Ah yes… DCS, War Thunder, X-Plane, etc… all “cheap games”.
History and nations have nothing to do with realism.
What a bizarre and stupid comment.Apply it to movies ,try putting an 80s vehicle in a ww2 movie and see how appeals to those who have an interest in armour.
2 Likes
There will never be a game, at least one with a playerbase of more than a peak of like 1k, that will be super realistic and historical.
This is simply because almost everyone doesnt want a very one sided game that requires a huge amount of time to get the basics down.
If you want a game that will have staurt vs is3 and has realistic driving, aiming, cordination, ect with similar stuff for infrantry/aircraft, you will have to make it.
I would be willing to try it but i doubt i would play it for long.
War Thunder is not and has never been a WW2 game.
War Thunder is not and has never been a war reenactment game.
War Thunder is a war games simulation.
War Thunder is popular cause it’s the most realistic war game on the market, and it doesn’t try to reenact history. Players don’t want historical reenactments, that’s not why people play games.
1 Like
*Gaijin moneymaker
2 Likes
I you open the gates for paper vehicles then those vehicles could be in the game as well. There is no categorizing them as more real and less real. You mentioned E-50 so I presume that you’re talking about the gap from Panthers to Leopards. Well that gap could be easily fixed by adding the actual Panther 2 with Panther G turret and the Leopard 1 prototypes which were interesting to say the least. E-50 wouldn’t solve any problems. You would get it but imagine what other nations could get. You would end up in the same point were you started. Russians and USA had paper vehicles as well.
1 Like
All is fine and dandy but you forgot about one tiny thing. Simulator battles exist.
You also have people reenacting real WW2 battles on Discord as well. If we went full realistic then Japan should be steamrolled every match because they used Ha-Go’s and Chi-Ha’s against Shermans
And that’s a slippery slope fallacy. We can draw a line to include credible paper designs while excluding impossible or straight up fantasy designs.
Regarding the E-50, the problem is the capability gap. The actual Panther II was just a slightly uparmored Panther I that was easier to manufacture, it would not perform substantially better than the current Panthers in game. It’s maybe 6.3 material. The G turret is also ahistorical, it’s just what the Americans slapped on the hull when they tested it at Aberdeen. It would have had a Shmalturm turret of some kind, IIRC.
Meanwhile, all Leopard 1 prototypes I am familiar with still have the excellent mobility and 105mm L7 gun (Excluding Europanzer C, which was just wild). The only real difference is in the armor, which is mostly irrelevant to the Leopard’s playstyle. At best, you have something with slightly less mobility and no rangefinder at like 7.7, maybe. That still leaves the 6.3-7.7 gap with both implemented.
The E-50 is the project that has enough information to work with to fill this gap. The other potential option is the Indienpanzer (I was surprised to learn it was a real project), but there’s too many unknowns to make a good guess as to how to implement it. Still, it has some interesting ideas (One of the proposals was for an autoloaded long 88mm gun).
War Thunder used to focus on realism, now War Thunder focuses on throwing as many gimmicky vehicles into the game to attract the lemmings into buying more. I won’t even mention the decorations and anime pillows of all things…
Also I think you’ve totally misread my comments, I’m asking for more realism not less. Older War Thunder was far more realistic than what we have now. Today we have aircraft flight models that won’t stall when they did and absolutely should, the 190A in particular has been so dumbed down you actually have to force it to stall.
Again having historical matches removed also deleted what little immersion and realism the game had left. Even in tank battles there’s nothing like having your WW2 tank obliterated by a HEAT launching Cold war vehicle smothered in anime pillows.
2 Likes
They could be much better and used to be much better. Gaijin are dumbing the game down with every update.
I won’t go into the aircraft physics again which are demonstrably worse than 5 years ago but if you want to look at tanks and their ballistics etc take a look at how Gaijin refuse to change APHE from the 1-hit physics breaking death orb that we still have to suffer with.
Don’t forget they also went away from official penetration charts to a formula a few years back…
Finally you can also barely damage your own tank or hurt your crew now. Back when tanks were introduced reckless driving could kill crew members. Not now.
2 Likes
It isn’t, as it has the wrong engine, meaning wrong performance, X-ray engine model, and engine deck.
The real thing was based on an M4 (105) chassis, where they switched out the turret, but the in game version is an M4A3.
You mean like this in the 1977 movie “A bridge too far”?
It’s a leopard 1, in case anyone here is fooled by the “disguise”.
Actually it’s pretty common for post ww2 tanks to show up in older ww2 films. “Patton” was filmed with M46, M47, M41 and M48 tanks, some of which were even featured on both sides.
2 Likes
Whats your point here ? Are you saying the late tanks in a WW2 scenario look fine ? They dont in the film or the game
1 Like
The fact that so many people run ww2 battles for themselves says it all.Warthunder failing to show respect to eras is one of its biggests failings.
2 Likes
War Thunder currently focuses on realism, and has more realism today than in the past.
Older War Thunder was arcade historical reenactment, not even realistic.
History isn’t realism, realism isn’t history. Nor is history immersion, otherwise you’d never be immersed in Metal Gear or COD Warzone.
Also customizing decals on tanks is realistic and immersive.
There are extremely few WW2 tanks above 6.7, and on top of that “WW2” tanks were in use until the 1960s IRL. Historical match making means Shermans facing M60s.
You can keep arguing that adding more realism is dumbing down the game, but I embrace the fact War Thunder competes with DCS and is even ahead of DCS in some areas.
Good to know you think DCS has bad aircraft physics.
Willi Odermatt’s penetration formula is correct and using it is realistic and accurate.
APHE is being changed this year…
2 Likes
Depends on the results of the vote tbf
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
1 Like
If APHE behaves historically it’d massively benefit the game. I’ll give Gaijin serious respect for that.
The difference is that Metal Gear nor Modern Warfare pretends to be historical nor realistic. That said the even the Call of Duty playerbase are complaining about the pink anime lasers and some of the skins… they’ve fallen into the same trap as War Thunder, take a look on Youtube at the amount of complaints about literally this.
History is realism and immersion when you have the facilities for it which War Thunder used to have (and brag about). You cannot have “Immersion” in this regard when a 1970’s tank comes around the corner and launches HEAT at your Sherman. In the same way people are complaining about Call of Duty having Nicki Minaj skins and pink laser guns.
At no point have I said that adding realism is dumbing down the game. Willi Odermatt’s penetration formula is NOT correct as it conflicts with actual test data. It’s just easier to use/justify as it makes tanks with obscure (or paper) rounds have some sort of formula behind it.
Where have I said DCS has bad physics?
The point is that classic ww2 movies feature a ton of period inaccurate tanks. In fact, it’s pretty likely to see cold war stuff in a ww2 movie if it was made before the advent of CGI.
Spain leased out their tank fleet on the cheap, so movie directors could have huge tank formations for the silver screen back then.
Its not a goid thing is it
The “classic ww2” films with period inaccurate tanks were received well, so it clearly wasn’t on people’s minds back in the day.
I dislike seeing cold war time travelers in ww2 tank eras as much as the next guy, but pointing to movies when they did cold war time travelers first isn’t helping your argument.