More AlvisWisla gobbledygook
1 Like
yes, many youtubers start by doing this on their channels. not only that myself and my squadron members have brought many players along to help them out. its how i met most of the people in my squadron in fact.
1 Like
Seen so many Squadrons from smaller CC’s fail to understand their job as the Leader of a squadron if your squadron is welcoming all types of players from AB-Transitioning to RB, from RB transitioning to Sim. You gotta be there and act as a leader.
One squadron I won’t name was the case, barely anyone ever joined unless the leader was there and even then it was solely for Sim. So it defeated the point of AB and RB. Since they didn’t enjoy either which is fine but if you’re gonna welcome all 3 then you have to put your thoughts aside and tolerate it. Other wise you need to make it fair and damn clear that you are a Sim Centric Squadron but Ab and Rb who are transitoning to Sim are welcomed.
Yes like I said. If people want historical matchmaking they would need to remove all prototype and paper vehicles.(Arguably even all vehicles that never saw combat cause including them would be ahistorical.)
1 Like
I’ll just answer you for this last time. I’m not in favor of such mode, it wouldn’t be a great experience for underdogs. However i exposed a formula that could potentially atract people on playing the underdogs for a good buck if you manage to outsmart your disadvantages and earn resources.
You don’t like it? Don’t play it. You find it unfair? Again, don’t play it. Furthermore, criticize it as much as you want, but don’t target me like i’m someone defending such implementation here. A theoretical historical matchmaker shouldn’t be well thought around balance, that’s why the game has a br system that places both SAV 20.12.48 and M4 Shermans at the same BR range yet they served at literally different eras at their respective technological apex.
Grab some freaking reading comprehension and don’t bother me anymore.
To be fair, the gamemode which the historical matchmaker mechanic would work the least is in Air, that’s why the conversation naturally shifted to ground battles.
1 Like
Ah yes, the usual “Don’t like it don’t play it” aka deflection. This isn’t a case of "Don’t play it cause you don’t like it, it’s called it makes NO sense to waste a company’s resources on a mode that a niche minority would only play. It is a waste of time.
This is the equivalent of cooking 15 tons of rice and expecting a group of 150 to eat it all.
Mind you this picture I’m posting is only 1 ton
D-Day Event, April Fools, and the crummy World War Mode are game modes that ARE “Don’t like it, don’t play it”. These are optional, but the mode you’re demanding to get added is not nor even counts at all.
AB/RB and SIm are necessary modes of basic requirements
“Historical Matchmaking” is not a requirement, and April Fools isn’t either not one of the modes I mentioned above is a requirement. So please by all means and I insist try to justify that HIstorical matchmaking is needed.
Everyone before you 365 days a year has said the same thing your not the first and never to be the last to bring this up and it will never be added. Gaijin made their stand on this and seems like even the Paid Volunteered(You get paid cause you deserve it, you deal with our and excuse my French “crap” all the time)Moderators(Thumbs up for your work) have seemed to relay the same message with you folks always ignoring it.
Before you think “I am defending Gaijin” I am not i do not agree with a lot of their decisions nor how they write articles and such which are almost always written in corporate English. Rather than straight-to-the-point blunt English on what the new mechanic or whatever means. However, that are also sometimes translation errors.
Got hidden despite it being relevant to someone else’s post they had made.
2 Likes
I might have said last year “OK do it then no problem”
Since then I have played Sweden and had a lot of fun with it. That is what means the most in War Thunder.
There are paths this game should have taken but it did not and we have to accept that.That is the answer to the OP and the perfectly acceptable question they ask.
The era mess is a mess no doubt but what is muddled is the fact that it is intentional.
Some people say the game was always like that from its inception others say no it was all WW2 at some point.
My point really is that if WT is so proud of the era situation, why do they always have same era vehicles in their adverts on a map related to that era.Why not an add showing the Tiger versus the M109 in Sun City or an A10 in WW2 on the Normandy 44 map?
If era means nothing then why not make a physics that gives the Tiger 2 200 mm armour at 6.7 but 400mm at 7.7 ? Why use historical fact when making tanks only to make the game a complete fantasy? Is that not madness pure and simple. You cannot even claim there is balance when 6.7 up tiers to 7.7 Etc ,it is debatable at best.
2 Likes
You’re again making assumptions. Get lost soon.
Actually it can, it can even one shot it from the front from any range. You either blow up the ammo or hit 3/4 crew members sitting in a line like in a Stug.
Not to mention that people seem to forget that side armor exists and is usually not any thicker than 100mm.
Because era seperation and physics are two seperate things.
Because many people like it. A lot of people dont like milsim but also dont like super fake arcade stuff.
If you have to do some roleplay, think of it as a modern day tankery match.
1 Like
No
exactly, it’s all about balance ¬¬, why not give the aim-9g to the p-51, and make it be able to fly at 1000km/h in 9.7 since it’s all about pixels that look like something historical
1 Like
But War Thunder is super arcade stuff in terms of gameplay. The only realistic things about War Thunder are vehicle names, looks and mechanics such as damage models, flight models, radars, missiles. Even these mechanics aren’t really entirely realistic. APHE shells overperform, flight models miss drag curves at different speeds.
And that is much better than the black/white games. You cant get realistic gameplay without at least infantry. Dont like the fever dream fake tanks in WoT, their hp box damage models, or spotting system.
I also dont want to play a milsim everyday. In war thunder, i can enjoy tanks/planes while not having to deal with gear ratios, trimming, or fighting something like a tiger in a stuart.
1 Like
RB should gradually start to become RP for real, like removing the option to lower the volume of the engine itself, and making it mandatory to see the grass in shooter mode and not see it from the barrel of the gun, those who don’t like these options have the option of playing arcade
1 Like
You would think it’s all fun and games until USA starts beating the brakes off everyone with our superior military technology. Then you’d regret such a thing as historical matchmaking.
Side Armor…Side Armor…Facepalm In a real battle no one exposes their side armor. The purpose of armor on a tank is to only show the strongest of your armor, if your being flanked from the side then you already screwed up.
Is that really what you want? Because the F22 Raptor is from the 90s and so is the J8F.
The F15C MSIP II and F16C with JHMCS are from the early 2000’s. Same with the MiG-29SMT and Su27SM. just for some context.
F14A F15A F16A MiG-23 are all 70’s vehicles, is that fair?
F14B F16A ADF MiG-23MLD MiG-29(912 and 913) Su27 are all 80’s vehicles. This is also unfair
Theres also vehicles like the F4J that both the US and UK used at different times. The US used the F4J before the UK bought them, despite the fact the F4J for the US is much better than the british one. HMs 7F etc. So should the british one sit at a higher br? They used it after the americans did.
Historical matchmaking makes absoutly no sense, if you want historical. go play dcs or smth
1 Like
Dayum. My G, i don’t have money for a good hotas and don’t have friends that’s why i play war thunder.