Immutability of gamemodes

Game Discussion General Discussion
,
1

For a game that is getting constant updates every few months that add numerous vehicles and mechanics, why are gamemodes never worked upon?

Gamemodes feel like the weakest part of the game for me. Players are given all the cool toys and tool but the sandbox they are put in feels extremely limiting. We have nicely modeled vehicles, realistically modeled mechanics (for what War Thunder is, that is) but the game we play feels so bad. When I think of War Thunder I think of the cool vehicles and mechanics in the game, but never how great ARB or GRB are as gamemodes.

Now some might think this is because of how old these modes are and I grew bored of them, but I don’t think that’s the case. For example, Counter Strike’s main mode (defusal) has been almost unchanged for over 20 years, and people still play it. No one complains about defusal, because it’s an amazing gamemode. I am not someone who needs new and shiny things every few months to keep me playing. I have played thousands of rounds of Counter Strike and I still like it.

Modes in War Thunder simply don’t allow for vehicles we have to be used to their fullest potential. These modes feel extremely unfinished. They feel more like alpha modes that would allow for testing of features in them like base bombing, point capture and similar.

People have been complaining about gamemodes for some time, but they are never changed. I don’t think there has even been a test or a change that got rolled back in recent years. I am not referring to lowering of player numbers in ARB we had recently, that is hardly a change to the gamemode itself.

I am just confused as to why gamemodes don’t get more love. They are the glue that hold vehicles, mechanics and maps together.

This game markets itself as “realistic” but none of the modes really are “realistic”. And I am not talking about the fidelity of the models, or the control scheme used, but rather what you actually do in game. 16v16 deathmatch in ARB, helipads in artillery range in GRB and other “unrealistic” stuff.

Now all I just wrote is just my opinion, but I want to see what everyone else thinks. Also keep in mind I mainly play ARB and GRB, but I have played all gamemodes (except naval) and I found none of them to be “good”.

Now I would like for your opinion on War Thunder’s gamemodes.
I am not referring to balance of vehicles here, only to the design of the mode. I.E what do you actually do in game, objectives, win conditions and similar.
Please only answer if you play the mode in question. Don’t vote on the poll otherwise.

How satisfied are you with Air Arcade Battles?

  • Very satisfied
  • Satisfied
  • Neutral
  • Unsatisfied
  • Very unsatisfied
0 voters

How satisfied are you with Air Realistic Battles?

  • Very satisfied
  • Satisfied
  • Neutral
  • Unsatisfied
  • Very unsatisfied
0 voters

How satisfied are you with Air Simulator Battles?

  • Very satisfied
  • Satisfied
  • Neutral
  • Unsatisfied
  • Very unsatisfied
0 voters

How satisfied are you with Ground Arcade Battles?

  • Very satisfied
  • Satisfied
  • Neutral
  • Unsatisfied
  • Very unsatisfied
0 voters

How satisfied are you with Ground Realistic Battles?

  • Very satisfied
  • Satisfied
  • Neutral
  • Unsatisfied
  • Very unsatisfied
0 voters

How satisfied are you with Ground Simulator Battles?

  • Very satisfied
  • Satisfied
  • Neutral
  • Unsatisfied
  • Very unsatisfied
0 voters

How satisfied are you with Naval Arcade Battles?

  • Very satisfied
  • Satisfied
  • Neutral
  • Unsatisfied
  • Very unsatisfied
0 voters

How satisfied are you with Naval Realistic Battles?

  • Very satisfied
  • Satisfied
  • Neutral
  • Unsatisfied
  • Very unsatisfied
0 voters

I don’t think naval has sim, someone please correct me if I am wrong.

Would you like that Gaijin test new modes or updates for existing ones?

  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

One thing I would like to note here, if there are tests for new gamemodes there should be some in game announcement and maybe even an incentive to play test them (slight RP bonus while playing for example). What should NOT be done is testing them on the dev server or have them excluded from gaining rewards.

Thank you all for your time, I am looking forwards to reading everyone’s thoughts on this.

14 Likes
2

reserved comment 1

3

reserved comment 2

4

I read an I absolutely agree with the points made, the game has incredible vehicles and mechanics yet modes feel very shallow and low variety, that is and issue I share and frustrates me, I have plenty fun just messing around in customs shooting at AI cause it’s different from the team death match that the whole game seems to be built around where the main catch are the vehicles rather than game itself, I would love a rework, maybe not deletion of current gamemodes but definitely some main modes with more mechanics and things to do that has as much relevance to grind and the whole experience as what we have right now

4 Likes
5

Gaijin tries different game modes. No one plays them.

Quickie random battles with simplistic TDM rules works for Gaijin (ie cheap to create and maintain) and the player base is conditioned to them by the thousands and thousands of repetitive game play.

3 Likes
6

I have heard this a few times but I don’t remember them putting in any new game modes.

4 Likes
7

WWM, subs, random event scenarios, the April fools events, etc. are all tests Gaijin uses to gauge how much “engagement” they get.

2 Likes
8

All you need is a collection of the best ideas for new modes/missions/objectives/interactions within War Thunder, not another group of players pointing out only what they don’t like.

Otherwise there is Custom Battles with the massive shame there has not been enough interest to make something of a viable option there showing what could be done.

The game strangles its own potential innovation by the model it persues. But if it didn’t follow this free to play model there is no chance you’d be playing it today.

4 Likes
9

There is probably a way to make the game more realistic and varying, but the path of least resistance/cost and safe bet of “what works/profits” is to just keep players on the endless grind chasing the new shiney they add to the game (which just happen to be much cheaper than creating new game structure).
So until players get tired of this and stop playing, Gaijin has no real incentive to do anything different.

10

The thing is that Gaijin likes to put those random event scenario in the middle of event grinds. Also April fools events are jokes and don’t really belong in War Thunder. And they then use lower player counts as an excuse to say “Oh well we tried and nobody liked it”.

1 Like
11

Early on April Fool’s events were purely for fun and a break in the “routine” and quite enjoyable I might add. Then with the advent of “testing” events for this annual spectacle, everything changed. When they did the test for desert maps for tanks, modern era MBTs and Helis, that was basically the end of the “entertainment” events that April Fool’s Day had been in the past. Yes, the players clamor for new things to do & play, vehicles, maps, modes and mechanics. Ideally Gaijin could gather a great deal of info/data and hey, it’s FREE testing for them . . they win, but . . . at a loss to what was a fine and fun/enjoyable tradition.
I may have made a mistake, I think the first actual “testing” event was the “Galleons” and the naval/water test (Beware the KRAKEN!!) . . which was good blend of fun and testing. More stuff like that would be ok, but Gaizilla, Inflat-O tanks and the Mech Walkers . . . . those were truly fun events from the past.

2 Likes
12

I also understand Gaijin’s reluctance for totally new game modes, same reasoning against a “Tanks Only” mode . . good chance of spreading the player base too thin and over extending queue/wait times . . . which we all know is something Gaijin strives very hard to avoid. People in general, and prolly especially gamers just do not like to wait. I mean look at recent players mad rush to top tier and doing anything they can to get around the normal progression to higher tiers . . . a pretty good sign that patience is a rare commodity indeed.
Something I have proposed in the past that might get around spreading players out too much is simply adding some variety to existing maps and slightly adjusting somethings within the modes but still keeping all of that within the Random Battles scenario we all use daily.
Things like, making 2 - 3 variants of existing maps . . . new spawn points, move the caps around . . . so players are not playing the exact same static map each time. More spawn points in Air maps . . seriously, no map should ever have a single spawn point per side. You want “realistic” tank maps? . … remove the big floating letters above to cap points, hide them on the mini map until a player actually drives on to one . . . that and different placements would make the entire dynamic of matches quite a bit different.
Merely work/rework what is already in game to add variety . . keep players guessing and on their toes . . . what might be a good sniping spot on one map variant, may not be on another . . and new sniping spots could appear, and so on . . . I think variety is a very good thing . . . War Thunder would only seem to benefit from more of that . . . new Challenges, new blood . . . fresh meat . . . win - win

13

There is a lot of untapped potential in War Thunder for game modes and mechanics.

there’s plenty of underutulised maps and maps that will instantly become player favourites with small tweaks.
there’s plenty of map ideas that I’m amazed haven’t been used yet either, Blitz over London and a map based on Iwo Jima come to mind first

I for one would love to see Arcade Assault (both ground and air) receive a realistic mode counterpart, Assault arcade is very fun in a squad but arcade physics feel nasty to us realistic/sim players.

i would like to see an GRB EC game mode similar to what “Frontlines” was in Battlefield 1, where there’s one or two objectives needed to be taken before a set amount of ticket bleed before the defenders win or can start a counterattack, when the points are taken the play area is pushed back towards the enemies HQ, this could be done on the larger maps and the maps which have two battle areas set like Sinai and Normandy. it would add a lot more map rotation to how the game is played while removing the possibility of a team being spawn camped into a total loss and get a chance at a comeback

4 Likes
14

We have Naval Enduring conflict which is sim-ish, but not sim like air and ground is. But it only runs Friday to Sunday.

1 Like
15

Air Sim is my main gamemode and for the most part. Im happy with it. But there are certainly room for improvements. There are issues with its economy but I feel that is slightly beyond the scope of this topic so shall focus on the other parts that could be improved.

The biggest issue is the diversity of PvE content within the gamemode, what there is is very 1 dimensional and there is only half dozen or so objectives. What we could really do with is a very healthy splattering of new objectives within the gamemode, ideally ones that have both depth and a wider impact on the match.

After that, Id just like to see more maps. New Air Sim maps are rare… too rare and this can create a more stale enviroment than the gamemode itself.

(New weather and time combos, and making them far more common would be very good as well and this goes for every gamemode to be honest. But especially in sim, night maps would be fun)

Naval, is the other gamemode i quite often play and its biggest issue is the maps. They need some pretty major redesigns and they could do with completely changing their doctrine when it comes to designing naval maps. Naval decompress would help too

New Gamemodes i’d love to see are:

  • Air RB EC. Air Sim, but RB, with GRB style markers (Friendly markers but no enemy markers)
  • Ground EC (large map, PvPvE gameplay)
  • True “Arcade” gamemode (CTF, king of the hill, etc)
  • More gamemodes than domination in GRB
5 Likes
16

When? I’ve tried playing before, but it has never been available.

17

Tbh if they took Sim battles and removed sim controls and used realistic control and made that a game type, I’d be all over it. But this is a controller player problem. lol. ASB just takes too many buttons for a controller but I want to play it so badly but can’t figure out a controller layout that’s comfortable for it so I gave up on it. And ground battles just need far larger maps for mid to high tier instead of brawling maps, more sniping positions from distances. Like Tunisia large is one of my favorite maps but it hardly ever comes up in ground battles.

1 Like
18

They should add AI convoys to ground rb, and destructible buildings or bases in key locations that would cost the team to lose points should they fail to defend it from attacks.

1 Like
19

Cause PVP Conquest is already a perfected game mode by DICE of Battlefield, and War Thunder already implemented all of that.
Which leaves PVE game modes which require an AI overhaul to accomplish.

And air battles is elimination matches with tickets: PVPVE.
The only way to really improve that is an AI overhaul that’d allow War Thunder to have more dynamic matches.

Funny enough, War Thunder’s closest “Team Death Match” mode is ground battle’s Battle game mode.

20

they need to put new game modes, some people always came here with the “nuh uh, they put new gamemode and no one plays it duh” which is dumb.

i remember the advance and secure gamemode and it was great, funny and ww2 era, when they added it some years ago (2022 if im not wrong) they added it to the “Event” section where you can find sim battles and Helicopters PVE. they got rid of it just because “no enough players” which for me is dumb, every time i tried to find a match on that gamemode i found it within 3 seconds and we were a lot of people.
“Ohh but maybe they will waste server resources or something like that”
Bro, we have fucking naval battles which are probably 20 guys with alter accounts fighting each, the meme of “NOBODY PLAYS NAVAL” wasnt created for no reason.
(ofc im exagerating the player numbers, it was a joke)

They already had the gamemode working, they just could left it there existing at least, it was funny.

Of course a lot of people wont play it if they hide the new gamemode over there, lot of people just play casual or just select a gamemode on the graphical interface (Air Arcade, Air Realistic, Air Sim, Ground Arcade, Ground Realistic, etc) and dont even know a new gamemode is added because they dont read news or forums, and they dont play Sim battles so they dont have any reason to open the Special gamemodes window.

i think they should add new gamemodes and expose em a little bit more :p

Oh yeah and lets not forget the fact YOU DONT GET ANY REWARDS FOR PLAYING TESTING GAMEMODES like this, how tf do they expect to maintain a certain number of players if it isnt worth playing em? players will be literally wasting time, having fun yes, but ZERO progression on the tree.

2 Likes