The number of players in China is several times that of Sweden. However, once upon a time, Sweden was as powerful as Russia. And before the arrival of Z10ME and M1A2T, the Chinese teams were very poor
Its both. russia has always been a popular tree but until recently they didnt need all the artificial pampering to stay competetive and now its essentially a vicious circle of: making russia unreasonably powerful → more people play it → Gaijin caters towards its biggest playerbase → rinse and repeat.
Yes until the number of Russian players became so large that they formed a queue that blocked the way
i like playing russia, but what they are doing with the game is a shame. is not fear and a pay to win
Exactly. russian playrates have become so ridiculous that im really worried how Gaijin will react to that. Either they keep the current trajectory and overbuff russia even more or they completely swing in the opposite direction destroying every bit of balance we still have left.
2 Likes
Only because it is good, if Russian vehicles were modelled correctly. Players would not gravitate to it, instead since Russia’s wee trip into it’s neighbour it has been full cope ahead.
T-72 turret to the moon - Gaijin add autoloader and reduce the chance of that happening.
Adds LMUR and Kh-38 just to maintain the biased.
Gaijin will kill this game, can’t wait to play the infantry mode and Russian body armour it tougher or NATO bullets are nerfed for balance.
Yep and that is exactly what id describe as russian bias: Gaijin engaging in selective realism so russia can stay competetive where they shouldnt be without it so Gaijin can continue milking its biggest playerbase.
3 Likes
But the game dies without an enemy for the Super Russian army to defeat, Just sucks we are trapped in this free to play model.
Imagine how good this game could be if we could have servers and make scenarios, restricting vehicles
Thats why every tree gets some treats thrown their way sometimes. An IRIS T here, an AH64E there. Just enough overall to pose a challenge but never all eggs in one tech tree basket.
4 Likes
A low iq monkey is still a low iq monkey no matter which zoo it moves to
A fitting statement to describe your behaviour
1 Like
if Russian vehicles were modelled correctly
Can you please provide an example where they are modelled incorrectly?
i dond understand what logic have this add toptier spaas to counter cas but add overperform dircm to helicopters wo counter this type of spaa… i fired all irst on mi 28 and all missed… and irl enought one stinger to shoot down … so gg
I wonder what would happen if some of the Warthunder community got together and created a copy-and-paste version of Warthunder, but fixed all of the GODAWFUL issues that it possesses.
Such as:
1. The “Eternal” Grind & Economy
The most consistent complaint is that the game feels like a second job.
- “Recovery” Sessions: Players often complain that a few bad games can put you in the “negative” for Silver Lions (SL), forcing you to play low-tier vehicles to afford to fix your high-tier ones.
- Stock Syndrome: Grinding a new top-tier jet or tank is miserable because you start without basic tools like Flares, Parts, or FPE (Fire Protection Equipment).
- The “Sunk Cost” Trap: Many feel they only keep playing because they’ve already invested thousands of hours or dollars, rather than because the current gameplay loop is inherently “fun.”
2. CAS (Close Air Support) in Ground Battles
This is arguably the most heated debate in the community.
- The “Revenge Bomb”: Players hate getting a skillful kill on a tank, only for that player to immediately spawn in a plane and drop a bomb on them 30 seconds later.
- Spawn Point (SP) Costs: A common gripe is that it’s too easy to spawn a fully-loaded fighter/bomber. You can often cap one point, die, and have enough points to dominate the rest of the match from the air.
- Lack of a “Tank Only” Mode: There is a massive segment of the player base that has been begging for a ground-only mode for a decade, which Gaijin resists to keep queue times low.
3. BR Compression & “Uptiers”
The Battle Rating (BR) system is designed to keep queues fast, but it creates “power gaps.”
- The +1.0 Nightmare: Players hate taking a WWII tank (like a late Tiger or Jumbo) and being “uptiered” to face Cold War tanks with HEAT-FS or stabilizers that they simply cannot compete with.
- Technological Leaps: In Air RB, the jump between “no missiles” and “all-aspect missiles” is too small, leading to matches where older jets are essentially fodder for modern Fox-3 carriers.
4. “Russian Bias” (The Great Meme/Debate)
Whether real or perceived, the “Russian Bias” complaint never dies.
- The BMPT & Pantsir: Recent complaints often center on specific vehicles like the BMPT Terminator or the Pantsir-S1, which players claim are over-performing or have “fictional” survivability compared to NATO equivalents.
- Volumetric Armor: Players often complain that Soviet fuel tanks or driver ports “black hole” massive high-penetration shells that should have easily destroyed the tank.
5. Map Design & “Spawn Camping”
- Redline Sniping: Many maps are criticized for having “power positions” near spawns that allow one team to lock down the entire match in the first two minutes.
- Small Maps for Modern Tanks: Players hate taking a tank capable of shooting 4km and being forced to play on a tiny “Call of Duty style” city map where you’re just rubbing fenders with the enemy.
And other issues related to map design and Objectives:
1. The “Knife Fight in a Phone Booth” Problem
This is the #1 complaint for top-tier players. Modern tanks and artillery are designed to engage at 2km to 5km.
- The Issue: Gaijin often puts these high-tech machines on small, “city-brawl” maps like Sweden or Advance to the Rhine. Players hate that “tactics” are often replaced by “who has the faster turret traverse in a 50m alleyway.”
2. Spawn-to-Spawn Sniping
Many maps are designed with “Sightlines of Death” that allow one team to shoot directly into the enemy’s spawn from the first 10 seconds of the match.
- Problem Maps: Middle East, European Province, and Sands of Sinai are famous for this.
3. “Redline” and Boundary Shrinking
In 2025 and 2026, Gaijin has been shrinking map boundaries to force players into the center.
- The Complaint: Players feel this removes the ability to “Flank” or find creative sniping spots.
- The Impact: It turns matches into a “meat grinder” in the middle.
4. Air RB: The “16v16” Chaos
In Air Realistic Battles, players are currently furious about the team sizes.
- The Issue: Having 32 players in a single match at top tier (with Mach 2 jets and 40km missiles) creates a “furball” where you die to a missile you never saw.
5. Gamemode Stagnation
Most matches are still just “Capture the Point” (A, B, and C).
- The Complaint: Players find it “bland” and “underdeveloped” for 2026. They are begging for Enduring Confrontation (EC) style maps where the goals are more complex (destroying convoys, taking out factories, etc.).
- The Fix: The community is currently praising the “Nuclear Thunder” event because it introduces actual objectives beyond just sitting in a CAP Point.
I genuinely wonder if making a different version of the same game, with the majority of complaints addressed or taken into account, would cause Warthunder or Gaijin to reconsider some of their choices.
2 Likes
It’s a shame that one of the main things that makes wt great is copyrighted…
Well… There Cheerios and there’s Honey Nut O’s.
There’s always a loop hole.
In order to deceive you at the same time maintain Russia strong
Since the version test server of last June, Gaijin has never intended for SLM to be strong. Who still remembers that in the test server, SLM was just a Roland 3 that could fly a bit further, and its speed at 10 kilometers was even slower than that of VT1? All the reports of its 3 Mach speed were dismissed as not a bug by using SLS’s data, and only after being fiercely criticized on the forum did they reluctantly admit SLM’s 3 Mach top speed. In the test server, they also gave MI28NM a magic shield at the speed of light. That is to say, from the moment SLM appeared in the game, there were already things it couldn’t hit. Although it was somewhat powerful for one version, it seems that even if SLM is strong once, Gaijin has never intended for it to be so
Any other not Russia vehicle all like this
Ru top tier is pathetic today lol literally went 10-0 against them every matches, only one match remotely close was normandy
1 Like
1: It’s patented.
2: It expires in less than 6 years.
3- All code on the planet is protected by copyright.
@lukydrivesthings
Battlefield has had the same game mode from 2002 to present, and people still love the game series.
Pantsir was never bias.
Volumetric armor makes tanks correctly “weaker” due to no longer having overlapping plate issues.
Fuel tanks and drivers ports have nothing to do with volumetric armor.
BMPT is the Puma situation.
Most maps at top BR ground are huge to WW2 tanks, and above average for modern tanks.
1 Like
Heavy ERA providing 70° protection at 20°?
Autoloaders not generating spall despite being made of fairly thick metal?
Soviet ammo holders blocking spall despite being made of basically sheet metal that can be penetrated by a hammer and nail?
Absence of hydraulic and electrical turret rotation mechanisms in Soviet tanks despite clear evidence showing to the contrary?
Soviet hull composite arrays overperforming by 10% or more?
Edit: can’t forget the BMPT damage model being 100% complete nonsense, quantum tunneling 30mm ammo that doesn’t chain explode like other 30mm ammo
7 Likes