I mean, usually when they actually introduce mechanics for certain vehicles like that, those mechanics end up being neglected afterwards.
They never really did much with stuff like mast mounted sights (RCV P, Strv 122 PLSS, Object 775), flamethrowers (Zippo, Churchill Crocodile, TO-55), hull-aiming mode, object building or even dozerblades and the scout UAVs to some extent. (I’d also count the auxiliary vehicle mechanic, but that’s still pretty new, so it remains to be seen if they expand on that beyond SAMs)
On a seperate note, they also seem to have forgotten about the radio operator crew role, as they always set “surplus” crewmen to be machine gunners, no matter if there even is a machine gun available. Similarly there still are dozens of tanks lacking their hull machine guns…
In many cases the vehicle still has a place in game and functions well at an appropriate BR. If and when the possibility of a mechanic comes along, that can always be done. But its no reason to withhold a vehicle in the meantime.
huh, the DE and SWE 8.0 to 9.0 WR surprises me, thats normally the two nations I have to try hard the most against. (As of late I mostly play UK 8.3-9.0, JP 8.3-9.0, & FR 8.3/8.7)
would be nice if statshark also displays WR% over BR ranges and not singular BRs.
65.2% WR is kind of a “useless” statistic when 11.3 only has three vehicles in it two of which are the BMPT. Still shows you tho which vehicles are overperforming.
@Smin1080p_WT Hi! Can I ask what devs are thinking about napalm meta? I mean, isn’t it too powerful currently? Dedicated attackers/bombers, especially if they don’t carry napalm containers usually arrive too late to enemy bases, because every fighter includig lol MiG-29s bring napalm and go straight to bases.
Fighters with good bombload as well suffer from increased br because of napalm meta, for example F-104S.
Maybe it would be healthier for the game to make napalm less effective and/or improve bases protection so they can be fully destroyed only with conventional bombs?
Only active players that have ‘registered’ their account in thunderskill(which means clicking on the blue update button on their account page), so most numbers can be slightly skewed upwards.
I’ve always wondered, is there a place that takes into account individual player averages for vehicle performance and compares how far above / below that their performance is on average?
It’d be nice to see what vehicles look like they perform fine, but are actually just carried by players that perform even better on other vehicles.
Hey. Different ordinance types have differing uses and benefits in game. Conventional bombs are typically more effective in combined battles or for armoured targets, whereas Napalm is generally more useful in Air RB for bases.
If the balance of any weapon causes particular concerns or gameplay issues, this is of course something that would be investigated futher.
Currently however there are no plans to change Napalm.
The vehicle shouldn’t be withheld from the game, sure, but you guys are building this vehicle from scratch (or mostly), why do you guys just not build it with all its features, when that is literally what you’re supposed to do when developing vehicles for the game? Especially since this one in particular, you have to pay real world money for, and stay on top of completing missions for several weeks. It should come with its full suite of options.
Smin, what are the chances for the Leopards which we have allready in game, but who dont have HE yet to get an HE round?
Because for some reason Sweden is the only Nation in game who has Leos who has HE on every Leo… https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/jlv1XEcbll4i
Fun fact, there was a classified document leak on a discord server yesterday… the leaker was banned obviously but still funny.
How many does that make now?
