Should there be another rb game mode?

From what I noticed, there’s 2 typed of rb players.

First type of RB player are the ones that like the chaos and quickness of the matches. Basically wanting an arcade experience with the RB Layout / rewards. (Nickname: ARB players)

Second type of rb player are the more realistic type’s. The people that Like to strategize and use their skill in long matches to win the game or actually complete objective’s to drain the tickets.
(Nickname: RRB players)

So the main question is, Should we separate/Make a RB game mode so both type’s of players have a place to go?

This wouldn’t Change BR placement or reward payout. (Unless we go more in depth between each mode)


No… But that’s just me. We already have arcade and sim. Plus realistic as mentioned. No need for another game mode.


No. Everyone plays the game how they want, some are the lemmings (which Gaijin caters to by adjusting the maps) who just blindly push forward, others like the brawling CQB still of gameplay, while others like the slower pace and watching how the match develops.

Otherwise as stated, Arcade and Sim are there to scratch the itch for those don’t enjoy RB.


I’d love to see an RB EC gamemode. Air SIM, but third person, RB controls but with friendly markers only.

Though I only partially agree with the reason why. Yes people want a TDM, furball gamemode. But I’d say the better reason for a larger “more tactical” gamemode is for the attackers that are DOA in ARB.


Progression in arcade battles are too slow.

To progress faster the arcade battle players play realistic battles.

Realistic battles are too difficult and then they complain.

Complaint is heard and realistic battles are adjusted.

Realistic battles are ruined for the players that want a bit more immersion but not the hard sweat that is sim-battles.

The way I see it, revert realistic battles to what it was and increase the gain for arcade battles. That way arcade players still holds progression rate and it does not affect the rest of us.


I posted this in another thread. The only path forward IMO is for Gaijin to start utilizing the entirity of maps, reworking/redesigning objectives and ticket bleed and moving ARB to a lobby based MM system.

It is almost criminal given the size and design of WT maps that we still do not have any sort of ‘Conquest’ type gamemode in ARB with dynamic objectives and sectors. They mothballed EC without acknowledgement or comment and World War has been an absolute flop…and here we are, arguing where A-10s and Su-25s should spawn on the map and at what BR when all of it could be resolved with proper resources dedicated to actually create an engaging gamemode.

It’s bonkers.


100% absolutely.


You are describing the target audience for AB and RB. There is no “room” for another mode in the middle AFAIK. BUT AB and RB could be adjusted.
Problem is, there is way more than TWO (or even THREE) player preferences. For instance i would prefer an AB mode with more realistic movement and national teams…but i guess i am the minority and then i have to adjust to what i get…we cant have a mode for each player :)
AGAIN…not saying AB and RB are perfect…just saying that more than TWO modes seems a bit difficult to adjust to the existing player base and numbers.

I wish there was some sort of convoy or dynamic objective game mode.

King of the hill would be fun, as single cap maps often end in lockouts once one team gets a minute lead.

I have been quite disappointed with the unrealistic realistic battles of the last few years.


I agree, none of this BS would be a problem if theyd just bring back EC and add bonuses to the losing team to prevent everyone dipping at the first sign of a loss

1 Like

No they aren’t realistic types… If they were they wouldn’t be playing RB.

Are we talking air or ground here? For air there is sim for these people. If ground then, wtf are they playing WT for. The ground modes seriously lack realism compared to air. Anyone interested in actual realism will not find anything he is looking for in WT, not even ground SB.

Literally described air RB


Missing the point.

What point?

The people he calls realsistic RB player are defined by stuff that has nothing to do with realism…

If he makes proper descriptions he might get his point across, this way he won’t.

You’re doing the classic “I’m too dense to realize I’m using a different personal definition to the word “realistic” than the other guy” tactic.

Then show mena textbook Definition that applies to his BS.

The point still stands for people wanting more realism than RB, there already is SB. And people wanting realism in tanks are simply playing the wrong game.

There isn’t one.

Not relevant. People want what RB used to be as it has degraded heavily throughout the game’s lifespan due to many ignorant changes gaijin have forced through ruining the mode bit by bit.

1 Like


But there are ones that descripe realism as media depictions that show the correct physical traits.

“the theory or practice of fidelity in art and literature to nature or to real life and to accurate representation without idealization”


No it didn’t degrade, it was always like this, the planes and tanks just got more agile, due to being newer. This sped up the gameplay.

I can only think of one gameplay change that made the game more arcadey and that was in ground when they reduced the crash damage. But this was ages ago.

So point out a specific gameplay change that made RB more arcadey. Gameplay, not mission design or other periphery stuff (like BRs or spawn points).