Next Major Update - Rumor Round-Up & Discussion (Part 1)

[HolmanTheHorror]

@KhorneFlakez1337

Enlisted is doing just fine. WW2 shooters, especially F2P ones with a progression system like the one in WT are bound to fetch a smaller playerbase, but 6000 player peaks on Steam alone is a good amount. Of course it is less than what Battlefield games are fetching, but those are well established mainstream games.

I wouldn’t use Battlefield as a positive comparison. That franchise has been slowly dying for years now. Regardless, that hasn’t been the sentiment I’ve heard, but maybe I’m wrong, though I’m skeptical.

@KhorneFlakez1337

There are good reasons to keep the game seperated, they didn’t just develop Enlisted seperately because they felt like doing so.

• It is way easier to balance the two games seperately
• Each game can get a seperate ESRB/PEGI/USK/FSK/whatever-rating (12+ for WT and 18+ for Enlisted)
• The level of complexity for different mechanics and gameplay elements can be much deeper when there are fewer aspects to factor in
• The servers can be more specialized to reduce loads for the different games’ needs
• The spec requirements for the two games can be kept lower as things that are needed in one game can be left out in the other
• Development overall can be much simpler, as there are fewer things that could potentially break when working on seemingly unrelated things

Those would be good points if it weren’t for the fact War Thunder currently has Naval, Ground, and Aircraft all in one game. They follow this logic, at the very least naval would have been spun off into its own game from the outset.

As for the rating, that really isn’t as big of an issue everyone makes it out to be. There are ways to keep a low age rating if they care about it, like not having blood and so on. At worst, it would be rated T, which is what Fortnite is.

@KhorneFlakez1337

Neither of those things is going to happen, it makes more sense to keep both games running seperately. Enlisted is profitable enough to keep it running and War Thunder is better off without playable infantry

And they could arguably make more money if they merged Enlisted into War Thunder. War Thunder is an established title, and much of its success can be attributed to it being, in effect, 3 games merged into one. Adding a fourth, one that has more appeal then Naval, would expand the game’s market and increase the playerbase of both.

And, again, War Thunder, the far more popular title, is nipping at the heels of what can be added, at least for its most popular modes (Ground and Air). ‘Sacrificing’ Enlisted to expand the longevity of War Thunder by merging it under War Thunder’s umbrella is a mutually beneficial decision. Enlisted would gain access to a much wider array of vehicles, Enlisted expands its playerbase, more attention would be brought on to War Thunder and it can advertise to the FPS crowd.

I’d also hardly say that War Thunder is better off without playable infantry, provided it is in its own game mode. So long as Ground battles, as we know them, stay the same (maybe rename them ‘tank battles’ or something), nothing is lost and is only gained.

EDIT:

@Славянский Прострел

which could be the end of it for some players, because FPS games attract streamers and hackers. the former tend to influence dev decisions too much. but that’s my opinion

Don’t see why that would be. War Thunder regularly gets tens of thousands of players as it stands, and there are streamers aplenty already. I fail to see how the existence of an infantry game mode would suddenly make people quit, so long as they can still play ground as it is now.

[Thenighthunter]

@HolmanTheHorror

And they could arguably make more money if they merged Enlisted into War Thunder.

They get more money by splitting your currency between games.

Enlisted avgs anywhere from 3,000 to 5,000 players on steam alone. For the title it is that is just fine.

FPS infantry has no place in War Thunder.

[Cpt_Naoshi_Kanno]

@Thenighthunter

FPS infantry has no place in War Thunder.

I totally share this opinion.

The only way i see AI in WT Ground is beeing a IFV modification (or any Vehicle that carried Troops) that lets you deploy a small squad with some launchers that defend the area you dropped them (will mostly annoy you with taking tracks/engine) and the most use of them will be defending capture points
like the AI in the Trenches from the event.
(This could also open the Can of deployable mines)

New Door animations on their way of inviting HE shells

Other than that they have no place here.

[Admiral_Pieter]

Completely agree. I occasionally play Enlisted too (partly to fill the void left by the death of Heroes and Generals), and it’s great fun, but I can’t see it working if it would merge with WT.
So much would need to change that it woukd basically be nessecary to make an entirely new game…

Keep FPS in Enlisted, improve that game

Keep WT vehicle focused and improve that game.

[Cpt_Naoshi_Kanno]

@Admiral Pieter@live

(partly to fill the void left by the death of Heroes and Generals)

I will never let go of it, to many good memories :,)

R.I.P. H&G in my Steam library

[Thenighthunter]

It was really great in the beginning. later years became a huge cash grab with terrible progression.

[Cpt_Naoshi_Kanno]

Yeah, for me the Downfall began with the Map reworks.
But it was still a lot of fun from time to time.

[KhorneFlakez1337]

If Enlisted is truly dying as you are claiming, then what makes you think merging Enlisted into WT would bring in more players? People that play WT and are interested in Battlefield-like shooters most likely already play Enlisted and Enlisted players that are interested in WTs vehicular combat gameplay most likely already also play WT.

If you can’t see how the points I listed would be major reasons for Gaijin not to merge Enlisted and WT, then I think you are massively underestimating the effort required to combine these games compared to the rather small increase in income this merge would bring.

WTs dev team already is having a hard time keeping up with the huge amount of bugs, inaccuracies and balance problems the game already is facing. Having a fourth mode where not only aircraft have to be balanced according to the capabilities of tanks, but also both aircraft AND tanks have to be balanced according to the capabilities of infantry would be an absolute nightmare.

I’ve said this before, but not a single aspect of WT has been designed with infantry in mind. They can’t just copy Enlisteds code and paste it into WTs code either. Game development (software development in general) isn’t as easy as people seem to think, you constantly run into problems and the more features you have, the more things can and will break when working on other things.

But since most of this doesn’t matter and your main focus point seems to be WT running out of vehicles to add, let me tell you this:
Adding infantry doesn’t change the fact that the amount of vehicles that people are hyped for is limited.
Infantry isn’t going to keep the people that are only interested in the vehicle gameplay around, especially not if the infantry has the same progression as vehicles.
And as a sidenote, logistics vehicles could be added without playable infantry, but most of these vehicles won’t be moneymakers either way.

[Thenighthunter]

Did you include any documentation stating the Pave Spike as being capable of 73x zoom?

[KhorneFlakez1337]

The Kurnass has TISEO? Where?
I’m fairly certain the Pave Spike did not have a zoom mode with 73x magnification

[Thenighthunter]

That’s not a source for the bug report. If anything can bug report the stat card for being incorrect.

[Thenighthunter]

A lot of the bug report managers don’t really take the time or have the time to review the whole document it is important to be to the point with your sources and direct with the information and state what you want to need changed.

[Thenighthunter]

I would have to verify it but I believe most of them are volunteers not paid even if they were with the volume they receive especially the amount of bad reports they won’t really have the time.

[KhorneFlakez1337]

So wait, does the Pave Spike get 73x zoom on the Kurnass 2000 or does it get the 2.9x-9.6x that it has on the Buccaneer?

[Thenighthunter]

@F-16D Barak II

*all of them

Only paid ones are the testers/CMs

Then why did you make this statement?

@F-16D Barak II

Damn… It’s almost like that’s their job or something

@KhorneFlakez1337

does it get the 2.9x-9.6x

I haven’t found a valid source yet but the only number I had seen given to the the Pave Spike is x4.

[KhorneFlakez1337]

Well, you made the bug report, so you should know if it has 73x or not.
It would also be good to include some more info in the bug report, especially if there are more problems than just the zoom being wrong.

[KhorneFlakez1337]

@Thenighthunter

I haven’t found a valid source yet but the only number I had seen given to the the Pave Spike is x4.

That’s the same number I have found, but according to a spreadsheet listing the zoom levels that Gaijin assigned to the pods, the Pave Spike has 2.9x base and 9.6x while zoomed in.

[KhorneFlakez1337]

The screenshot says that the inbuilt optics (the TISEO) has 73.7x, not the TGP (Pave Spike)

[KhorneFlakez1337]

It doesn’t list the Pave Spikes zoom on there, afaik the “Pilot” specs tooltip never lists the external pods’ specs

Harrier GR.7 as an example:

With TIALD

Without TIALD

Tornado GR.1 with TIALD for comparison

You’ll have to test the zoom for the Pave Spike and the TISEO seperately ingame to be able to tell if the zoom levels are correct or not.

[HolmanTheHorror]

@KhorneFlakez1337

If Enlisted is truly dying as you are claiming, then what makes you think merging Enlisted into WT would bring in more players? People that play WT and are interested in Battlefield-like shooters most likely already play Enlisted and Enlisted players that are interested in WTs vehicular combat gameplay most likely already also play WT.

2 reasons. First of all, War Thunder has a much stronger brand then Enlisted. Just look around the forums and comment sections regarding ‘The Next Big Thing’ trailer. You have a ton of people hyped about the idea of War Thunder getting Infantry combat and only the occasional mention of Enlisted. The only people who know about Enlisted are people who play War Thunder and are somewhat active in the community. Secondly, for the same reason why Gaijin probably has what amounts to three separate games in what was originally supposed to be be a plane game, sunk cost fallacy, exposure, and maintaining relevance within your mind. You are more likely to try something if you are exposed to it, and more likely to keep using a product if you are exposed to it, that’s why brands put up billboards and advertisements everywhere. To keep their brand in your mind. You’re also more likely to try something if you have access to it, which, for video games, is having it installed.

@KhorneFlakez1337

If you can’t see how the points I listed would be major reasons for Gaijin not to merge Enlisted and WT, then I think you are massively underestimating the effort required to combine these games compared to the rather small increase in income this merge would bring.

It’s not that I don’t think it wouldn’t be difficult, it’s that Gaijin has done it from scratch twice now, once with ground forces, and once more with naval. You cannot look me in the eyes and honestly say that merging Enlisted with War Thunder would be harder then implementing tanks and boats to a plane game.

@KhorneFlakez1337

Adding infantry doesn’t change the fact that the amount of vehicles that people are hyped for is limited.

To an extent, yes, but it would be far better than the current scenario where there wouldn’t be that much hype.

@KhorneFlakez1337

Infantry isn’t going to keep the people that are only interested in the vehicle gameplay around, especially not if the infantry has the same progression as vehicles.

Would depend on how exactly they implement it, but I can personally attest that I wouldn’t have bothered with either Coastal or Bluewater if they weren’t part of War Thunder and, instead, separate games, but as they were a part of War Thunder, I tried them and enjoyed them, and invested money and time I otherwise wouldn’t have into both.

@KhorneFlakez1337

And as a sidenote, logistics vehicles could be added without playable infantry, but most of these vehicles won’t be moneymakers either way

Not really? Like, I guess they could have an engineer style of gameplay, but I feel that engineering vehicles would be a better fit for that as they would have methods of personally defending themselves.

@Thenighthunter

They get more money by splitting your currency between games.

Enlisted avgs anywhere from 3,000 to 5,000 players on steam alone. For the title it is that is just fine.

FPS infantry has no place in War Thunder.

In regards to revenue, that assumes you play both games. Sure, within that specific niche you may get more revenue, but that would probably not be enough to upset the potential opportunity cost in the form of players who would otherwise never played Enlisted or the average gamer who would otherwise never have touched War Thunder could have.

As for FPS infantry not having a place in War Thunder, that only holds water if you ignore the game’s own history. Playable tanks have no place in a plane game either, and yet War Thunder has planes. Similar story with both coastal and bluewater vehicles in a tank and plane game. They fit about as well back then as Infantry does now, and so long as it is its own separate mode, I don’t see the issue in having them.