Even though no futuristic technology is being brought into play in this case, I completely agree with you.
But this is complete nonsense.
Balance of performance is the only sensible way to balance a PVP game.
3 Likes
To be clear, the alternative was tried, way back in the day, in the old World War mode. First event was Barbarossa. Panzer IIIs versus KV-1s. Guess what? After a few games, no-one wanted to play the Panzer IIIs. It was like Nuclear Thunder, only far worse.
In a PvP game, players like to win, and they like to do well. More to the point, they hate losing, especially when they feel like they were playing at a severe disadvantage in the first place.
You might be satisfied with the idea of being at a severe disadvantage because you get to LARP, but most players aren’t like you. They want to go into their games with the reasonable idea that, if they play well, they can win.
2 Likes
A poorly designed event is not justification for not removing HEATFS from the pre Cold War brackets.
2 Likes
Imagine if this was true
Pz IV G production started in May-March 1942
Pz IV H in May 1943
M4A1(75) in July 1942
M4A1(76) in December 1943
T-34-85 in December 1943
Where’s the time travel? The long gun Pz IVs were produced even sooner than the 75mm M4A1.
In the comparison with service life. The Germans never found an adequate replacement for the Pz IVs, and used the late G, the H and the J all the way up to the end of the war. If you wanted a Normandy/Bagration/Summer 1944 BR, the late Pz IVs should be 5.7.
1 Like
I’ll also point out that the Pz4s, like sherman and t-34, would find it’s way well into the cold war with it’s last confirmed war being the yon kimpur war…in the 70s
But they didn’t show up in 1944, they showed up in 1942. By this reasoning, we can easily find 75mm M4s still kicking around in 1945 - does this mean they should be 6.7?
Even if you want to go by date of introduction/date of first test, you’re still getting the Pz IV J at the same BR or higher than the T-34-85. Hilariously, Pz IV J production started after the Maus had completed its first test. So, yes. Time travel.
3 Likes
Pz IV J was a model made expressely to reduce the cost of the Pz IV. Being worse than G and H, it is rarely played anyway since it is at the same BR or higher as those two, so nothing would change.
Chaffee was introduced in 1944.
Anyone noted any difference in PT-76 HEATFS post pen damage ???
Looks like much better now. Basically i can one shot tanks like Panthers just shooting in the middle of his frontal armor.
1 Like
How is that relevant to its time travel status?
Yep. Another time traveller. It’d be fighting King Tigers with historical MM. No thanks.
1 Like
That’s nothing new. Panthers were always pretty easy to kill from the front with HEAT because the turret crew is so close together.
1 Like
I know. With the M-51 is just a shot in the center but usually the PT barely can kill one or two crew member is the same spot.
Well maybe is just me.
What are you even talking about?
Because it is objectively and intentionally worse than the previous model? You talk about time travellers but can’t justify the Pz IV G and H being lower than their introduction date without a hypothetical scenario over a year after they went into production.
The other poster implied the Pz IVs were introduced at the same time as 76mm M4s and T-34-85 and are somehow “time traveling” by being lower BR than them.
That only matters if you support performance based matchmaking. Which I do. If you support historical matchmaking (the stance I am criticising), it doesn’t matter how good or bad a vehicle was. People who complain about SPGs or low tier HEAT don’t want these vehicles to get a BR placement that reflects their low performance. So, why should the Puma or the Pz IV get a different treatment? Why does that not outrage the proponents of “immersion at all costs”?
What’s hypothetical about Overlord and Bagration? If WT had a historical set up, the G and H would have to fight all the opponents they faced in real life.
And even if you just talk about the J, the same double standard remains. People who complain about the PT-76 being too low in BR for “immersion” should also complain about the J. Or the M24, or the Puma, or the Archer.
Instead, when it comes to WW2 vehicles, the principle of performance based MM is accepted by these people just fine. It’s only when modern vehicles end up at “ahistorical” BRs that suddenly people “remember” about muh immersion.
1 Like
I see, that’s ridiculous. But in turn, gaijin does not appropriately place many of these vehicles, leading to such threads.
Which would be 75mm Shermans of various models, even in uptiers.
You could make this much funnier because now Panther D, being produced starting January 1943, would go below the M4A1 76.
1 Like
depends on which version of the Pz4, because the J and I believe the H would also be fighting M60s, Sho’t kal Alef, T-55s so on and so forth
2 Likes