You are not everyone and there is a lot of people who use their MG for more than just shooting bushes.
I’m sure I can speak for the majority here, playing as a bait isn’t what many people like to do.
You have similar or even worst vehicles in higher BR doing very well. Again M51 is not a exception for that stupid low BR.
You really need LRF for playing between 6.7 and 7.7??? LMAO.
The more funny is here you are talking about a tank you never played, stupid arguments supported by smoke well done.
Finally someone reasonable.
Is it that hard to understand that if i want historical accuracy i don’t want to have panzer 2s fighting is4s (which i have no idea how that would be historically accurate), but rather to have tiger 1s fighting t34 85s and sherman 76s in peace without post war tanks interfering. I think it’s a simple concept.
M51 can face other heavily modified ww2 tanks at 8.0 and be fine.
Also stop blaming every problem with balance on german mains please. Players should not be taken into account when talking about balance.
Edit: What i’m talking about here is BASIC historical accuracy, you know, the kind that makes things look reasonable, not absurd, like the latest spaa with leopard 1 chassis at 5.0.
So what tanks in particular should be at 8.0 alongside M-51 ?
Couple of examples is more than enough.
Off the top of my head i can think of t34 122. I’m not feeling like doing research right now, maybe i’ll come back later.
It doesn’t even need to face heavily modified ww2 tanks, but just a copy paste of, for example, t34 85 but at 8.0 with syrian camo or something and maybe new shells.
Okay so T-44-122 and M-51 at 8.0.
Where would WW2 classics like Tiger II and others be placed in this system ?
Also, where would stuff like Leopard I go ?
I may not play it, but I have played vehicles at this BR range, if you get a decent sized map, like Sand of Sinai or European province and have a long range battle with, like the example of vehicles I do have experience with, the IKV 91, which has a LRF, even if you fire first, there’s a minimal chance your going to win or should I say minimal chance for you to land a shot while theirs is already on the way, and then also, the constant up tries to 8.0-8.7 range where there are other vehicles, the Strv 103 A and C, both have LRF and amazing rounds with similar penetration. The IKV has a 43 MPH top speed (roughly 70 kph for metric) and the Strv with 31 MPH ((roughly 60-64 kph for metric) which should be 37 MPH) I don’t think you know what your taking about, a M-50/51, essentially the chassis of the M4A2E8, with improved gun, and no mobility changes, sure it should be 7.7, that’s an abysmal move. (I’m definitely not being sarcastic if you couldn’t tell) also, no, I don’t need a LRF, it just makes it so much easier for ranged engagements of 1000 M + especially when your shell has a giant arc. So if you think a glass cannon is too OP when absolutely everything can destroy it and turn it to a mangled metal mess just stop because putting it higher is going to make it even worse.
It wouldn’t. Unless it’s the Middle East, some third-world country, or Africa. Since the Panzer II retired in 45(end of the war or possibly lasted longer under the holdout units). While IS-4 was being designed in 1944 but only got produced in 1947->1949
Now go back to the first part of your paragraph. To an extent Historically accuracy is fine. But once you get higher in the BR bracket certain vehicles like the Tiger II should not be fighting early-mid or late post-war vehicles. Rather early post-war is fine as many of the designs were either built with WW2-era technology, were under design development, or were only finished after testing but were not commissioned for production. Another exception is vehicles that may have been built decades later but at the actual period it was built would have been outdated and performed poorly Ex: The Swedish Pansarbandvagn 301 built in 1961 however uses the limited produced and retired Stridsvagn m/41 and Swedish licensed version of the French Hispano 404 20mm from the retired SAAB-21’s. That is the catch though.
1 Like
Is3, the last ww2 tank (technically not, but you know) and some other tanks that have ww2 technology ONLY, for example t54 without heat or apds, should be at like 7.7 and everything past that needs a complete rework, decompression or however you want to call it. Those crap modified ww2 tanks would be then at 8.7 and stuff like m46/t54 with heat at 9.3.
It’s not ideal, since tanks like m46/t54 with heat wouldn’t be able to meet an is4, but that’s what you have to do to keep tanks like m51.
Now if such small group of tanks makes such a big problem for the famous tanks everyone wants to play, why shouldn’t they be removed? Maus got removed, why m51 can’t be.
It would not be accurate, but it’s an example you have made up. Here’s one that would be accurate: Pz 35(t) vs KV-1, as per the battle of Smolensk. Have fun.
As for Tigers, sure, no problem. There will be ten Shermans for each Tiger on the field, though. It’s accurate after all.
I can’t believe I, as a German main, have to say stuff like this. I guess there’s a reason for the stereotype.
2 Likes
The M-51 Super Sherman is fine where it is.
Despite it having a 105mm HEAT Yeeter, I am content with where it currently is, and I have barely even played it.
The reason for it being 6.0 is due to the following: Its based off the M4A3 chassis, a french 105mm gun that is NOT autoloaded, and the fact that its the first Israeli tank you unlock, so Israeli players are ALREADY at a major disadvantage when compared to other nations, who start at rank 1.
9 Likes
When War Thunder Ultrasim (the Discord server) prepared the rules for the event meant to “re-enact” the Battle Of Smolensk, they also (obviously) drafted a list of the allowed vehicles for the match. Since only tanks that were actually there would be allowed to participate.
Now, I would actually recommend reading the entire document, because it’s a good case study of how much work you need to do, to produce something that approximates historical realism while using War Thunder as your starting point (all the rules they added about repairing, about stationary gun emplacements etc). But to keep this short, I will focus on the lineup element of this, because it’s a good snapshot of what “historical matchmaker” would actually mean.
Would I play something like this? Hell yeah, it sounds like a challenge and an incredibly immersive experience. I have a few very busy months ahead of me at work, but after that I’ll definitely get in touch with these guys and try to attend at least one of their re-enactments.
Would this be player-friendly, and/or be “fairer” than a Tiger E fighting an M-51? I’m sorry, I just don’t see how.
3 Likes
Well, one did manage to go to the 1945 parade. So it is by a few hours. Heheheh
How about no. That does not make people happy it only pissed a ton of people off, as we want to play whatever we want to play without restrictions. If you put restrictions you basically kill the casual player which is the majority leaving only competitive ones leaving Gaijin with no profit at all. I’m not saying I agree or deny the idea. But it doesn’t work with WT as an overall.
Read his last sentence.
1 Like
Err… What?
I don’t think you’ve understood the content of my comments. I was explaining to him why historical matchmaking wouldn’t work in WT, and that if he wants that experience, he can find that in dedicated spaces, like roleplay focused custom battles.
Most of the time, it’s the people who want to play the famous tanks that are the problem. I was blindsided by someone on my own (German) team complaining that I was using the M109G simply because “it was a cold war vehicle”. It really makes me believe that people have the wrong set of expectations for this game.
AHh haven’t eaten so i’m in a drowsy state. So my bad.
1 Like