It’s popular because of the sheer level of glazing German WWII equipment gets from historical vehicle/armour enthusiasts, every time this gets asked about everyone auto-defaults to “omg Tiger” as every wehraboo (term predates War Thunder btw) wants to larp as Michael Wittman.
Even though a Western Front scenario would be mostly Sherman 75s vs StuGs, not Tigers and Panthers.
I’ve played “historical battles” with figures since 1972 and on computers since about 1983 - so I’m going to go out on a limb and say that I pretty much KNOW they are fun.
People who think that historical battles cant be balanced just think they can’t be balanced despite never having played them and realising how easy it is.
The first season of world war had some fun historical scenarios and some alternate history scenarios, that were very much unbalanced, yet they were legitimately fun (at least I thought so).
Im pretty sure one of the events did that. It was the lower tier one where the boss tanks, t34 and panzer 4 f2, were limited to like 2-3 per team.
Yeah, i cant blame them. People tend to want to play things that are better than the rest.
If you offered people the choice of using a stug/panzer4 or a panther/tiger in the same match, they will choose the panther/tiger
So let them - 1 Panther for the whole game or 4 Pz-4’s… they can get their KDR up and their win rate right down…
Not only that you can have asymmetrical victory conditions too - that’ll totally mess with the FPS brigade! :)
So many suggestion posts are answered the same way.
Why dont we do this? Gaijin cant make it work
Why dont we do that ? Gaijin can’t make it work
BR suggestion? Gaijn can’t make it work
Can we change the game play style for something more interesting ? The spawn zones?
can we sort out ODL ? no because …
I would say that “so many want them” is that so many werent here when we used to effectively have them. They were not fun for the guys on the side getting clapped.
It often comes down to people wanting to meme in a tiger against shermans, people forget Matilda II vs L3s would also be a thing.
@Josephs_Piano
Well unlike you, I did play historical battles, and Germany won every time because they had the superior lineup in every single battle.
IRL German tank operations were ripe with bad communications, maintenance, and other blatant skill issues in manufacturing and use.
In-game we don’t have those skill issues thanks to plenty of online sources on how to be good at shooters.
They couldn’t balance them because then they wouldn’t be historical battles anymore, cause the moment you stop allowing Tigers into battles that had Tigers IRL, they stop being historical and start being realistic instead.
How much fun is any part of the game when you are getting clapped?
What is all this talk of unbalance when we have a BR system ?
Then why are Germany’s stats so bad at WW2 levels?
Cause it stopped being Tiger vs Sherman 75 and M10 Wolverine, and started being Tiger vs M18, M6A1, and Sherman 76.
They had to start angling and use tactics rather than relying exclusively on their flat armor.
Enough battles to make me realize Arcade Battles were more fun & fair even if my tanks were faster.
Perhaps Poor Players?
Imagine devs make a historiacal prokhorovka-like battle where you get to play a lot of T34s (76mm) vs a few Tigers/Panthers and perhaps a few PzIVs (all with historical guns and ammo)…or any other “realistic battle”…
Do you really believe that IN THE PRESENT system, players would stay and play the T34s?
Imagine they build a set of historical battles with asymetrical teams…and some better tanks on all scenarios. You would bet randomly put on a tank you owned BUT probably not the best tank in the map.
Do you REALLY believe that most players would stay (on the weaker tanks) and fight it out??? I can take you to the “I am entitled to ODL” or “Uptiers are unfair” topics where lots of players say they leave for A LOT LESS!
THAT SAID…i do believe devs could try to make a GOOD EVENT out of this idea. Get a battle were balance was easier (PzIVs vs T34s or M4s)…and see how it went and how players took it. Hell i actually think that a good event where we would get a single TIger (with Support) vs a number of M4s or T34s might work if sold right…(rewards, map, conditions).
BUT…i dont see a game mode out of this…not when players can leave the game…and there is no way to force players to play…
Why should Tiger vs M18 be an issue when the M18 stomps the Tiger is so many games? Both 6BR what is the issue?
Is it beyond a game maker to balance a game? apparently it is.It seems to me that when we ask what the biggest draw back to Warthuder is the answer is always Gaijin.
I really wish they would hand the game over to somebody who can do something with it.
Well as you can see I don’t have much issues facing M18s as I keep my ears and eyes open.
Tiger 1s really hold the hand when you know basic angling.
I’ll keep preferring realism and balance over historical reenactment. Especially since milsim is among the most toxic communities; Milsim, WoW, and LoL.
You have to realize that my preferences are directly linked by my experience with 5+ milsim groups all being lead by those kicked out from their military recruitment and being salty about it to the point of ruining the experience for others. I have a disdain for historical reenactment that will never go away because of those experiences.
No because I believe too many of them are as thick as pig poo and simply cant understand the concept of balance as anything other than a pure like for like on a set of weighing scales.I think this is what you are suggeting.
Actually you may have hit upon the second answer to why? Which is ,the public overall are too stupid to accept …
Sorry for the honesty
We already have commemorative battles but sadly the rewards are pathetic which is a shame.If we had real collectible to gain then it may encourage people to play along historical line.You have to condition the public to a degree to get with a program and Gaijn does not have enough direction to do this.
My experience like Josephs Piano is simply 50 years of playing games and seeing how balance is achieved when diverse teams meet each other.
So Romans face Huns and its tech vs numbers or Russia meets Germany and one has tanks and the other planes.I don’t see the why after 50 years of video games Gaijin cant do video games.
I do see the player issue. Outside the game we have every patriotic American screaming for this and that to be in their tech tree yet we have a historical battle and all those devotees of Uncle Sam suddenly jump straight into a Tiger and make it all one sided.You do have to laugh.
Because the BR system directly contradicts historical battle MM lol.
If we got things like 6 pounder APDS it might not be as much of an issue as it could be, but it would still be having some critical flaw points.
Case and point Matilda II domination of the early BR tanks. KV could be doing the same thing. Tiger too, so on.
Imagine a team of Tiger IIs fighting an enemy where the best they can field are fireflies, avengers and challengers for example. A weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee bit different.
So what is your point here? Are you agreeing the game itself is nowhere as good as it could be? Are you justifying a bad game by telling me how bad it is ? I mean what are you actually saying here.
We are discussing the game,its limitations, Gaijin inability to make the game work and you come in with what seems like an argument but one that reinforces everything I have said.
BR is supposedly to bring balance between two sets of opposing vehicles irrespective of what they are and and any era .Its pixels vs pixels,that’s all it is.
You do realise that Pershing’s fought at the same time as Sherman’s and Tigers at the same time as Stugs? You also realise we have had nearly half a century of historical wargames right ?
What is this impossibility of any form of historical gaming you are peddling here? Is this a new 21st century thing that we could do before but cant do now?
What an earth do you think most tank and plane players actually came to this game for upon seeing historical modeled vehicles fighting each other in the adverts?
I mean how did we end up with WT players gleefully defending the games biggest fault which is failing to deliver a realistic, enjoyable game doing what so many expect it to do?
I would think it pretty obvious I am saying historical MM system for WT would be terrible for gameplay and players.
The gameplay is as realistic as they can get without causing serious imbalance issues. Just because you do not like the point I am making doesnt mean I didnt make a point.
And, okay, yes, the pershing fought at the same time as the shermans and tigers… at the very end of the war, it doesnt mean you will have them on your team of Churchill Mk II/IIIs vs tigers does it? Given the Churchill Mk III was out of service when the Pershing was tried out. For a historically correct desert war campaign you would have potential A13s, crusaders, Valentines, Matildas and Churchill Mk IIIs fighting Tiger tanks in the later stages. Is that fun? Nooooooo.
edit: I remember when gaijin had a far more “historical mm” system a decade ago, it was not fun.
I wish they followed Israel’s model for more nations.
China at WW2 props gives almost nothing unique. It’s all american, soviet and maybe some british and japanese things and like… 1-2 rank 1 truly unique, domestic designs.
What china props give is turn air sim EC into “Is that P-51 mustang in silver camo a friend or foe?” “Is that P-38 friend or foe?” “Is that P-47 friend or foe?” and the same for soviet things but I don’t really play on USSR’s side enough for it to be as clearly annoying.
China at WW2 could’ve worked if they split taiwan and CCP so that bluefor planes (taiwan) stayed bluefor, redfor planes (CCP).
For sweden - just make it Finland/hungary at WW2 that turns into kalmar union at cold war. . Both were axis nations that fought USSR so putting them on the right side in sim matchups becomes easy. Hungary has no reason to exist post WW2 given how we’ve basically just used soviet technology and nowadays buy gripens from sweden and tanks from germany.
