Lineups 8_2 and 8_2_2 Rework

Game Discussion Simulator Battle
,
1

Lineups 8_2 and 8_2_2
Link to lineups page: WTLineup

Objectives:
The objective of this proposal is mainly to address the disparity in player availability for each side and the terrible queue time this leads to. The main causes of such problem being lack of balance and variety.
To keep the focus narrower and thus more manageable, discussion on nations participation for both sides (Finland, Hungary, East Germany) will be left out.

Lineup 8-2:
The main issue here is Rus-China side (Red from now on) lacks enough competitive vehicles to face NATOish team (Blue from now on).
These are T-54 and IS-4M while China only has Type 63 and 62 wich are (although fast) very lackluster. T-54s are rightfully very good overall but excell at nothing and only T-54(1949) has APDS and HEAT ammo so the 1947 version lacks in firepower against heavies. IS-4M and IS-3 are very well armored but lack in speed and fire rate while HEAT and APDS availability across Blue team aswell as their fast vehicles makes them quite vulnerable.
This results in playing Red being imbalanced, repetitive and boring.

Proposed changes:

Both sides:

  • Add back ARTI-SPGs (except VIDAR) for the sake of variety (also they fit here better than on later lineups)
  • Add Hand-Aim missile launchers (these are barely usable otherwise)
  • No thermal optics vehicles (remove Wiesel 1A4)

Red team additions:

Show list

Rus:

  • T-54(1951)
  • SU-122-54
  • BTR-80A
  • ZSU-57-2

China:

  • M48
  • Type-59
  • ZSD-63 (SPAA)

Blue team additions:

Show list

USA:

  • XM800T
  • M48
  • M60
  • M103
  • M50

Israel:

  • Magach 3 and 6
  • M-51
  • Shot Kal Alef
  • Tiran 4 and 4S

Others:

  • JPZ-4-5 (Germany)
  • Ikv-91 (Sweden)
  • AMX-13-90 (France)
  • M47 (Japan and Italy)

Notes: Keep in mind that some of the suggested additions are based on the poor performance that some vehicles would have in a higher lineup (8_2_2).

Lineup 8_2_2:
Similar issue to the previous one. There is too little variation in vehicles from 8_2 lineup and still quite imbalanced.

Proposed changes:

Both sides:

  • No tracking SPAAs (remove SIDAM 25)
  • Add SACLOS (mouse guided) ATGMs
  • No thermal vehicles except VIDAR and Wiesel 1A4
  • Vehicles with a maximum of 2 out of the next 3 features: Laser Rangefinder, Stabilizer, APFSDS between 250mm to 400mm of penetration.

Based on this, the additions would be as follows:

Blue team additions:

Show list

USA:

  • M60A1 (AOS)
  • M60A1 RISE (P)
  • M60A2
  • M551
  • T95E1

Germany:

  • M48A2 G A2
  • Spz BMP-1
  • Marder A1
  • Leopard A1A1
  • RakJpz 2
  • RakJpz 2 (HOT)

UK:

  • Chieftain Mk3
  • Chieftain Mk5
  • Swingfire

Japan:

  • Type 74 (C)

Italy:

  • OF-40
  • M113A1 (TOW)

France:

  • AMX-10M
  • AMX-13 (HOT)
  • AMX-30 ACRA

Sweden:

  • Strv 103C
  • Pvrbv 551
  • UDES 33
  • Pbv 302 (BILL)

Israel:

  • Magach 5, 6A, 6B, 6R and Hydra
  • Giraf
  • Tiran 6

Red team additions:

Show list

USSR:

  • T-55A
  • T-62
  • T-10M
  • BMP-1
  • BMP-2
  • Ob.906
  • Ob.435
  • IT-1

China:

  • Type 69
  • ZTS63
  • ZBD86
  • M113A1 (TOW)
  • CM25

Notes:
APCs present on previous lineup should be kept as they remain relevant and useful.
Ob.775 is excluded from this lineup as it would be OP.

Conclusions:
With the proposed changes lineup 8_2 would see a refreshed list of available vehicles that allow to complement the current one and improve balance between the teams. This is vital for Red Team and would partially address the issue of long queue times and small number of players.

Lineup 8_2_2 would see a shift in the main type of vehicles available for both teams as SACLOS atgms and stabilized tanks are more widely available and thus gain a more distinct place between 8_2 and 9_2 lineups, potentially resulting in a more interesting experience.

[Would you like to see this two lineups modified?]
  • Yes, as proposed above
  • Yes, but not quite like this
  • No
0 voters
2

I feel like ground sim could use a general overhaul anyways.

Part of me wants to remove the paper vehicles and severely limit the map selection (or add new ones) to ones based on historical locations depending on the time period of the matchmaker. I don’t really like late war German prototypes being thrown in with postwar NATO vehicles to be honest.

The sim experience I want is something closer to GHPC (which I can’t play because I’m on console), and I think War Thunder could rival pretty much any simulator tank game and even be better than them because the infrastructure is already in place.

2 Likes
3

I agree with jspene.
I think ground sim need a complete overhaul, at least in balancing vehicles to match gameplay and immersion.
I personally play only from 9_2 to 11_2 as an exclusively helicopter player, so i can’t really talk about other balancing issues other than helicopters/AA.

So we should create a new topic about the rework of the entire sim ground, not only 8_2 and 8_2_2.

4

Yes, I understand what you mean. There are tons and tons of improvements to be made to every lineup, map and sim gameplay in general but focusing in specific more prominent issues is more practical, I think, for getting changes done.
Examples like the removal and additions of certain vehicles from 2_2 (PzIV) and 9_2 lineups (QN506) or the creation of a brand new one (11_2) where needed is what this post aims to replicate.

Im focusing on 8_2 and 8_2_2 because those are the most avoided ones of all sim battles. It takes forever to get a match as NATO and even as RED you sometimes dont get games in 10 minutes or more wich is a shame since there are interesting vehicles to play. Also this creates a big gap in progression for getting 9_2 vehicles.
That is what this post tries to remediate. And to do so it might be better to start with less radical solutions (like entirely removing some vehicles) and not let complete overhauls (wich are needed) prevent us from getting immediate improvements.

Also, please, try to specify wich of the proposed changes you disagree with and why.

1 Like