Holy yap. No. Whine about the PT-76, the F-4F KWS LV ICE, the VIDAR. Whatever. It doesn’t matter. EACH AND EVERY SINGLE VEHICLE IS VIABLE. THE KWS LV IS A BEAST IN THE RIGHT HANDS. Now use your brain idiot.
2 Likes
As of now I’m retiring for the day. Sleep well!
1 Like
You too mate!
1 Like
Alright. Have a good one. Take care!
I’d say deleting Gaijin would be the better solution, since they willfully add crap to the game that’s only good in game outside of it’s era because of how they designed their game, and seemingly add that crap instead of things that would both fit the era and BR range of a given rank, like the M44 and M55, which could easily be replaced with WW2 counterparts which would actually be better than either of them as they were implemented
You can easily delete it from your life by not playing the game. It has the added benefit that it doesn’t ruin anyone else’s experience.
Why replace them if you can have both?
Alright. Now. Real talk, bud.
You have 13 ground kills in the Tiger H1 to 41 deaths.
You have 38 kills in the VK to 81 deaths.
I am not bringing this up to stat shame you. We have all been there at some point in the curve. However, if your performance in a vehicle is much worse than that of the average player, what do you think is the likeliest problem? That the vehicle is fighting unfair fights, or that you’re simply not using it right?
Blockquote what do you think is the likeliest problem? That the vehicle is fighting unfair fights, or that you’re simply not using it right?
Both, I know I’m not good at the game, but I also know the game is badly designed and balanced, two things can be the problem at the same time, as is the case here.
Addition: I personally find historically accurate unfair forced match-ups much more tolerable than historically inaccurate ones, if the match was unfair because the enemy simply had more vehicles from the right time period that effectively counter what I’m using fair enough, but being forced to fight coldwar vehicles while using WW2 vehicles is one of the many reasons I would never waste money on WT instead of just getting something else
Blockquote Why replace them if you can have both?
Because if you were to have both, the coldwar ones would be at best, be a small improvement because of slightly better speed (M55 compared to the M43), or be an outright downgrade in the way that matters most for an SPG, firepower (M44 compared to M40).
The M55 and M43 have functionally the same gun, the M40 has the 155mm M1A1 or M1A2, which would have the option of APBC/HE or HE rounds while the M55 only gets HE, but that also assumes Gaijin wouldn’t just choose not to give the M40 a type of ammunition it could historically have used as they did for earlier Shermans
Not in this case. That’s the whole point of MMOs. People gravitate to the strongest option. If Tigers were really disadvantaged, there would be no way to get positive results with them (K/D, WR etc) because the more competitive and experienced players would all be using these supposedly broken future vehicles to club you.
So, go play a Pz38t vs a KV-1 and then post the replays.
But tbh even that is irrelevant. For every one player who would spawn the Pz38t, another ten would spawn the KV-1, because no one likes being punched in the face and you can’t control people’s behaviour. Hence the BRs. It is that simple.
Earlier you mentioned uptiering the 15cm. You have a grand total of six ground kills with it…
You’re making plenty of strong claims with very little to make them credible.
Why is that a problem? Then they’ll be the same BR, or 0.3 higher.
Why is that a problem? Then they’ll be at a lower BR.
Nothing wrong with having an extra soft balancing factor.
Flak 88 vs KV-1 ahh yeass! let’s go! I dare you!
Just a heads up smart@ss you could also just delete the game from your life if you don’t like his idea! I’m 100 with the dude of instead of toxicating low BR with these vehicles why not the historically accurate counterpart to the game instead they mix up Different era vehicles on a fictive basis of balancing purpose… if it were that shit that it can’t fight stuff that actually could encounter why add it in the first place? there are literally tons of vehicles out there they could add… no they add stuff in without thinking… If you and the rest of the snowflakes want balancing than why not start with these vehicles by adding setup times to it cause these vehicles never were able to fire on the move! It’s a fire support vehicle… not a close quarter fighting matchbox! I do say let the cold war crap deal with these HE lobbers push all M44 and M55 to 7.7-8.7
[quote=“Aongus_Brostin, post:50, topic:203579”]
you could also just delete the game from your life if you don’t like his idea![/quote]
I’m not the one complaining about the game’s design. I have fun in it just as it is. So why should I stop playing it?
It’s people who hate the game and play it anyway that should reconsider their choices. If you ask WT to be something it’s not, it would be far more productive to look for another game.
They do no such thing. They just play.
We’ve had this discussion once before. My answer remains unchanged. If a vehicle exists, it will eventually come to the game. You will eventually reach a stage where you have both the M44 and the Hummel, both the M55 and the Sexton. And their BRs will be determined by performance, as with every other vehicle in the game.
Because MMOs survive on drip feed content and the more they can add, the better. Also, people are clearly playing them - I meet them often now - so evidently there is interest in playing them.
Sounds like a good enough reason to me.
And they will add it.
Lmfao
But War Thunder does not faithfully represent real war. If our tanks can do city fighting without infantry, then our artys can be tank destroyers. Easy peasy.
Alright. Challenge is open to you too. Show us that this would be fun and balanced. Take an M44 to 8.7 and play ten matches in it, then link the replays. I’ll be waiting.
They already meet each other in the game, because they are at similar BRs.
As an additional challenge to the M44 and the PVKV ones, you could play the Pz38t at 3.7. Or the Pz IV J at 6.7. Show your work.
Why would I want to play the PzIV at 6.7 to face off M51? why is that remotely okay to you? Or 2S1M or M109 tell me in what situation they encountered each other in WWII? help me understand pls O Balancing whorshiper
I’m not interested playing any type of cold war or modern warfare equipment nor want to encounter them in general… If somebody want to play with them fine play with them at 7.7 and 8.7 where it would encounter stuff that in reality encountered…
You have no control over the overall matchmaker, but you can at least prove the vehicle’s effectiveness against the opposition it faced in real life.
The J was a late war modification meant to simplify production. So, run it in a lineup with your Tiger II and a Puma. That’s historical matchmaking, isn’t that what you want? 😌
The Tiger II Sla was never operational, let alone did it participate in combat, and yet there it is.
The M6A1 never fought against a German KWI C, and yet there it is.
Your double standard is showing again. If your idea of matchmaker is that only vehicles that fought one another IRL should face each other in the game, then we need to rip the whole book in WT and annihilate several lineups.
And we have another one for the selfish scrapbook.
You are demanding a complete makeover to the matchmaker on the premise that the PVKV or the M44 would be competitive at “historical BRs” but you can’t even be arsed to verify this premise. Why should anyone take you seriously?
You first. Demonstrate to the world that your assessment is correct and these vehicles are competitive at those BRs. Test this yourself, before demanding that a vehicle gets shot up from 4.0 to fucking 8.7.
"The Tiger II Sla was never operational, let alone did it participate in combat, and yet there it is.
The M6A1 never fought against a German KWI C, and yet there it is.
Your double standard is showing again. If your idea of matchmaker is that only vehicles that fought one another IRL should face each other in the game, then we need to rip the whole book in WT and annihilate several lineups."
What double standards are you talking about? Me saying only 1 or 2 vehicle that I point out why is that double standard? Should I start writing a novel how broken the entire game is? I’m playing it straight from the Beta and than it was nowhere near as fu@ked up as it is now… I could start pointing out like list of vehicles that should be pushed up cause it have nothing to do with WWII stuff… yet they meet them… I have no double standard but I don’t want to sit here all day writing a novel… AND NO I’m not playing these craps cause why should I play them? cause they think it’s okay to put it down to lob 200mm HE against what PzIII J? cause we know thats going to happen… The game become broken by the day and they keep making it more boken by this way… instead of moving it where it belongs nobody would complain… as nobody complains about the Sd.Kfz.221 being in the game… in 1.0 it’s completely useless if it were let say in rank II and in 2.0 it would at least have a scouting ability that would make it usefull now it’s completely crap at 1.0 as it can’t do shit… gun is useless can’t scout tell me how is this balanced to you?
On the side note I would love the PzIV J and Tiger II and Puma in same lineup… have a super flavor to it… but it’s shit cause you will face M109 M-51 S what ever and I could keep adding the nonsense cold war/modern garbage that it will face… The player experience is out of the window.
Let them add vehicles I’m fine with that… but divide the game already with a Fu@king Era divison … Let the M-51 fight T-54 and similar crap… let the rest of the gamers decide what they want with their lineups… if you want to play a Tiger II against IS-4 and M-51 fine you can chose a lineup with that vehicles next to it so it goes up… but I don’t want to face these crap… Nor play them as matter of fact… I don’t want to face M44 with a sherman… I don’t want to face a M55 with a Zrinyi I
Easy. You said:
The obvious implication of this statement is that only vehicles that met each other in war are allowed to meet in the game.
How many recorded engagements do we have that involve the M6A1 and the KWI C?
By your standard, they should not meet each other either.
Because you are demanding a massive change that would impact many vehicles and many players. You demand this change because of an idea that you have. The least you can do is to verify if your idea is right, since it would affect the playerbase at large.
But maybe you’re just scared to find out that you’re wrong and that the M44 sucks at 8.7.
Eh, Pz III Js in real life had to worry about Soviet 203mm artillery fire. It doesn’t matter who fired the big HE donk round, if it hits you, you’re dead anyway.
Also the Panzer III J is at 2.3 BR, so how exactly is it meeting M44s?
Here I am. I’m complaining. I don’t want historical matchmaking. Now what?
I enjoy it. It’s fun.
No. Sweden’s early ranks would be unplayable. Late WW2 vehicles would be perma downtiered, making the BR immediately below them hell.
So, play it.
The hilarious thing is that in the Pz IV J, you would have a much easier time killing an M-51 than a fucking Super Pershing.
Really? The IS4M? That’s not okay either? A tank whose development started in 1943?
I don’t care what you want or don’t want to play. You’re not the “protagonist” of the game. You’re just one player among many. If you think it would be fine for M44 players to be at 8.7, then Show. Your. Work. If you don’t care about them, then you can’t expect them to care about you, either.
Now you are doing double standard by point out only parts of my sentences.
Where is the rest what I said? Like the M-51 The M109?
As I mentioned if you want to play you can make the lineup so it will go up… the rest of the players who doesn’t want to play against these crap why force them to?
What standard?
Did I mentioned any records? Yeah they never meet on the battlefield… I didn’t said this is okay! You came up with this… I didn’t said it was okay… Here is another problem I just didn’t mentioned cause it’s an obvious problem… Can we agree in this? cause I never debated about this…
About the Sweden techtree… I can only say this… Shit to be Sweden… it was their decision to make these vehicles… the could have made it differently… I think they made it this way cause it was adequate at what they were using them for…
yeah I wanted to say L instead of J… the situation is the same…
Yeah but it was not running around pointing and clicking at them like in the game… these howitzers were emplaced in a fixed location and bombarding locations with given coordinates… there is a gigantic difference here don’t you feel?
You can and you should… and there is already an option for that… which I don’t have… You can put any vehicle next to each other and the highest will count… there is your fictional battle have fun with the fantasy you wanted… I on the other hand can’t reduce the bullshit in the game cause I can’t push these vehicle out of my BR range… and I can’t lower my BR range to not meet them…
Got you you lying little piece of gun :D out of 16k game you played only 80 game with that crap… you know it’s shit and you don’t play it for that reasons.
As I said it before… I don’t play it cause there are mostly cold war crap that I will face not fun… and I don’t want to…
Did I said I have problem with killing it? I have problem that I don’t want to face it… why cause they are in a different era… thats all I don’t need more reason.
You clearly care cause you started arguing with the guy who started the post… So who is the one controversial? What I propose would angers you cause you think this is a chess game where everything is balanced and the same… I don’t think this should be followed… everywhere they do this they end up ruining the entire game…
Use some logic. I already know why you don’t want to see the M-51 and the M109, because they are “postwar designs”. I single out the IS4 because as it happens, most of the design work for it was done during WW2, so it is surprising indeed to see that you don’t want to meet even those.
Because PVP players depend on balance of performance to survive. And judging by the player count, WT is doing great. If they want to play historical sims, there are other products for this niche.
Alright. What BRs should they be then, respectively?
No. I am perfectly happy with the M6A1 and the KWI C being in the game and fighting each other.
The problem with selfishness is that it comes back to bite you. Oh, you want historical matchmaking? Shit to be you.
Sure there is. That one was an actual war, about as unfun an event as can possibly happen on earth. This one is a videogame with much fewer variables.
If you want historical sims, there’s plenty of games you can play.
Play The Troop. Play Panzer Corps 2. Play Gates Of Hell. Play Panzer Elite, or Steel Panthers, or Command Ops, or IL-2 Sturmovik, or Steel Division 2, or Easy Red 2. Plenty of options out there. WT is not a historical war sim. The vehicles are represented faithfully (to a point) but not their operational context.
Where’s the lie? It’s a BR 1.0 vehicle. How many battles should I play in it before I can say I have fun in it? I have only 37 more matches in the 15cm, which is at the same BR and has a fun donkey gun. I would say for a 1.0 80 battles is plenty.
Then shut up about them going to 8.7.
Then a competitive PVP is not the game for you.
I care to explain why historical matchmaking is a dumb idea. An idea so dumb that even its proponents are too caught up in their own BS to go out and test it themselves. Your responses prove that
- You don’t care if the M44 is unbalanced at 8.7, you just want it out of your sight
- You don’t care if players of minor nations or enjoyers of these vehicles get shafted, so long as you get what you want
- You know the M44 would be unbalanced at 8.7 and would rather not find out for sure
The combination of all of the above means that your opinion on the matchmaker is worthless garbage.
we DO NOT need historical brs or ww/cold/modern era br brackets.
2 Likes