This is such a fun topic to speak on aha! Everybody wants to hear that fkn SQUISH sound from command & conquer along with the death scream when the infantry get ran over also!
The game would not be made better by adding a half-baked crappy Infantry system. People hoping for this are not aware of how War Thunder works or how gaijin develops.
1 Like
I understand your pov. Its still fun to digress on.
2 Likes
Looking at infantry in WW1 event, it’s definitely a joke.
Ahahaha
The did did say it was a work in progress
1 Like
While true, the problem I have with that statement is, back then, we hadn’t even gotten a T-72 yet, at least from what I recall, so the absurdity of those claims are readily apparent. And, even so, at this point, we know we will eventually get all of those. It’s also the fact that the trailer didn’t drop on April 1st and that Infantry in War Thunder isn’t that absurd. They also usually do one event, not two, so it would be entirely new behavior for them to do this. It doesn’t track well with Gaijin’s past behavior.
My guess is that Gaijin is considering merging Enlisted with War Thunder due to the title not doing very well, whereas War Thunder is doing quite well. Enlisted, at this point, is in many ways a War Thunder gamemode that is arbitrarily split off as it’s own title, so why not merge the two games and leverage War Thunder’s renown? The trailer was to see how the playerbase would feel about infantry. That way, if it’s widely panned, they can easily walk it back as a joke, but if it garners hype, they can move forward with it and start playing around with the idea more seriously.
3 Likes
I hope we get Infantry tech trees!
The addition of infantry could also mean the addition of SPHs like the Hummel, or M7!
They made a whole game that is war thunder with infantry. No reason to add them to war thunder.
I think this is what you are asking about?
It depends a lot on how they implement infantry.
With the current arena style mission design i don’t think it would work.
I also have issues seeing how they are going to differentiate the gameplay between AB RB and SB. I mean they already screwed up tanks, where there is little to no difference between the gamemodes.
The only way to make it work i see is going full milsim. But then infantry would be sim only (no AB/RB infantry) and the tanks need a multicrew rework for it.
And a complete mission design overhaul.
They better make a seperate milsim game.
If they go the battlefield route it will be an unbalancable mess.
1 Like
Doing so would lose them their 13+ rating, which would be very detrimental to a significant user demographic. Right now any kiddo can install the game for free without any parental controls, and once hooked, can bug mommy for her credit card.
Getting a mature rating by showing violence and death to persons will introduce “engagement friction” and cut out that market segment.
1 Like
Dude you think the demographic would be an issue?
Going full milsim would lose them all the shooter players, so the AB and RB crowd.
I said going full milsim would be the only way to make infantry work. I didn’t say it would be as popular as the current game.
Milsim has a far lower audience than a vehicle shooter.
It could be one of the greatest milsims ever however and i personally would enjoy it.
A milsim would be a great own game and they could reuse a lot of WT assets. It would be a better idea than aces of thunder.
Considering how poorly/unpopular WT’s “Simulator” mode does, it doesn’t matter how greatest it is if it loses money and has to be cancelled. Which I expect is what will happen to Aces o’ Blunder.
I see you never went to bidness skewl…
I never said aces of thunder will be a success.
Lol. Who is saying anything about commercial viability?
I am saying what technically can work. You are putting the cart before the horse. You need to check what is technically possible BEFORE making it a product.
A WT milsim obviously wouln’t have the current WT audience but the ArmA audience
It beeds different pricing, Advertisement and be a seperate game.
Yeah, you obviously don’t know anything about how businesses work.
You know that there have been FPS combined arms games since the 90’s right?
You know that there are already plenty of “milSim” games that have infantry in them?
Of course its technically possible.
The question here is if their is a viable business case for it (ie. makes money).
GLWT. I think Gaijin knows both their audience/market and their games strengths and limitations better than you (or I).
Yes, whichbis why i mentioned two of them already.
Are you intentionally misreading posts?
For slow people:
What i said is, that AB/RB/SB all do not fit infantry in the action shooter style. As you would need artificial balancing like you would have in battlefield. This goes against the real performance figures WT uses / tries to use.
The other option for combined arms is milsim. Only Air SB works for this as the gameplay in AB/RB and ground SB is too unrealistic to support milsim.
So from a simple gameplay view infantry does nit fit current war thunder. (!!! gameplay view, not business view … Sadly i have to point that difference out)
And all i said is that the current majority of WT players are not milsim players. Which should be obvious.
So instead of arguing what you imagined i said, stay literal.
Which is wrong. The previous power armor infantry event had playable FPS infantry and it worked just fine. To work them into the game would only require reducing their capabilities to fit an era/BR (ie: bazookas < RPGs < ATGMs) There is no reason at all that they couldn’t add Steel Beasts/ARMA style dismount squads that you could control or they could be AI. In any mode at all.
So they point I am making is that your point is wrong and irrelevant. The only reason they can’t/shouldn’t is that adding people to the game is that they will lose their 12+ rating because it would need to show people getting killed and run over by tanks.
But I guess its something you can’t understand, so, oh well.
Ok, how would you balance it?
The gameplay for infantry would be pretty much identical in every mode while the gameplay of vehicles isn’t. So how do you balance the complexity differences that exist for vehicles but not for infantry.
As the dumbed down assists for.vehicles are designed to mimick infantry controls in shooters?
It’s the bomber Situation but worse.