I dont think a “Hey, yes its still being developed, here are something features being worked on, and no, we dont know when it will be ready” post would go amiss. Its been in development for like 3 or 4 years now I think and I dont recall ever really seeing a post about it anywhere
2 Likes
I agree with most of what was said here. The fact that Gaijin balance vehicles by user performance is absurd and allows better players to seal club in under B.R’d aircraft and tanks etc whilst also making other aircraft over B.R’d (Hello anything that can turn and has cannons).
Vehicles should also be built to be historically accurate and be balanced by the vehicles individual performance and stop listening to the cries of the playerbase because they refuse to learn the behaviour of certain vehicles. Gaijin has been way too soft in this regard with multiple vehicles and the previously mentioned APHE, don’t forget Shvak’s as well… the widely known weak cannon of WW2 that can eviscerate bombers because some (not all) RB players cried on the forums… not to mention the “content creators”.
On top of all of this we need more immersion, aircraft sounds are incredibly weak. Give us the old sounds from Birds of Steel where the Tempest/Dora/P-38 practically roars at you when you use WEP. Give us back the damaged cockpits and oil splatters over the windscreen. Make it visceral again instead of the boring sterile game it has become. In regards to sound remove the wind sound and make the external/canopy open effect play with the canopy closed in cockpit view.
In regards to immersion give us historical matches as well even if they’re a limited time event, maybe give increased rewards to go with them. It doesn’t matter whether it’s Historical EC’s or just regular matches like the Battle of Britain event etc.
Come on Gaijin you have these battles at your disposal, just activate them again.
Well it can actually work, it would just be very different from the two other gamemodes.
I believe the utilization of escorts would balance the cruisers against the battleships. So when you research a couple of destroyers you can equip 2 different ones with your cruisers. The only problem I see with this is the speed of some things, but that can just be part of lineups. Battleships, aircraft carriers and submarines can all be spawned in with spawn points after you lose your first convoys. And yes, this would make you think that it would be cruisers rushing to get as many spawn points as possible to play battleships, but that’s where aircraftcarriers come in. You see I want aircraftcarriers linked to the air TT by you having to research the navel aircraft to use on the aircraftcarriers (Ik that most countries might be limited). The aircraftcarriers should be able to launch a series of plane squads (like 5 or 6 planes, but it depends) overtime that the player can control directly or indirectly, and you should be able to set up attacks and stuff like that. Since the cruises have a possibly various number of escorts, they will be key to shooting down planes.
Submarines are pretty self explanatory.
My only concern is that Russia lacks a aircraft carrier, but I’m sure there’s some laid down design or smth.
Edit: crazy idea but naval sub TT.
Oh trust me they don’t
The amount of money and manhours it takes to make a modern game engine is insane
There is a reason 99.9999999% of games don’t have their own game engines
Even Battlefield uses a game engine from over a decade ago
1 Like
I’d say the main issue is the disparity of carriers between nations in terms of classes.
Israel has nothing
Sweden has 1 seaplane carrier
Germany has 2 (iirc) fleet carriers
France has 1 carrier
Italy has 2 (iirc)
China and USSR/Russia only have post war carriers (barring Chinese seaplane tenders)
Now compare that to the Japanese, UK and USA. Sure it’s more even as Italy, France, USSR and China all get post war fleet carriers but the other navies are at a disadvantage.
If it were only available in pve and custom missions I think it could work.
As for subs, they do have the potential to work so all in favour for that.
That is definitely something I’d agree with.
Games have to be balanced so this one is an automatic no-go.
More popular modes like ARB or GRB are getting boring at certain tiers, so reworking Naval before those two wouldn’t make sense.
And how would you objectively gauge the vehicle performance ?
To other vehicles in other Tech trees. I mean look at the chi-to 4.7 then look at pz.4 H (3.7), kind of crazy that there that far apart , for being similarly preforming vehicles.
1 Like
That’s what gaijin wants you to think 🤣
Chi-To is overtiered and should be 4.3
Pz 4 H is undertiered and probably should be 4.0
Exactly
I dont think you understand how monstrously complicated it is to rewrite a game engine.
Their actively working on it.
You haven’t answered my question.
How to objectively know vehicles should be at a certain BR ?
You can’t just compare pros/cons as people value those differently.
No, that’s what make games fun and worth to play.
Lol idk, similar to what we have except vehicles shouldn’t be balanced by players stats, or else things end up like chi to and pz 4 h
1 Like
You still haven’t answered the most important question.
I’m confused now, what’s going on?
How would you objectively gauge the vehicle performance ?
Idk
Edit: I don’t feel like figuring it out rn + I already said it for the most part.
No you really didn’t.
I need a detailed, variable-by-variable (firepower, mobility, gun handling, gun depression, etc. etc.) breakdown of how each one of those affects the BR and by how much.