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

Game Discussion General Discussion
3692

All it would lead is people angry at having to grind for 410,000 extra RP to get to the endgame because someone thought it was brilliant to add a speed bump for 2 marginal differences.

Wanting 4x Eurofighter variants on a tree is as redundant as 4x F-16A variants would be.

The differences between the variants of most planes you list are more significant than those between a Late Tranche 1 and Early Tranche 2 EFs.

I’m starting to think some of you just really like grinding and want to have more stuff to grind even if it doesn’t actually have a significant or relevant impact on the game or gameplay…

3693

2007 off of what though? A2G weapons?

3694

Its 50 50 with british players, they either hate all non brits or they dont have a problem with others. Its a flip of a coin when it comes to which side they are

3695

Yes

3696

Yes, for A2A its 2003 which is still about 9 years newer

3697

This is incorrect. When the major update went live, both Gripen A and C were functionally almost identically on par except in the variants of Mavericks they used.

We also made it very clear the C was following closely behind for Sweden and would be added when it would introduce actual meaningful differences (Such as RB 99, because the A and C in game were already that closely similar) to the A.

3 Likes
3698

Then for air RB it’s effectively a late 90’s model

3699

Im a case of somewhere inbetween both of those if im being honest, i try not to base opinions of vehicles until ive at least tried them once

3700

Not with an HMD it is not.

3701

I do enjoy grinding, but you know what I enjoy even more? Not having the BRs compressed to the point they could cause a supernova.
More variants with lesser differences = more possible BR steps = better progression and more balanced matchmaking

3702

Agreed. Ground has kinda been neglected, relative to air, for a while now, though I’m honestly quite happy with what Gaijin has been doing with it lately, copy paste aside. They’ve been implementing a lot more AA vehicles, with a lot being passed to the developers. T77E1 was a great addition, as many never bothered with the Dusters as the 40mms are a bit of a pain to use, and from what it sounds like, they are preparing to add in long range SAMs into the game, and if they add in AI infantry as well, similar to what was shown in the trailer and the event? CAS may actually become balanced, or at least much better than it was before.

Honestly, while I do have my issues with Gaijin, I’m actually somewhat optimistic for the game’s future. There is the aforementioned AA implementations and possibilities, but it also seems like Gaijin is slowing down with additions that really push BRs forward, as well as the implementation of new nations, instead filling out gaps in tech trees (as well as in general).

There’s also the recent WW1 event, which was great. It wasn’t a grindy event, the rewards were good, and the features it was testing are things I am genuinely looking forward to. Especially as it seems like Gaijin isn’t tagging them as event vehicles, which suggests that they are considering implementing WW1 and the early interwar period sometime in the future. Obviously, that is exciting for the prospect of seeing more of the cool prototypes and early designs from the period, but also suggests that Gaijin is making actual alterations to the techtrees, which they haven’t done since the implemented BRs, which can mean seeing anything from seeing the number of lines a nation can have expand, splitting up WW2 and Cold War+ vehicles (rough example) from each other, to overhauling how subtrees work. Would certainly be in line with the leaks of a potential subtree for the US.

Do hope they make the trees thicker instead of pushing them forward, however. There’s quite a few prototypes and production vehicles that can be added that would be good vehicles to ‘center’ an update around, such as up-gunned Abrams prototypes, the aforementioned SAMs, and a few more ‘traditional’ AA platforms that include CiWs mounted onto trucks. And that’s what I can think of off the top of my head. There’s probably quite a few I don’t know about that could be added, but, point is, we can probably delay a new tier for some time.

Interesting, I think I can see them doing this if they implement Infantry, assuming they don’t decide to just merge Enlisted into War Thunder.

It’s one thing to grind out a bunch of different guns in a WT system, which can make it feel tedious, it’s another to grind out full on squads, even if the difference is mostly in presentation.

2 Likes
3703

Ah yes after backlash but you didn’t plan on making them on par until after we had to ask so dont try to play this as gaijin being kind when the original goal was to screw sweden over which has been their plan for a while given the state of the Gripen A, C and the newest dumpster fire the F-18C because gaijin wants to skip the MLU 1 because it would devalue the US model. The F-18C was added so gaijin didn’t have to fix the lack of a good top tier fighter on sweden and could ignore their air tree for another year.

3704

My biggest gripe is that the JAS39C for sweden is basically everything the A should be minus the SBDs and the general A-historic secondaries which makes everything 5 million times harder to report and deal with

1 Like
3705

Ok i read that and immediately imagined a gripen carrying dauntless dive bombers

1 Like
3706

Smin does Gaijin have any plan to change their naming scheme for Aircraft. The “early” “late” designations are showing their flaws.

1 Like
3707

Gaijin trying their hardest to make a Gripen C which isnt just the A model challenge impossible

3708

Since the discussion is off-topic, I will try to avoid fueling it further; but this is why I spiraled so hard into it.

I don’t understand some sections of the community sometimes.

If more of the early variants of a plane are added beforehand and progressively, they are deemed to be redundant, “speed bumps”, “nerfs”, “Gaijin hating X nation”, etc, under demands and claims that “better variants should have been introduced right away instead”…

But if Gaijin does indeed skip the earlier variants and goes right away for a more capable variant, if ever so slightly, suddenly now THAT is a problem too because “they are skipping potential additions they could have added to enrich the trees”…?

So what now? What do we want? Trees with 5 identical variants of each vehicle, or trees that progress through gameplay-relevant upgrades? In both cases, apparently everything is about criticising Gaijin… and I’m someone who does that quite a lot; it’s just that I can’t see a reason to do it in this instance.

3709

Its even got the countermeasures the A should have, it is a more accurate A than the A

1 Like
3711

It’s almost like different people have different opinions or something

Doesn’t really matter tho, because they are getting close to the point where they have to add these “redundant” variants to pad out the updates.

3712

Its been evident gaijin has no interest in a historical Gripen ever since it was added. Probably because they couldn’t care less about their airtree