And yet here your post is, remaining…
1 Like
The year of manufacture is completely irrelevant for the BR placement
The Concept 3 (BR 4.7) was built in 1979, the same year as the first Leopard 2s
Spoiler
Yes, your “poor” KV-2 can meet an armoured car built in the same year as the first third gen MBTs
what are you yapping about
1 Like
Can we stop seeing unfun “I win” buttons being added each patch? Or in general…
2 Likes
can we not get a second coming of the M44 to most trees? please?
2 Likes
My previous other 2 posts didn’t, they just deleted it and put me on hold.
And that is also a bad idea and dumb in general… The only reason they put it down cause “balancing” These tanks were made with a completely different technology an knowledge, not to mentions about the general idea of tactics and strategies when these tanks were developed… Just cause it wasn’t developed to counter Leopard 2-s it doesn’t mean it should encounter PzIV and KV-2s and what not…
I feel like these is a skill issue problem and these tanks are pushed down so people could play with trash like this in the first place… doesn’t matter that this ruins the game experience cause you get to play in a fantasy game… If people want fantasy games than go play some fictional games… it’s just sad how this game gets lower and lower…
Blockquote
KhorneFlakez1337
Yes, I know “reload times can be adjusted for balance reasons”, but this is actually ridiculous.
This thing fires much larger and heavier shells than the FV4005, but somehow has the same reload rate?
Look, I get it, the realistic reload time would be way too long for a game like WT, but either the M55 should get a slightly longer reload time (32-35 seconds when aced) or the FV4005 should get a reload buff
Or just simply move the thing to 7.7-8.7 and than the reload will be reasonably low compared to the FV4005 considering it trading off armor for a better yield and reload speed not to mention low profile and way better speed! I think this would be balanced! As we talk about it M44 should also move out from the 4.0 and move to 7.0 at least! Should face off against coldwar stuff as it was mean to face those!
3 Likes
So, what should it encounter?
Let’s see something positive for once, an actual proposal. Let’s hear your solution. Where would you place the Concept 3? Consider the following constraints:
-
This is a PVP MMO. The easy balancing you can do when playing vs the AI is not available here. Instead, you have to assume that you cannot control player behaviour. Players will flock to strong vehicles and will tend to avoid weak vehicles.
-
You want people to play the vehicle. So the Concept 3 can’t just be cannon fodder, but also should not be OP.
Take it away.
Bro, we’re playing tanks without infantry cover in urban environments. You can play the Antarctica map with a Maus (who the hell deployed it there? Why are we fighting in the south pole?) and have Israel on the same team as Nazi Germany. A car with a 77mm gun is where you draw the fantasy line?
The M44 was absolutely not meant to be a cold war tank destroyer. It was meant to fire at fortifications, bunkers, infantry. If it hit tanks at all (artillery is a big tank killer) this would still be from a safe distance, through indirect fire. None of these are an option in WT, where it is forced to play as a tank destroyer, ergo…
2 Likes
Blockquote Bro, we’re playing tanks without infantry cover in urban environments. You can play the Antarctica map with a Maus (who the hell deployed it there? Why are we fighting in the south pole?) and have Israel on the same team as Nazi Germany. A car with a 77mm gun is where you draw the fantasy line?
No ofc not, these what you mentioned also bothers me a tons… which we also had probably tons of discussions about… but they kept ignoring this and the ones above you mentioned! This game should already divided vehicles from different era!
Blockquote The M44 was absolutely not meant to be a cold war tank destroyer. It was meant to fire at fortifications, bunkers, infantry. If it hit tanks at all (artillery is a big tank killer) this would still be from a safe distance, through indirect fire. None of these are an option in WT, where it is forced to play as a tank destroyer, ergo…
You see you point out a huge problem… yet the development still ads these things in the game don’t you see the irony? BY the way it first saw service in the Korean war… so it should face off the stuff that was participating in that war… instead of lobbing HE at Shermans, KV-1, T-34, PzIV, and anything really at between 3.0-5.0! Not to mentioned the cold war I meant it for the M55 that is in the topic… I just side noted the M44 as a similar case.
By the way why not add the Pries the Bishop and a lot of other Howitzers like the Wesp the Hummel and similar stuff instead of these… You can’t answer that right?? I would completely accept these vehicles in 4.0 and around…
BlockquoteSo, what should it encounter?
Let’s see something positive for once, an actual proposal. Let’s hear your solution. Where would you place the Concept 3? Consider the following constraints:
This is a PVP MMO. The easy balancing you can do when playing vs the AI is not available here. Instead, you have to assume that you cannot control player behaviour. Players will flock to strong vehicles and will tend to avoid weak vehicles.
You want people to play the vehicle. So the Concept 3 can’t just be cannon fodder, but also should not be OP.
Take it away.
Next level nonsense… for your 1st point! Did they give a damn about what will happen to the SD.KFz 221? it’s on 1.0 and even there nobody plays it cause it’s horrible! Can’t even scout… and it’s a scout car… or the stuff that came from the WWI event vehicles in 1.0 completely useless stuff… I only mentioned these cause we can be here all day and never reach the end of the list.
For your 2nd What did it face in IRL you tell me?! by the way it’s gun is perfectly fine to kill anything even IS-3 should be not a problem considering you shouldn’t go face to face with it… why should you you are a scout vehicle that can ambush anything. you have speed you have low profile no armor best armor.
To sum it up I only see that the developers just dumping out content without concept and than calling it balancing… clap clap the most easy way to ruin gaming experience.
1 Like
There always have been rather modern vehicles at very low BRs and WW2 vehicles and when Cold War vehicles were introduced you also had more than enough WW2 vehicles meeting those vehicles.
BRs are purely based on vehicles performance and there is nothing wrong with stuff like the Concept 3, the low BR AMX-13s and the low BR Ikvs meeting WW2 vehicles in terms of balance.
This is not a “skill issue problem”, this is very common in WT because BRs are based on vehicle performance relative to other vehicles rather than year of manufacture or war era. Historical matchmaking is a stupid idea and there are more than enough videos online that highlight the massive imbalance between vehicles if matchmaking was done on a historical basis rather than on the BR basis we currently have.
Also, since your main point seems to be that HE slingers are the big problem, I would like to ask you to look up some WW2 howitzers. 150/155mm howitzers were very common, even in early WW2 and they all would be able to overpressure the other WW2 tanks just like the M44.
1 Like
I think that it’s much more interesting that the Maus can traverse bridges in this game and that there are wooden bridges and scaffolding that don’t collapse, no matter what tank is driving on them
There are countless examples of the game being hilariously unrealistic and the game itself never was meant to be 100% realistic to begin with, yet people feel the need to argue that certain matchups are unrealistic and that there should be historical matchmaking (which would be extremely unbalanced)
1 Like
m8 have you even read what I written?! I also mentioned I would be fine with the WWII howitzers but no we got the coldwar ones in WWII lineups… And you are the one who is wrong thinking this is okay.
“Historical matchmaking is a stupid idea” I think the idea of not having historical matchmaking are the stupid ones! Have you seen the mobility of the M44? It’s more agile than a PzIV I would love to see a Priest a Bishop a Wesp a Hummel they have a reasonable weight/HP ratio and was not able to zipp around the battlefield like a stupid RC car… what these M44 and similar craps doing right now…
Yeah talk about broken things… piling up even more broken thing is the solution than people can feel safe and balanced… the logical solution.
Correctly. Because they’re busy making a fun game.
No. Nobody would play a PVKV IV against a T-54.
This is a commercial product. If you make a vehicle’s model, sound etc, it’s with one purpose in mind: for people to play it.
If you create a matchmaker where a PVKV IV has to see a T-54 in battle, everyone will queue up in the T-54, because players are not stupid. What was the point of adding the PVKV then?
But you can add it if you balance it by performance and not by era. Everybody wins.
No.
There are two fundamental differences between real life and a video game.
1: in real life, soldiers obey orders even if they are given a shit job, because it’s needed and because that’s how military discipline functions coercively. If you are told to go against a KV 1 in a Pz38t, you will do it, even if it’s unfair. In a free to play videogame, you are under no obligation to take such a shit, one sided match. You will spawn in another vehicle instead.
2: in real life, military vehicles fulfill a ton of different roles that simply would not exist in any videogame, even the most realistic one. Including them in a videogame means accepting that they will have to perform differently than in real life because the conditions are different, and that’s okay.
You think using the M44 as a tank destroyer is anatema vs real history, but even famous and normal WW2 vehicles are used very differently from real life. For example, if you play the Soviets, you’re not going to use the IS-2 as a breakthrough tank with the T-34s plunging into the gap for exploitation, if anything the T-34 will get to the objective before the IS-2 because it is faster, and the IS-2 will often do the exploitation instead.
The idea that WT is a realistic depiction of tank warfare is a fantasy. The only realistic thing about it is the damage model, by videogame standards. Everything else is arcadey gameplay.
No. It should face things it’s competitive against. Date of service is not relevant.
If a vehicle exists, it will eventually come to the game.
It doesn’t matter in which order they release content, you would always end up in a world where the Wespe, the M44 and the M55 are all in the game together. It’s not either/or.
I play it. It’s fun.
The M24 Chaffee can pen the side of a Tiger II. They are contemporary vehicles in real history. One is at 3.7, the other at 6.7.
The Puma can pen an IS-2 from the side. They are contemporary vehicles in real history. One is at 3.7, the other at 6.3.
Funny how no one complains when it’s beloved WW2 vehicles that do time travel.
There is a concept, a pretty easy one. Vehicle over performs, goes up. Under performs, goes down.
See above. Both will be in the game. Both will be balanced by performance.
If that mobility is hugely helping the M44, it will start over performing and it will go up in BR. If it’s not over performing, then the mobility is not a problem. Done.
How is the Concept 3 broken? Open Statshark and tell me which of its statistics is clearly superior to the rest of 4.3. Win rate? K/D?
1 Like
For you maybe… but there are others who don’t think so so we should ignore these players right… instead of adding it to the place were belongs pus it randomly… I wonder where will be the Priest and the Bishop when they come? Will be at 8.0?
WT is an incredibly successful game. For people who want more historically focused products, there are other niches and other games. I play some of them myself.
It’s hard to see how your proposals would lead to a player increase, given that your matchmaker idea would, for example, instantly nuke the Swedish tech tree. But sure, you’re the one concerned with disaffected players.
Nope. Performance-based is not random at all.
Even if Gaijin went insane and put them at 8.0, their stats there would be terrible and they would immediately drop in BR.
In reality, they’re going to be in the mid tiers, and you know this. Based on their performance they will be at the usual arty BRs. You haven’t addressed any of my actual arguments because you don’t have a leg to stand on in this debate.
1 Like
Yes, I’ve seen the mobility of the M44 and I can guarantee you that less mobile assault guns and howitzers with similar firepower and protection would be at even lower BRs. That’s how BRs work.
Case and point, the Bison (15cm sIG 33 B Sfl), Ho-Ro and Spj fm/43-44.
Vehicles that are worse in terms of specifications are at lower BRs, the ones that are similar get similar BRs and the ones that are better get higher BRs.
Historical matchmaking just ignores the specifications and throws whatever was available at a certain time against other things that were available at that time.
Are you seriously going to tell me that M10s, M22s and M24s should be meeting IS-1s and Tiger Is just because they were built in the same year?
Or that the ARL-44 should face the Maus and IS-3? That the Concept 3 should only be fighting third generation MBTs? That the Ikv 72 should only be fighting Cold War tanks?
Are you gonna say that all AMX-13s should be within the same “historical BR”?
Next thing you are gonna tell me is that WW1 ships should be the ones with the lowest BRs, that the original Harriers should be fighting F-14s and that F-14s shouldn’t be fighting early F-16s or MiG-29s
2 Likes
Panzer II Luchs vs M26 Pershing, let’s go!
2 Likes
I wouldn’t mind one bit…
1 Like
Historical matchmaking just ignores the specifications and throws whatever was available at a certain time against other things that were available at that time.
Are you seriously going to tell me that M10s, M22s and M24s should be meeting IS-1s and Tiger Is just because they were built in the same year?
Or that the ARL-44 should face the Maus and IS-3? That the Concept 3 should only be fighting third generation MBTs? That the Ikv 72 should only be fighting Cold War tanks?
Are you gonna say that all AMX-13s should be within the same “historical BR”?
YES
My problem is not the BR bracket… it was all fine until the mixing started… yeah it’s okay to not face tigers with a M22 or M24. They are still in the WWII range… but that’s not okay that a M55 going to face Shermans and other WWII vehicles while it could easily kill anything in probably ANY BR!
And don’t give me that crap that nobody would play it… This question was not on the table when they added the Sd.Kfz.221, any of the WWI vehicles from the event(let’s face it nobody plays them for a reason). And I could keep listing unused vehicles…
Ohh yeah and one more thing… now one every arty it comes out doesn’t matter where or when was it made… let’s shove it to 4.0 cause why not? Cause let’s make 3.0-5.0 even more toxic with all the HE lobbers perfect!