I’m asking for balance between historical accuracy and game balance. Right now balance is not more important, it’s the only thing that matters.
You’re the ones who come up with strawman arguments. Every single time historical accuracy is mentioned, you immediately come up with some horribly unbalanced scenario. You can think only in black or white, yes or no, good or bad.
Just let me fight Tiger 1s in T-34-85s in peace.
Was and never will be a point of this game, stop crying over it and learn how to play better.
I called you a casual, as in casual being the opposite of realism, not the opposite of competitiveness, since you yourself said that you don’t care about historical accuracy.
So you have no proof and are outright lying. Slander will get you nowhere.
Also, there’s little point to caring about it in a game that doesn’t prioritize it. The accuracy I prioritize is vehicle model and performance, which is also what Gaijin is supposedly prioritizing.
Ok, you haven’t actually explicitly said that you don’t care about historical accuracy, my bad. It can’t be far from truth though, given your stance.
Now what about the rest of the matchmaker? Should grants and 75mm shermans be facing Tigers as well just because you want the T-34-85 to face tigers? You’re willingly ignoring the rest of the game just for these two tanks to face each other. Get a hold of yourself.
Sure, a historical matchmaker would sound cool, but it would absolutely break the game and would never be fun besides for one or two nations at a time.
Grants and 75mm Shermans can fight Panzer 4s like they do now, I really don’t see the problem.
Btw the fact that Panzer 4 G, H and J have dropped so much in BRs over the years shows that statistics based balancing is flawed, human watch is needed. There was nothing wrong with Panzer 4 H for it to drop from 4.3 to 3.7.
Well that’s not realistic, they could also face tigers. Why are you picking and choosing when they face tigers, isn’t that the system you wanted to do away with?
Or are you subconsciously realizing that a historical matchmaker would make impossible matchups that are extremely unfair?
A historical matchmaker wouldn’t pick and choose for 3 tanks to fight, while heavies from the same time period also fought. The Grants and 75mm shermans (excluding jumbo) would also face the Tiger. Don’t ignore that fact.
Look at the 5.3 tanks. Does that seem like a fair matchup? You’re vehemently against fair, balanced matchups arent you?
What do you not understand about balance between historical accuracy and game balance. Something in between, best of both worlds.
And what was so scary at 5.3, that Panzer 4 H couldn’t deal with, IS-1? Sure it’s worse than an IS-1, but it’s a full uptier.
Sounds like balancing stabbing someone with nonviolent conflict, not really something that mixes well.
Black and white are opposites, yet together they mix to make gray.
Something in between that would be slapping someone.
Which is still inherently violent.
Yeah, they mix, now swap black and white in your analogy for oil and water.
You think balance and realism are like oil and water, I think they are like black and white.
ISU-122, T-34-85, jumbo used to be there, etc.
There is no “think”. Historical matchups are inherently unbalanced, because each side is actively trying to outdo each other.
Ha-Go vs Sherman 💀
Panzer IV vs T-34-76, T-34-85 vs Panther, IS-1 vs Tiger I, Tiger II vs IS-2, Maus vs IS-4, Leopard 1 vs T-54/T-55A.
Where the compromise comes in is for example in the case of the Hetzer. It’s from 1944, but can sit at a similar BR as Panzer IV H.
That’s where you would make a compromise and make it fight some Stuarts. Not really historically inaccurate either.