Late WW2 heavies

it isn’t acceptable since unlike the Maus for the predesessor of Germany, Japan never had even one F16. The F16 AJ was just a concepted proposal, that was decided against. Not even a prototype. And now with the F15 J, at basically the same br, you don’t have the excuse to fill a hole in capability, that also could be filled by teamwork. Like the US that have many bases in Japan, that would fill the lacking capability. But War Thunder doesn’t care about that…

no, the Maus was never added as a placeholder. It was like every other tank at that time, a normal tank. It was never added as a placeholder. Unlike the F 16 AJ, that was, and now, where it isn’t needed anymore, still isn’t removed.

what? it either dominates, or gets dominated. So it sufferes…
I think your defenition of suffering is weired here.

As I wrote (bc we balance everything through a 1 D-Matchmaker), but the MM has limitations.
And I wouldn’t say it works good, if you have to remove a tank of the first days bc of those limitations.
Yes the game changed, but for the worse, requireing such things to happen. Requireing the gameplay change of esp heavies, that now have to deal with decade newer AA or IFV’s etc that get balanced against tanks, bc of their modern munitions being against tanks way better, than agaisnt the AA-needs they were introduced for. Like R3’s…

it isn’t unworkable for sure, but do you want your only balancing system to be not unworkable, or do you want it to be actually good?

no vehicle is build for +1. Vehicles are build for the threats and tasks they had at the time they were designed. And those go completely ignored in this game, and that is a big issue imo, esp when those tasks aren’t even in game or get rewarded (like escorting heavy bombers over large distances, or using modern mbt’s over actual distances), which imo they should aim to include, not exclude for a Counterstrike-like 3 lane Map-design.

Edit:
Don’t get me wrong, for arcade having such simple and small maps is fine, but not for realistic or sim, that unlike the changes in air still rely on bigger versions of the often arcade or rb maps with now the same objectives.
I think we need EC for tanks and like the group that wants EC air for RB, I think there should also be a more EC like (esp since you can get out of the match before it ends and jip without much loss) ground battle, like they kind of tried out a bit with the april fools update.

Air AB maps > Air RB maps

Honestly a map issue, needs to be addressed.

Era-seperation does not, and will never work- which is fine. The current BR system has flaws, but is a lot better then an era-seperated system would be.

1 Like

Who made you the gatekeeper here?

1 Like

A strange woman living in a pond distributing swords, that’s who.

2 Likes

You got me there : )

1 Like

Would that be an issue? If the vehicle is in the same tier/br/match as its counterparts?

Yes
Yes it would
Its at 2.3 rn
It has a single 20mm

So does the Wiesel. It also have a single 20mm. It does have thermals though.

The wiesel is also smaller, faster, has thermals, LRF, and NVD, has apds and hvap, higher firerate, more ammo, HAS THERMALS, and is at 7.3, not 8.0.

But is built close to the PBV301 production.
Wiesel 1979–1993
PBV301 1961–1971

So, the PBV301 should be around 7.0 while the wiesel at 8.0, if they bothered to do a tight decompress and had historical matchmaking.

excuse me what

are you insane my guy

The PBV301 is already nothing special at 2.3.

It would be horrible at 7.0.

BRs might be unbalanced but that is something that can be changed. Historical matchmaking is unbalanced from the way it inherently works.

5 Likes

You were the one to comment that the PBV 301 could be 8.0 in historical matchmaking, so idk.

There are ways to balance the historical matchmaking, like they did in the Normandy landing event, they limited the amount of players on the ‘stronger’ side, which I thought was very cool.

You can’t see any issues with WW2 vehicles getting donked on by 1960’s vehicles?

It isn’t an issue when those 1960s vehicles aren’t any better than WWII vehicles.

The 1954 EBR is 6.7 and balanced despite being 10 years newer than many of the tanks it faces.

This gif should hopefully help you visualize my feelings towards you and this thread
jpeg

6 Likes

but the m-51 penetrates his tiger 2 frontally :( (ignore everything else about it)

If they have cold war munitions, they are not balanced in a WW2 setting. There can’t be logic behind your reasoning.

It was a comment on how stupid historical matchmaking is, not a legitimate game suggestion ffs…

1 Like

Yeah, because having a compressed TT without having historical MM sure is the best solution, right?

The EBR does not have Cold War munitions, same with the AMX-13s.

The first amx-13 uses the same 75mm as the Sherman’s, and the later ones and the EBR use a 75mm cannon with average pen for its BR.