Well, it can’t. It can’t even be .50caled with some slighty angling, other than around the turret in general.
But yeah, that Italian tank has some pretty good armor on the turret and better survivability.
You don’t need to be genius to figure out what BR and RoF suits a tank.
And RoF of most vehicles could use a lot adjustments, considering it makes like no sense across vehicles, that have clearly better ergonomics, layouts and number of crews operating the vehicle.
I agree with your second part.
But generally you only nerf / buff one thing at a time to see how the stats adjust. Then if need be nerf or buff again
The only moron here is the one having issue fighting KW-220
Edit: nothing wrong with it.
So, question. For the sake of your argument.
I think everyone here would agree. The IS-1 is slightly worse if not possibly much worse than the KV-220 right?
@ULQ_LOVER @_Renzo @KillaKiwi @quartas121 @pooqich
So if that’s the case, and the IS-1 is lower in br btw… why is my KDr higher in that, over the KV-220?
5.7 sees 6.7 nearly as often as 6.0 does.
You see what I mean?
Lower plate is an instant off switch. Sometimes the gun too. Easy as hell to disable though.
Big ass flat 90mm plate on the face of the turret that makes KW-220 big junk.
Like really, M24 can deal with KW220
i have no leg to stand on in this argument
i dont have the tank and i dont face it often at all, its quite rare infact
but i think its not really that strong, sure it has pretty good armor and all, but none of that matter once you realise that you cant frontally pen like half the 6.7 tanks
You mean how like Gaijin buffs or nerfs a vehicle without adjusting the BR?
I have an idea. Wouldn’t it be interesting to change the crew’s life skill to stun time? Essentially, when they receive a penetration hit, the crew would be stunned for several seconds, and depending on the crew’s skill points, this time would last more or less time. I think it would be interesting because it would help reward the player who hits first, instead of rewarding the player with APHE and penalizing everyone else. It would also make large-caliber HE and HESH shells generate stun without needing to penetrate, depending on the explosive charge and the thickness of the armor hit, and of course, with a Battle Rating (BR) increase for those vehicles.
enjoy getting permanently stunlocked by gepards
This was subject to a poll run by Gaijin, and it lost decisively. Which is good, because it’s a terrible idea that just compounds the advantage of high RoF guns/whoever shoots first (those who already have the advantage in the engagement). Ground doesn’t need even more “win more” mechanics.
The key would be penetrations, not impacts. If a cheetah flanks and fires at you from the side, if it can penetrate you, it doesn’t even need to stun the crew anymore, since it simply kills you. On the other hand, if you land a shot and penetrate the cheetah, instead of it continuing to fire at you due to the poor damage model, the crew would be stunned, giving you time to land a second shot before or shortly after the cheetah moves again.
What you fail to see is that you’re actually asking for a buff to solid shot, and you emphatically do not get it with a stun lock mechanic, since it applies to any penetration. Even modest-filler, low-calibre APHE would become more lethal because it doesn’t matter if it lacks overpressure when it hits your engine, you’re getting stunned anyway! It doesn’t matter if you have thin armour such that the round doesn’t fuze, it penetrated you and so you’re stun locked.
You’re getting all the downsides of the horrible stun mechanic without actually achieving what you really want.
If you want solid shot buffed (a position I support) then there’s a very simple way to get it done: buff the post-pen damage of solid shot. The community didn’t want to nerf APHE post-pen effect, fine, even if Gaijin wants to be seen as respecting that poll, the other option is available, and it’s a much more parsimonious way to go about it compared to introducing a whole new mechanic.
EDIT: if you want to buff HE as a tank-killer you also have another option available, simply include the kinetic component of the HE round, which the game does not model.
Although tbh large calibre HE already works well thanks to overpressure.
The Jagdtiger’s APHE will struggle to pen a T-10M from the front (I know they don’t meet in the regular matchmaker, but I have it in my 7.7 lineup) however if you use HE on its cupola, you will overpressure it to death in one hit. And that’s “only” a 128mm, smaller than most SPG HE calibres in the mid tiers these days.
Well, something more realistic and simpler could be done: the stun effect could only occur in the penetration zone, creating a sort of sphere from the impact point, varying in size depending on the projectile caliber. This would prevent the stun from occurring because you’re shot in the engine compartment.
What I want is for the most important thing in tank warfare, as in real life, to be penetrating the enemy first before they penetrate you. This is impossible in this game because absolutely everything related to penetration, armor, and damage is extremely poorly modeled, leading to comical situations like penetrating an enemy and only killing one crew member while you die, or even penetrating an enemy five times only for them to repair and kill you.
Not only that, I want APHE rounds to do their actual damage, and HEAT rounds, and HESH rounds, and APCR rounds, and APDS rounds, and APDS-FS rounds. What I want is to play a game where bullets do what they’re supposed to do, and where you’re the one who makes the difference in the match, and it’s not the bad bullet modeling that decides whether you kill someone or die miserably.
The real solution is easy to imagine but difficult to implement, as it would involve reviewing the damage of all bullet types, revising the penetration calculator for many bullet models, reviewing both armor and volumetric bullets, completely redesigning the maps and making them larger, etc. As you can understand, I’m more than sure that, firstly, the devs aren’t going to bother doing this work, and secondly, it’s reached a point where the players themselves just want the game to stay the same (possibly for fear of losing kill ratio). Therefore, the other option, quicker and simpler to make the game fairer, is to slightly benefit the player who penetrates first with some kind of stun, of course adjusted to avoid problems like those mentioned before, such as stunning by firing an engine, etc.
There is also a fundamental problem of game balance unfortunately. Very much unlike real life, acquiring targets in War Thunder is incredibly easy. We fight in small maps, we have an incentive to push aggressively even if it means being in the open because that’s how you win matches (conveniently we also are not afraid to die, unlike real tankers!) and every gun in the game is uncannily accurate. You can pixel aim for weak spots in a way that would simply be impossible, not just with WW2 optics, but more importantly with WW2 turret drives.
So if tanks worked like real life (one penetration ends the fight) matches would be over in two to five minutes.
If you want a core game loop centered around that, the first thing you need to do is cripple our accuracy. It is definitely something that could be playtested through the CDK, but I’m not exactly shocked that this isn’t Gaijin’s priority at the moment, since GRB in its current state is the most popular game mode in WT…
I want that too, but aside from the massive impact it would have on BRs (which is not a negative imho), there remains the issue that in WT’s current core ground game loop, you can’t destroy a tank. Not really. Every component can be repaired (with the exception of fire extinguishers I suppose). You win a fight by killing the enemy tank’s crew, which functions as the “hidden health bar” of the game.
Buffing solid shot, even to unrealistic levels, gives you a more competitive balance with APHE. If you want a deeper revision of all damage to get a more realistic experience where penetration is the only thing that really matters, then like I said you need to fundamentally redesign the way a ground battle occurs in the game. Stun lock certainly won’t get you there.
It is also not clear that it would be profitable, since GRB seems to be very well-loved in its current shooter format.
Stun lock is really not fair to anyone, inherently it’s just a “win more” mechanic. The parity you’re speaking of is best achieved by reducing the damage gap between APHE and everything else. Since the option to nerf APHE has been ruled out, it’s time to buff everything else.
But it’s necessary. If the developers truly want to do it right, balanced and fair, everything needs to be reviewed and rebalanced. I know it’s a mess right now, but it’s the same old story. It’s something the developers should have done from the beginning, and kept modifying it properly, especially since the players wanted realism. But they made the mistake of evolving the game within a flawed mechanic until reaching a point of no return, only forward progress. That’s why the game feels like things get worse every year, and they implement worse mechanics, because the game’s foundations were flawed from the start.
The game was intended to be a realistic competitor to World of Tanks, but ended up being World of Tanks 2.0 (the kind that today’s players want).
In principle, the basic accuracy figures should be realistic, as there have been several reports where these figures have been changed due to official documents. What is certain is that there is no effect from wind, humidity, or other factors that would affect accuracy.
But then we would have to give the Full AP cards an artificial upgrade so that they deal damage in a sphere, and the HEAT, APCR, and APDS cards would also have to be upgraded, since their situation is the same as that of the Full AP cards.
I’d be interested if the devs at least did some kind of test with that mechanic, to see how the matches would play out, and then decide. It’s also the same old story: realistically, as long as people keep buying premium tanks and premium accounts, the devs aren’t going to change a thing, since they’ve achieved something extremely beneficial: a large number of complacent players who accept everything the devs come up with and even buy everything they put on sale. Removing veteran players to replace them with these new ones was the best strategy the devs have ever implemented.
This is a company. What they want is to earn money, like every other company in the history of business.
The only motivation they would have to initiate such a comprehensive revision of the game is if it would bring them more money.
On the face of it, this seems highly unlikely, because the more realistic tank experience we have described (bigger map, worse aim, one penetration ends the fight) leads to a much slower flow of the game. And if there’s one thing we can observe for certain in the playerbase, it’s that people like quick and plentiful action.
This seems like projection to me. The popularity of current GRB is no accident.
It doesn’t feel that way to me, or I wouldn’t be playing it.
I would like to see more competitive parity, but high levels of realism are best left to Discord-run events and/or a future overhaul of SB perhaps.
It sells the illusion of realism, and does it really well. This is foundational to its success, as you yourself state:
Yep.
I may not have been sufficiently clear in what I mean by “accuracy”.
When you think of accuracy in WT you are probably thinking of horizontal and vertical targeting speed + average spread of your shots over a certain distance. But you’re missing the fact that mechanically, aiming in WT works completely differently than it would have in WW2.
For example: for tanks that don’t have hand-cranked turrets, we always use the powered turret drive rotation. This means we perform our gun laying at the maximum possible theoretical speed. This was not done in real WW2 gunnery. The powered drive would get you most of the way to the target, but without the micro-adjustments made possible by a mouse interacting with software, the final gun laying was performed manually because the “fast” drive lacked the precision necessary to perform the final corrections. Try and play ground RB with your mouse DPS settings turned up all the way and you might get a feel for what I’m talking about.
When you add parallax difference, hurry, visibility etc, the kind of pixel hunting we do would simply not happen. There’s a reason tanks tended to have their armour concentrated in the UFP… because most shots in real life conditions were simply centre mass shots.
To go more in depth about why War Thunder’s aiming system is so much better than real life, the issue is that your gun constantly follows your reticle. Unless you’re pressing free look, there is no point during the match where the gun is not adjusting its elevation and traverse based on where you’re looking.
This level of constant micro-corrections happening every tenth of a second is simply impossible to replicate in real life. The gunner isn’t gonna sit there working his arm off his shoulders to constantly micro-readjust the aiming of the gun, and even if he wanted to, he’s not going to do it for a target he or his commander can’t see. And good luck looking steadily through a gunsight of the era while your tank is moving over rough terrain, and managing to stay on the target…
If you give tanks real-life penetration vulnerability, but leave this terminator laser-like accuracy of gun laying, you are not going to get a realistic engagement.
If APHE can have its sphere of death, I don’t see why every other round can’t get, say, a strong bonus spall modifier.
It might lead to BR changes, but the same would have been true with an APHE nerf anyway.
Of course they have to make money, what I’m saying is that at least, since they’re making money, they should provide a slightly better service, and not base or condition absolutely everything they do in the game on “let’s see how we can make more money by working less.” For example, bug reports: there’s a huge number of bugs reported and accepted, but they’ve gone years without being fixed. I imagine it’s because fixing bugs doesn’t generate money, and if people eventually forget about them or get used to them (which is what usually happens), then the developers are free to waste time fixing them.
I was referring to players in the early days, eight or nine years ago.And also, the fact that the vast majority of players don’t want the APHE nerf, that they seek to abuse CAS, that they want extremely small maps and CQC combat, and that ODL is constantly being done is not an accident either.
I’m still playing, and I’m noticing. You only have to look at the number of rebounds or drives without damage that happen, which didn’t happen eight years ago (at least not so frequently). That means either the game has gotten worse, or the devs have added a random mechanic to save players from dying.
It’s clear that there are many missing precision factors (which would be interesting to add to lengthen games), but for example, changing from powered turret drive rotation to the crank could be done simply by making short mouse movements slower to represent adjustments with the crank.
I think it’s just as impossible for them to give all bullets a damage sphere as it is for them to add a stun system.
The simplest way to improve the game is to give all bullets consistent spalling damage, essentially giving them the same damage they have now but removing the randomness that sometimes causes bullets to pass through without doing any damage. And in the case of APHE bullets, it would mean removing the kill sphere and replacing it with a slightly larger damage cone than the other bullets. This would improve things and wouldn’t require changing any Battle Royale (BR) weapons, since APHE bullets are already too powerful. Removing the kill spheres would simply make them less overpowered in securing easy kills.
I don’t usually give too much consideration to player stats since they aren’t necessarily indicative of vehicle’s capabilities. I think it makes more sense to balance a vehicle around its hard parameters than around its playerbase.
In the case of the BT series, they are the direct predecessors to the ever iconic T-34, so you are going to get tons of new players playing them. This is where your point about armor does actually somewhat come into play. Vehicles that are strong overall, but have low survivability are going to inherently require more skill to unlock the full potential of. Most new players are just going to rush into direct combat and will often die first if they are facing something with a shoulder stab that gets the first shot off. But a semi-decent player can do very well with the firepower+mobility combination.
I’d also like to point out that I am not content with the current state of the Pz.III, Pz.IV, and Stuart family, as well as many other low rank vehicles. They need changes too. My reply was just only looking at the BT series.
I think it’s also disingenuous to discount my proposed changes to the BT-7M as just a double nerf. I also want to give it scouting, APCR, and HE. The BT-7M gets brought into higher BR line-ups all the time, so this would make it generally more completive.
or they stay were they are, there is no need to move tanks that are just good nothing special.
