Soon™ (iirc it’s been an entire year since we were soon going to get low tier Hungarian air)
3 Likes
It’s already pretty strange that there’s no map selection menu in a multiplayer game in the year 2025. BVVD, in his infinite unquestionable wisdom, expresses his concerns that multiple map bans could render the game more repetitive, with only a few maps receiving attention? It’s almost like he knows most of the ground maps in the game have very obvious flaws that the playerbase detests.
Keep in mind that this is a game where the game modes haven’t really changed in about 12 years. It’s clear that the developers don’t care about repetitiveness at all.
9 Likes
New and Unique SPH, Wespe and Hummel? :D
3 Likes
Bvvd has decided, copy paste M110 will be the only new TD
1 Like
Nah, they are unique :clown:
1 Like
They probably won’t even add the German specific M110A2 G
No he sayed, C&P wherever possible, but that doesnt mean unique ones wont come.
Still with the minimal ww2 attention I wouldn’t be surprised if the excuse of having a M109/M44/M55 would be used to deny another vehicle.
4 Likes
let’s agree to disagree,…
i don’t insult the facts he’s been giving on Anti-radiation missile or Strategical bombers,…
or the Damage model change he intends to give for bombers
but all the MAIN aspects questions he have been asked on, his answers were : “Lol, no LMAO, you thoughts that we will help you guys?”
and those are as unsufferable as the community is about him,…
the question about tank objectives - he said that there is no reduction of players to the capture point objective gameplay → IT’S THE ONLY GAMEPLAY WE HAVE FOR TANKS,… there can’t be statistics about others Gameplay types since there is NONE.
do you see now?
the current proportion of good things he said is about 15% in the whole video.
6 Likes
rely at all - lol
There are still a lot of well used tanks missing e.g. “Wespe” or the US “Priest”
4 Likes
I dont think researching modifications with another vehicle would be a good solution. But youre absolutely right, it is basically impossible to spade a stock heli in ground battles. I just think it is a good thing to actually spade the vehicle by playing it, get used to how it handles, what it can and cannot do and by training that also unlocking the modifications.
Which is what heli ec does. Training in a controlled environment. But where some helis especially in mid tiers with very limited loadouts -in general: not the russian ones- which on top are slower not only because they are stock compete with premium helis with 5 times their armament, and long range armament at that for RP. But in the end, even if you do well and can solo some objectives (Bases…impossible if you dont have the high number dumb rocket loadouts of some russian or high tier apaches) you research 10 to 20% of only one module. Its one the most tedious processes in war thunder (which says a lot, the competition is strong and most of the times it feels like they hope you will just whip out your wallet because of how long it takes and how boring it is, at which point im like: especially not now snail. I pay money for a good product and have for wt in quite big amounts but not for an annoying one wtf what kind of signal would that send?
IMO it just needs a more engaging gamemode or rework of heli pve with reasonable rewards and missions for all helis. Like how and why the f should a gazelle at 9.7 with 4 hot 2s compete in this gamemode with mi35s? or even ka50s??? Spade that thing on stream bvvd and then maybe you would catch a glimpse of why people dont play heli pve…and then tell me why in the world, after spading the gazelle, would anyone come back and play THAT with a spaded heli?
1 Like
He s Exactly correct on your bias. Situation with 2s38 and mi28nm whining proves it it’s impossible to ignore so it found it’s way into answers
1 Like
nah its “longer term plans” now
i watched the whole video,… the resume can be said to be “lol, no lmao”
yes he presents arguments that only works to his way,…
but also keeps ignoring the massive list of arguments that are against the way he propose,…
the problem experienced by players (be them experienced or not) are not even looked by BVV_d,…
most of the problems he said “no” to, are easily fixable in a way that will ensure both Action and Strategical within gamemodes,…
as i also explainned what the community backbone is willing to have through this post:
as another point to explain why Bulannikov hurts the caring community:
Bulannikov spoke about the tank mode objectives, said that players still plays on the game with the current points objectives, so the problem do not come from point objective gameplay.
But that’s a fallacious take, as there is no such different thing in the game than point objectives gameplay for tanks,…
the statistical/KPI argument, he’s giving on that point clears the whole argumentation:
“until the game dies from boredom, we will not change the type of objectives in tank games” - that’s what he said cleared of all political formative “blabla”
and while i agree on some things he said on those Mains Questions,… most of the video demonstrates, from Bulannikov sayings, that him and other Devs from lead team, don’t play the game as actively as their community (1h/day for most of it)
because if they were playing it as much as us,… there would be meaningful change and argumentation in Q&A,…
i can take on stats from [DEV] squadron itself (a squadron reserved for DEV team) - they’ve barely scratched at the public side of the game.
and that’s also true, when Bulannikov is doing any Devblogs Stream, and shows the ability of X or Y aircraft/tanks/weaponnary,… he is not using the vehicules as players would be using them.
But let alone those facts, most of the argumentation Bulannikov gave us, through that video, is statistically based and clearly not taking any feedback surveys he could have asked for, as such he’s not going to get any argumentation that would be meaningful to players, and certainly not appreciated by the community side that care more about the game health on this forum,…
so let me say it one last time: MAKE SURVEYS AND FOLLOW THOSE
Following the current KPI’s don’t give any reality on what the players wants!
6 Likes
Yes always the same… players buy our prems… so we make more to satisfy… cause what players want is not killing the game no no… imagine your country does what u want, give everyone 5000 dollar per week. Who needs streets and schools if u have enough money? xD
Well, we obviously live in a parallel universe.
Mr. Viacheslav explained to us that they invest great effort in making progress with the naval part of the game. I stopped playing naval because of that “great effort”.
Back in the day I just loved to play naval, like many others. I played with over 100 ships, coastal and “big ones”. I finished researching Bismarck and Yamato, but I don´t want to play with them.
And I just can´t force myself to finish researching Iowa because the experience of playing this game mode is awful.
God help us all with your improvements to this game!
4 Likes
They also will never play the same game that we do, as i guarantee none of them are grinding literal months to get specific vehicles and then spading them.
I would love to see any of the devs stream their way from 1.0 to toptier in any TT.
4 Likes
let’s not forget that the point is to demonstrate that current DEV team don’t get what the issue truly are within the game - because the Key-Project Indicators (KPI) they’re using are telling them otherwise, despite those KPI being wrongly chosen by the Dev Team.
that’s the major point of my post, i use the experience base of DEV team within the game as secondary argument to show why the Chosen KPI are wrongly picked.
2 Likes