funny to talk and discuss about in War Thunder. Bc there is the option for PC Players to use Ultra low Quality Mode, so you can play on a pregnancy test like Doom. In competetive games the people will always try different ways how they can beat you. In WT its the graphics were you can delete a good amount of bushes and trees so you see enemys alot faster then they will scout you.
And sound would be great, but even Turn10 Studios which have millions about millions of $ to spend in Development and even they dont get it right with realistic CAR engines and mufflers.
EDIT: Bc how we humans encounter sound is from person to person different. And it also depends on your hardware. If you have quality Soundcards in your PC and really bada$$ headphones then you will hear Sounds more brutaly then a Xbox Series X player with only a good pair of headphones.
Conversely, I avoid GSB for a multitude of reasons as follows;
-Free second spawn of vehicles was removed.
-LRF elevation used to be a Sim only function until it was added to RB, removing the uniqueness.
-Queue times outside of peak hours (the time I return home) can be terrible, even with Join active battles on.
-General feel of SB is slightly slower than RB, but otherwise everything else is near the same.
-Vehicle rotations incentivize using the best vehicle at all times.
-Vehicle rotations are too restrictive, nations with lacking support vehicles sometimes cannot fill gaps.
-Sometimes have an Allied vs Allied vehicle, hurting the immersion of the mode.
-Difficult to identify allies using the in-game function, slightly remedied by using an MG (lol)
Sim GB, for me, just isn’t enticing enough to move over. The novelty wears off extremely quick and I find myself returning to RB because it’s less of a headache.
Do you mean GSB ? Bc there are Spawnpoints of 1000 and a heavy costs you 450, lights, mediums/mbt, TDs cost you 300 and Spaa costs you 250 or 150 i guess. (dont play a lot of spaa).
Whats LRF Elevation ?
Thats the topic we argue about all the time in the past 40 posts.
Also talking about that in the last posts. How to improve GSB to elevate it from GRB.
Sadly the downside of rotation lists.
yup.
Dont think so, in reality there are fighting rn T72 vs T72 UA vs RUS. So it was in WW2 too. They were captured vehicles and they also used it.
I mean there is the “follow me” button for so you can mark your position for allies. But yes here gaijin also can improve to make it a bit smoother to chat with your allies.
And the main part is everybody should play what they want and have fun.
What do you want to improve the sim mode?
I don’t see anything wrong with sim mode
In GSB, you used to be able to respawn a vehicle (not including heavies) without using a backup. This was eventually removed.
I’m suffering severe mental block, but it’s when the gun automatically sights itself to the range indicated on the laser rangefinder. It used to be SB exclusive.
Which in itself is fine, but I mean situations like Italian M18 vs US M18 kinds of situations. I wasn’t specific with it, my b.
I agree with this, I just wanted to share my input about why I don’t find it appealing. It is an opinion after all.
that’s the worst feedback we can give the snail. the developers say okay. the sim mode then stagnates completely. the remaining players leave sim bit by bit. and in the end it’s all over. that’s why it’s important to keep actively giving the snail feedback. and to keep demanding the things that sim players have been demanding for the last 8 years
I still don’t see the problem sim battles is basically hell on earth and will be impossible for a lot of people to do and since skill levels are just way to high it pushes people away in sim battles I actually suggest match making where it compares your KD and hooks you up with the right people to fight but the match making has to always go off based of play stats not after a game but all time stats I’m going way off topic am I
WT GF SB battle has already too small playerbase to provide any changes that would make more players leave this mode.
The problem is so huge that I know what player will be using what and where he will go after just looking at nicknames.
1 Like
So you basically said rn you want Skill based match making for War Thunder. Shame on you Sir! SBMM is already in Call of Duty, the maps in War Thunder are already CoD like now you want the baddest implementation of Call of Duty to be in War Thunder. Pls delete your post before Devs see this xD
How ? Didnt you read my post earlier ? Here it is again!
You welcome!
Guh
I barely even run ULQ ;-;
Air Sim existed from the beginning…
Why? GSB in it’s current form is redundant if it is almost exactly like RB.
Yes i prefer that. It works perfectly fine for Air Sim. A Lobby system like in AIR SB also works. YOu are pulling the times out of your arse anyway. i know quite a chunk of people personally that prefer a more realistic experience. With 150k playerst online even 1% is enough to fill that.
Dude GRB and GSB are the same… that little difference is enough for you? BS!!! let me guess you are playing GSB because you don’t like CAS (because that’s it’s major pull RN that planes have it harder than in RB). You also have almost 10 times the games in RB than in SB, so obviously you wouldn’t stop playing WT if GSB gets removed. Gaijin wouldn’t loose a customer. And that is because RB and SB for tanks are what’s called substitute goods in economics.
Gaijin can gain SIM players, while the Shooter players like you will just play their 5-10% of SB they play now in RB. It’s not like you would stop playing alltogether if you are playing 80% RB anyway.
Warthunder sim is the most realistic war simultor out there. Where else can you recreate the famous battles between the Panzer 4s of Germany and the Concept 3 of South Africa that took place in Midwest America in the 1960s?
1 Like
Guten Morgen!
What I know it wasnt at the beginning, but I also not started in the Alpha of the Game.
Why it was a dumb answer? Bc we dont need less gamemodes, we need more! Here is the perfect sample for it, You.
I didnt said a Lobby System like ASB wouldnt work. I said that queing times of 40 minutes ~ are BS! Nobody wants to wait that long for one single match hahaha
Nope it isnt. Maybe for your experience it is bc you want a whole Simulation, but I clearly isnt the same.
I didnt say its enough! If you look my idea of the Solution post I made couple of posts earlier and you would read it threw, then you would know what I stand for.
Wrong! I play GSB bc its for tanks and for CAS harder. Its more tactic in GSB then in GRB, you have more people who think first and then do so. You gain more RP and SL in GSB, thats another reason, especially if you are spading Tanks its pretty cool.
Thats right my friend I have more Battles in GRB than in GSB. Ive done in the past several Clan Wars, Squadron Battles, and the majority on console(yes I am a console player) dont play GSB, bc of the ultra long waiting times.(and they are way less than 40 minutes.)
And yes I would stop playing WT when GSB getting removed bc it is a dumb idea to remove gamemodes. Bc I think more revaity would create a better experience and more player would play the game.
They would.
In Austria we call this Schubladen denken! It means You think in Draws. Why are you only thinking in black and white? Cant be a shooter player experience a more harder gamemode than Arcade or GRB? When Im a shooter player then you wanna force me to play with the other people in a mode that I didnt like anymore at all?
I would stop play as I said it! Bc my fav mode is GSB and I cant get more Battles/quicker more battles bc of Queing times of 5-10 mins in average bc people like you want even more queing time for a even more realistic gamemode.
But I also said in my loooong post(I recommend you read it, so you know exactly what I think would be a solution, before you assuming here) that GSB must have a rename into Realistic Battles.
No, Matchmaking will be based off all time stats not game stats. Like you performed really well in 1 match and now your against literal sweats who need to water proof there PC and it’s only a suggestion really. Plus on topic I don’t play Simulator battles but I do see videos and it’s all really good till you get around top tier then it’s just who can press range finder faster which I see the problem in that but if I ever play SB (after war thunder begins to work) I’ll try to find the issues with SB and I will talk to guys about it if I ever do. (Also, SB being more Immersive means you just need to bring up your graphics and be able to buy a flight stick)
But if it’s Ground SB I don’t really know.
What would you count to the “all time” stats? By mine understanding the K/D will influence the “all time” stats. And how I mentioned it, it would be SBMM just maybe not that hard how it is in Call of Duty.
Top tier doesnt suffer IMO from who can press rangefinder faster. In most cases I experienced the opposite someone who try to rangefind me also give out their position (if u have LWR) so I could try to retreat in cover and figure out a different engagement.
On bigger maps sure you will use ur rangefinder. But the main thing is that you play with vehicles which are capable to pen anything on a range from 4 KM easy, on maps which are designed for low tier vehicles.
When we look on an example like Red Desert that map is one of the biggest. There are the lanes from A-F vertical and horizontal you have 1-7 one Square like A1 is 500meters big from one end of the square to the other no matter in which direction. When we now increase the meters from 500 to maybe 1000 or even 2000meters per square u scale the map bigger. So it would “feel” bigger bc you have to drive longer to pass one Square. We didnt even scratch the Layout yet, just the scale of the map. Only this change would make Top tier more immersive, bc you arent 30 seconds in the game and you are facing the enemy bc you drove already to the middle of the map.
So in this scenario, the map would be at 2000meters per square 4x bigger than the original version, it means you and you opponent have to drive 4x longer than previous.
What automatically mean the match would be 4x longer than current. When you now add more different terrain like palm tree “forrest” or “jungle” whatever, hills, rivers and all kind of things that your engagement to try to get to the middle of the map increases, but not only 4x as I mentioned bc of longer distance, no it would be more maybe 6 or 7x than originally. It means you battles would be 7x longer than now, where we come closer to Air SB, where sometime battles last more than one hour. But you have to fill these battles with logical objectives and many of them simultanesly for opponents and your team. It would be boring just to drive 7x longer. Almost the same counts for helis and planes, bc their engagement distance would be also longer.
Im totally aware that not everybody wants that kind of battles, but I assume there are still a large number of players out there who really are into this kind of battles.
I can agree with your message about SB. I mean by all time by like Kills, Deaths, Games Won, Games Lost, Match’s Played, Average Skill for most players in the region, Routes he takes, His way of playing, It won’t only look at all time player stats it looks at the entire leaderboard, the way he plays, everything (the way I describe it makes it sound like if the Government had control over video games)