I comprehend. People who visit the forums are way more likely to identify issues because people who don’t identify issues just play the game and don’t post anything.
They shouldnt have been spammed across so many trees but might as well keep them now.
1 Like
THE M44 & M55 should be at least at GRB 6.7 - 8.0 NOT AT 4.0 - this is a clear example of Retarded Snail Logia and displays a total lack of understanding about how tanks and things actually work. Modern vehicles have no business fighting against WWII ones. A medium tank from WWII is NOT equivalent to a medium tank from the post war period (1945 onward) … it is fucking stupid !?
or is this an attempt to degrade War Thunder to the braindead World of Tanks ?
I’m pretty happy they added it to all the trees. If they made the model and code for it for one tree, why not add in into others that used? It fits the criteria, it’s gonna come sooner or later, why not now?
Plus, there’s the added bonus of I don’t have to grind through another tree just to play the M55
Another goober who thinks historical matchmaking should be a thing, Point and laugh.
The time something was built has never mattered, Are you going to whine about the Concept 3 in the Brit tree next? That came AFTER the Abrams was first built despite using a slightly different version of a WW2 gun.
Is that why the French kept using the Panthers for another year and gave up on the ARL-44 only 1 year after building them because of how trash they where IRL when their whole point was to replace said Panthers?
Or how WW2 tanks continued to stay in service for decades after the war was over? The T-34 85 was used in Korea, The Panzer 4 was used in the Yom Kippur war.
Again, Date means nothing.
Move the Brumbar/KV-2/15cm SiG/Ho-Ro to 6.0-7.0 then.
This whole thing just screams negative 2 K/D Tiger main.
3 Likes
Yes historical matchmaking should be a thing … especially in GRB, what is is done in Arcade is irrelevant that can keep the retarded matchmaking.
Another goober who thinks historical matchmaking should be a thing, Point and laugh. - this shows a total and utter incomprehension of how armoured vehicles actually function.
Post war tanks built on what was learned during WWII … they are equipped with better armour mobility and firepower, not to mention way better heat rounds etc. If you don’t have historical matchmaking you end up with a World of Tanks clone.
There should be a HGRB that removes all the fake tanks, thanks that where prototypes that never went into production or where never produced and used in the army’s they where built for.
I can not for the life me see the logic in pitting WWII tanks and aircraft against tanks that never saw a WWII battlefield.
The modelling of prototypes results in an unrealistic tank that has none of the flaws it was rejected for, there where reasons why these tanks did not make it to production.
Another goober who thinks historical matchmaking should be a thing, Point and laugh. - lets have a civil discussion and not devolve it into a middle school playground name calling session.
how well did the PZ IV fare during that confect ? The modernised Sherman ripped them apart. The t34 85’s where similarly decimated by the new variants of the Perishing’s.
The point stands … WWII tanks can not compete against post war tanks.
You would then in turn have like at max 2 or 3 vehicles for a lineup and most of the cold war stuff would just not be playable. Cannot imagine that would be fun
The only one showing lack of comprehension here is you.
Armoured vehicles were not and are not designed to fight death matches against enemy armour with third-person camera and no logistics/repair concerns. They were and are designed to spend the vast majority of their time engaging soft targets and then being good at engaging other armoured targets when the need arises.
We never, ever fight any battle in WT that even remotely resembles the conditions these vehicles were designed for. That’s because gameplay and fun take precedence. It also means that vehicles have to do wildly different jobs than they did/do in the real world. And they are worse or better at those jobs depending on a high number of variables.
The PT-76 was not designed to go brawl around a cap with enemy MBTs. Against armour, it’s less effective than it would be in its actual intended role. So, it goes down in BR to a point where it can be effective against the one opponent it gets to face in this game - enemy armour.
It’s not a hard concept to grasp, bro.
The only postwar tanks that actually rely on armour (American/Soviet/French heavies and TDs) can be one-hit-killed by the long 88 of the Tiger II even at insane combat ranges. Especially thanks to the bullshit magic of APHE. You can snipe the cupola of a Foch at 1km and kill the whole crew. You can snipe the LFP of an M103 and send it straight back to the Cold War. On competitive grounds, everything postwar that has armour is still balanced in a downtier because even with vehicles a full BR below them you can kill them frontally, let alone kill them by exploiting situations and flanks/using your brain.
Also, all of these heavy vehicles fire standard kinetic ammo for the most part (a few exceptions exist, like M103 and SU-122-54).
This is much more common for postwar designs: medium tanks with great pen and no armour. You know what it means? It means they can kill you, but also that you can kill them without even having to aim. You can kill them with a Puma. You can kill them with a Pz III.
The things that differentiate WT and WoT are the lineup system and the different implementation of “health points”. Another major point is that WT sticks more closely to real-world designs. There’s nothing in there about re-creating historical battles or being a milsim.
The logic is that it’s fun. This is a competitive shooter game, if two tanks fighting against each other are competitive, that’s all you need to have fun. Who cares when they were made. If I want historical experiences I play The Troop or Steel Division 2. Not a bloody MMO shooter lol.
Also, you really don’t understand why a PVP game needs to prioritise balance of all playing sides above any other consideration? Think about it for a second. Maybe the answer will come to you.
Ohh, don’t worry, the serial production tanks we have in the game also lack all of their flaws that made them death traps in real history! My Jagdtiger never had to worry about the transmission exploding! Early T-34s with a two-man turret have the same targeting acquisition as every other tank because of the third person camera!
You are asking this game to be something it’s never meant to be.
1 Like
“Historical matchmaking” Literally only benefits one single nation in this game (Germany) to the detriment of all other trees.
Sweden would have jack all for ranks 1-4, Japan would be non existent 4.7-7.0.
You only want “historical” matchmaking because you want nothing to hurt your precious Tigers when you decide to sit in the open all game.
Most prototypes are modeled correctly, In most cases the reasons things where rejected was the military of each country changing their mind during development, One example being the T92 was going to be accepted into production to replace the M41, Then the US wanted something that could swim instead.
Other reasons include being not needed anymore like the T29 projects.
If the flaws you are talking about mean weak points, Those are modeled.
If you mean stuff like engines breaking down or fires starting randomly, Then oh boy do i have news for you about late war German tanks, The Ferdinand especially was notorious for having issues catching on fire.
There has been event modes for just that, And it had to have its own balancing system to make it fair, Perfect example being the Normandy one where Panthers had to earned with spawn points while you where stuck with Panzer 4’s in the beginning which spawned with SL, Even with that the match ups ended up being heavily one sided due to what was available.
2 Likes
If it’s true historical matchmaking, not even. The Tiger will be doing 1v5 on bingo fuel.
Because the repetitive grind is boring and annoying. I’d much rather work towards something unique or at least further down the tree instead of having to double back and unlock some filler vehicle. Multiple times.
That isn’t necessarily true. They could restrain themselves. Gaijin doesn’t have to do things this way.
They what is the point of having separate nation progression trees?
Do you really want an answer to that?
Both have to pander to the greatest common denominator. And that is the casual player that doesn’t care about historical accuracy (then why bother, but I digress…) but only experience and volume of content.
The casual player would not know the difference, but players the want historical do see the difference. The greatest common denominator will still engage becase they don’t know the difference. So why follow the WOT model when you can be different?
But you’ll notice that the Gaijin devs DO follow what WoT does, such as persisting in supporting naval mode even though it has a relatively tiny user base.
Most people only play one tree. Gaijin know this. They also know this leads to people getting upset when others get access to a mechanic and they do not. So, SPGs for everyone.
Lol, why? This is a drip feed content industry. Game’s been around for 13 years. To be around another 13… Every excuse for new content that is ignored is money left on the table. We’re even doing infantry now! The only constant in WT is and will be constant expansion.
He will know the difference when one side is stronger, so everyone queues up for that side, so the matchmaker is dead. Welcome to historical matchmaking. This happened every single time something like this was tried in WT.
This is a PVP game. Competitiveness is the most important factor in ensuring balanced lobbies. Not immersion.
1 Like
Why do you think my French tree looks like this despite having every vehicle up to rank VIII spaded and only need to spade the leclercs (top tier sucks ass so who knows when that will happen). I was lucky enough to pass the copy paste slop tier before they were added.
OK!!! . . .
I get it …
Most people only play one tree. Gaijin know this. They also know this leads to people getting upset when others get access to a mechanic and they do not. So, SPGs for everyone.
SPG’s - US/UK/GER/USSR deployed SPG’s - why add modern ones to WWII battles … where is the priest and sextant Grail etc ?
As for balancing giving Allied units 5 extra player slots or allowing them to get 1 extra spawn slot for games 1943 onward makes sense. Adding post war stuff dose not.
If it’s true historical matchmaking, not even. The Tiger will be doing 1v5 on bingo fuel.
Having PzIII’s fight modern SPG’s and tanks is Retarded on a fundamental level along with PzIII’s having to fight M24/M19 SPAA that can frontally Penetrate them is NOT balanced in any way ! Also these SPAA like the Russian and french and Swedish ones were designed to deal with Jests and are massively deadly to WWII Prop planes.
I am sure that a the game would benefit from a Historical battle GRB option.
1 Like
May be WT should be looking at game models like Call to War (Oss Front ) and not WoT?
If a vehicle was built, it will come to the game.
To do otherwise is, again, leaving money on the table.
However, the M55 is much less exciting in terms of “brand recognition” than the Hummel or the Sexton. So, it’s no huge loss to just copypaste it to everyone. Then, maybe (judging by some of the visual material they’ve released) in 2026 we get the Hummel. And maybe the Sexton is scheduled for, I don’t know, summer 2028. And so on.
Again: drip feed content industry. By doing this, you have milked as much interest potential out of each of these vehicles because they get to hold the spotlight for one update.
You don’t get it. This isn’t a single player game, where you can adjust difficulty settings in myriad ways. When it comes to PVP, you are not just trying to achieve competitive balance, you are also dealing with people’s behaviour.
The moment one side is favoured (real or perceived!) over the other, everyone will start queueing on one side.
World War Mode in 2022 ended up exactly like this. The Germans could only have one Jagdtiger per operation. However, there were x10 people queueing on the German side than there were on the American side. And if they saw the Jagdtiger was not available, they left the match, and tried again, because they wanted to use the big fancy weapon to stomp the Shermans.
Asymmetrical balance is much more difficult to achieve and even if you get there on paper, people will screw up the matchmaker based on their preferences. Hell, even with performance-based matchmaking, Germany at the WW2 BRs has so many players that you often get an entire team of only Germans playing against everyone else!
Since this is a competitive game, the best and easiest way to ensure balance is to go by vehicle performance. That’s all.
It makes sense competitively. If your problem is that it breaks historical immersion, I would ask what exactly is historically immersive about playing tank battles in urban environments without infantry. Or any environment, really.
Why? They can kill you. You can kill them. It’s a competition. Have fun. If you’d rather play a milsim, there are other titles available.
On the other hand, WWII planes in real life didn’t get the benefit of third person view and mouse aiming, and were generally - you know - afraid to die. Planes in WT are free of those limitations, so they are stronger than they were IRL, so they face stronger opposition than they faced IRL. It’s that simple.
It was tried many times. It never worked, for the reasons described above.
I don’t know, maybe one of the most long-lived and successful MMOs in the history of videogames does not need to fundamentally rethink its entire approach, what do you think? Lol.
1 Like