One thing I’ve learned during my first few days of get “5.3 lineup for everything” was that naval is surprisingly cheap (Mods.+grind) and that there are more than 5 players. Also you don’t need to wait 3 minutes like what most people think.
3 Likes
I agree with this, I really think it’s the key issue. The trouble is that simplifying and reducing the difficulty of a game to try and get or keep players is almost always a one-way ratchet. There’s no real way to make a game or game mode “more difficult” and succeed this late into its life.
The real core problems of WT naval are keeping game lengths of 15ish minutes and observing real-time physics. I think within those limitations they’ve done about as good as computers today permit.
1 Like
Maybe that was their plan, to change the aiming system to something that wouldn’t really require any skill and then add iconic battleships.
Many new players should want to try Naval in War Thunder seeing battleships like Iowa, Bismarck, Yamato added to the game. Maybe the devs think that with simplified aiming system there is a much higher chance for new players to stay and enjoy Naval.
I have a different opinion, especially it’s easier to explode ammo racks nowadays. The reduced TTK after the last major update may be a source of huge frustration for new players.
Anyway, June will definitely be an interesting month in Naval. But it will be even more interesting to see what will happen later in 2025.
For me this strategy looks like “all or nothing”. If the next major update won’t bring a lot of new players that will continue playing Naval in the future, this could be pretty much the end of Naval. I don’t believe Gaijin will put a lot of resources into a game mode that is almost empty.
Helicopter battles are a good example of an abandoned game mode. We used to have helicopter PVP battles, but they weren’t popular enough to be developed (but really required many changes!), so this game mode was eventually removed.
We now have simple and boring helicopter PVE battles with many bugs and problems, but it’s PVE with poor rewards, so the devs don’t have to care. Of course, you can’t count on any significant changes in helicopter PVE battles these days.
The future of the Naval game mode may be the same if these iconic battleships fail to attract a large number of new players to stay. But I really admire the optimism of some players, especially if they saw Naval stats.
4 Likes
I get this but… there’s still a MONSTER GRIND to get to BBs and “enjoy” them. They’d need to grant instant access. [epiphany] Oh. Premiums. …ok but! …in a F2P model, most players aren’t paying. You’re relying on the Free players to pad games with fresh meat, and you aren’t going to do that if the waters aren’t fun to be in. The core game play has to be worth putting the hours into, or you won’t have players. Free OR paying.
I mean, it’s the SHIPS that cost the most to model. The bigger they get. They’re doubling down on the biggest baddies because they think that’s going to pull the WoWS fanbase but, there best core gameplay is at the coastal level. The level they’d originally planned to deploy. …ignoring larger ships.
It would really suck if we got stuck with THIS aim mechanic before they abandoned the mode.
I’m a chopper enthusiast. But you gotta play tanks if you want to play choppers. And you gotta be willing to suffer to learn. Heli’s are a lot of fun in Realistic Tanks. Especially 7.3 or 7.7. After that, the AA can mean no gameplay for you.
I just wish Gaijin would take the hint and abandon Big Ships. There isn’t enough there to make them fun. Never really was. Too slow to move and fire.
3 Likes
Why throw the baby out with the bath water? It’s obvious that changes could make Naval gameplay better, yes, even with big ships-- it’s just that Gaijin doesn’t make those changes. They can’t abandon the big ships if they’ve already made them, so why not suggest that they improve the game they made!
Why is it that every time someone talks about Naval, it’s always in the context of cutting back or abandoning vessels and modes, instead of fixing what’s there? This pessimism will never help the game be better. It will only make it worse.
4 Likes
[shrugs] The idea was IF. If we’re going to curb our enthusiasim on an aspect of Naval because it’s not “viable” for Gaijin, then I say, “Hey. Look at big ships. Pump your breaks on them. I’m sure it takes like 1000h to model one. Take it easy. Those guys don’t actually do much besides make really loud booms. Which is cool but… ya know… we’re looking for gameplay.”
Sure. There’s rooms for BBs. It’s just not what’s going to “save” Naval.
Currently, BB combat is Point. And. Click. You used to have to think at least a LITTLE bit. Now… there’s not much to do with those slow moving floating islands.
They spiced up the Big Ships with Float Planes. that was great. If not broken half the time. But that gave you an ability to take part in the match before small boats capped the points and won the game.
I mean, that’s what you’re going to get when you start ships that move 30kph 10 kilometers from a point.
Sure. Keep the BBs. But MOVE focus back to dynamic combat experiences.
Small boats has that with closer starting points, and a large variety of movement/armamnet. DD combat is still pretty fast and fun, while staying vulnerable to boats.
But above ALL… for the love of god… give us back the aiming! What’s there to even do if we’re not AIMING tactically? If we’re not pulling fun trickshots based on our understanding of the physics of the game? What’s the point of playing if we’re just… relying on the bot to do it all for us? If I can’t “Fire from the hip” because targeted and untargeted aiming is so radically different?
idk.
6 Likes
So it’s an interesting discussion. I just think our collective framing might be a little off.
We all know Gaijin plans months in advance, and that they had two big changes planned for naval, both announced months ago. All the famous battleships in 2025, and also simplified AB mechanics starting with simplified aiming.
Taken together with their current playerbase stats, the plan comes pretty clear. That overall WT playerbase hasn’t changed in size in over a year, and 99% of that is primarily air and ground players. There’s nowhere left to grow there; anyone who likes those kinds of games has heard of War Thunder by now. And there’s nothing really that they could do in those modes more than they’re doing to get new growth within the limits of the existing codebase.
That leaves naval. I think the plan was always to make a serious play for WoWS audience share with those two changes above. First they had to make the changes to the AB gameplay to find that new audience and then they had to lure them with a big naval update. It’s not about luring people from other modes in this game over to naval… it’s about finding that whole new group of newb players they think they can pull over from the other game. I mean, if your playerbase size is as static as theirs has become, might as well hit for the fences.
The “old AB” isn’t coming back. Not a chance. RB will likely stay, for those who liked the old gameplay loop to continue on in. And if I’m right the June update will also see additional simplification of the AB ruleset. I don’t know what that would be, but I don’t think they’re done making a “zero barrier to entry” naval mode yet, and they said the aiming changes would just be the first step in that. And after June they’ll leave naval alone for a while, one way or the other, and try other things.
I don’t think it’s in any way their last hope, like Poul says. If this doesn’t enlarge their playerbase into a new market, they’ll move to do something else in 2026 that they think will. They’re making a concerted determined play to grab a whole new audience segment, and they might succeed in that, and if they do, it’ll only be healthy for all the game modes. I think we should all hope they do succeed, honestly. But we also need to manage expectations that the core gameplay loops of War Thunder are pretty change-resistant at this point and there’s not any real capacity to make any really dramatic changes to any mode going forward. Like any 10+ year old game, it is what it is.
4 Likes
He tried Arcade EC and couldnt hit crap…
1 Like
Question, how on earth did the opposite team lead player got 40+ kills?
Further: I don’t think anyone should give up on naval yet. RB is, I think, about as good as it has ever been. I’m not: just sunk some of my Strategic GJN Reserve into a 5.3 I wanted just last night.
I suspect I won’t like AB in its final form next month for the same reason I don’t like WoWS, it’s just not “naval” enough.
If Gaijin asked my advice I’d tell them to tweak RB to make it more palatable for the old AB players now. A big part of that would be tweaking down AI AA dispersion to rebalance in aircraft and make the radars more useful. I’d also fix some irregularities on which ships have air radar and which should but don’t. I’d add a second cruiser spawn point to the maps that can take one to increase spawn variability and reduce congestion. I’d increase the weather variability on higher BRs, where the chop is less of a problem, for atmospherics and a little added challenge. And last, an old favorite of mine, I’d let hydroplanes of all kinds be first-spawnable, if you wanted.
Those kinds of changes, basically tweaking a single variable in the code, could have outsize effects to increase the fun factor on RB and are still very doable. It’s changes of that nature, low-impact, high-value, that I think are worth our support and advocacy to make RB more of a “WT classic” naval mode that I think, in the long run, could keep the “Old AB” players and possibly even invert with AB to be the more popular mode.
5 Likes
Sure. I track the thought process here BUT… here’s another idea.
-
People playing WoWS are happy playing WoWS, and probably personally invested in the $100’s if not $1000s of dollars. Why would they switch? Even if Gaijin pulls of a 1:1 match on mechanics. IDK. It’s an optimistic play to mimic them.
-
If you’ve met market share, you’ve met market share. [shrugs] What Gaijin REALLY needs to do is… stop dropping matches by BR. It’s fragmenting the community. The more BR we have, the less people can drop in what they want because they’re all stretched out across 13+BRs. We need to move match making into a more Enduring Conflict model where ALL BRs are welcomed, and it’s all about how much does it cost to deploy. Give greater rewards to players for making older/lower BR units WORK in a specific mission, and specific roles. Add AI and objectives to huge maps. People would drop immediately into active zones, place on the map at objectives that makes sense for their BR/Tech level, but still part of a larger dynamic battle.
…but that’s a little bit different convo. EVEN THOUGH, Naval did that best by making 3.7 PT boats EFFECT STILL against 5.7+ Cruisers, or even BBs. Through boats inherent stealth and torpedoes (the great equalizer).
They’ve destroyed that balance. Which essentially means they’ve completely abandoned Coastals and are putting all their chips on The Biggest End Tier Ships.
This is potentially a fatal mistake.
[shrugs] Let’s put agency back in aiming. If that looks “different” than it had, cool. Me, To Gaijn: “Hey Team. Cool. I see what you’re doing. You simplified it. Now… make it INTERESTING.” Right now, it’s STILL a mess. For new players, all they’re going to understand is that you HAVE to target a ship to hit it. If you’re going to do that… make that mechanic work wherever you point the cursor. Don’t have TWO DIFFERENT Aiming Mechanics for Targeted and UnTargeted states. Make it so if you’re pointing at the water in front of you, you’re hitting it. If you’re pointing at the ship, you’re hitting it. Right now, if you lose lock, your gunners are losing their mind and shots are flying WILD. As if the deck crew has COMPLETELY forgotten where they are aiming. It’s not just annoying, its immersion breaking.
My god. If you’re right…how much further could they possibly simplify it?!? What’s difficult about driving around? That’s a terrifying and interesting proposition. If the game gets “simpler”, what will be left to actually “do” in it. …I guess I’m here for that trainwreck.
I’ll take this. The problem is “RB” is SLOW. I don’t want to try grinding a barge or frigate, and find myself sailing to a point for 25mins, never making contact. That was the appeal of NAB. You can get in there, mix it up, get some RP, move on to another match.
I LIKE RB. Sometimes. If Gaijin can make RB more dynamic, I’d be happy to walk away from NAB. For me, that would mean pumping up Boat/Ship speeds.
5 Likes
Just a small note, but I believe there was a round of statistics from just before the naval aiming changes that showed that AB was actually more popular than RB pre-Hornet’s Sting.
4 Likes
I think you’re right. AND I think you saw a bump in Realistic players, but maybe a dip back down.
Yeah, those were my stats: Data Analysis #3: The arrival of Statshark answers some old questions
AB was and remains the more popular mode. My point there was that that’s different from ground/air, where the arcade “entry mode” is now less popular (as you would expect in any old established game). I think there’s a possibility to see that relationship now invert for naval like the other two.
2 Likes
Lol. This guy is funny. But he echoes a lot of what we’re saying here.
Arcade aiming is crap. It’s not fun. It’s not rewarding. It’s frustrating to miss because you’re not even responsible for dialing in the target so… if you’re missing… wtf can you do?
If Everyone is just playing to get into Heavy Cruisers and BBs then… what is everyone else doing? What fun roles are boats/coastals performing? What fun missions are the DDs accomplishing? How can people play other naval craft and still have fun?
8 Likes
Ya know, it was funny because Gaijin released some REALLY COOL maps that NO ONE saw because you had to play at like… 1.7 to see them (talking about you, Sunken City!) WHY do that!?! Why spend all that time/money/thought and not let your most enthused players enjoy it?
In the right context, those lower tier vehicles could still get some use (like you see some tankers do in end tier matches with early WWII tank destroyers).
Gaijin just has to be more thoughtful about coastals. They’ve made most nations a real bore. That’s probably part of the problem. Japan, France, Brits… all super painful to grind coastals. Stop making the majority of coastals boring (and giving the Russians all the funnest OP toys…ok ok… Germany has some fun one too).
I’ll be happy when they get these BBs out of their system. Hopefully, when that doesn’t pan out (because… I just don’t see that gameplay being fun enough to keep people playing), maybe they’ll be interested in diversifying the experience (away from: Big Boat Camp and Go Big Boom)
Give us… subs. Sub hunters, both surface and air. Give us more missions to be sneaky boats in. Let us be rewarded for smart, tactical game play.
Not just… pointing and clicking.
2 Likes
It’s interesting that almost all the “Old AB” player loss, which has been significant since the update, happened at the lower end. Only 7.0 AB has really seen any increase under the new changes.
1 Like
I mean, I know some people will get a lil’ ruffled when I say this, and I mean no offense but like, at 7.0… you’re not doing anything. So this change has the LEAST impact. At that tier, a lot of players are essentially sitting still, or steaming away at 20kph. So I’m not surprised that 5.7+ players aren’t as outraged or upset as coastals. That gameplay is the LEAST impacted. (not all of you guys. Fella in that YT vid is also annoyed at the BB level).
But, All other gameplay is severely crippled.
3 Likes
and to add some wishes:
- show near enemy vessels on the map
- identify enemy vessels depending from distance (none/ship-type/ship-class/ship-name)
- add torpedo reload zones near the spawn-points (maybe incl. a cool-down time)
- nerf ai anti-air
- hold distance correction if chosen manually
4 Likes
Holding distance correction would make me swap right over to RB, currently I get sick of scrolling to recorrect over and over… feels like my mousewheel is going to wear out before a line is fully ground out!
4 Likes