War Thunder has lost its way

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
1

To start off, let me make this one thing clear: My intend is not to call for a reset of the game, I’m sure players love the game exactly as it is today, but:

I think players that started playing this game more than ~5 years ago can relate to this.
Back in the days I loved playing War Thunder because of its charm. The more time has past the more of that charm was lost and - in my opinion - the game the game worse.

These are the Main changes that made the game worse:

1. Speed Meta

Gaijins’ focus on firepower and mobility has pushed heavily armored vehicles – which were once the backbone of the meta – into irrelevance. The strategic gameplay that revolved around utilizing the strengths of in their abilities limited tanks (slow reload, bad mobility etc.) is slowly disappearing.
It just felt like I was actually playing tanks and not just speedy cars that can easily one-shot each other, as it is the case today.

2. Tactical Gameplay

War Thunder once felt like a tactical war game, where smart positioning, teamwork, and strategic thinking were key to success. Nowadays, the game is increasingly dominated by fast-paced gameplay where speed and firepower dictate the outcome. Teamwork has taken a backseat to individual performance, matches feel more chaotic and less satisfying.
Long and intense matches were seen as something good while what Gaijin is aiming at today is battles becoming as short as possible.

3. Realism and Fun

In the past, War Thunder struck a perfect balance between realism and fun. It felt authentic without being overly punishing or frustrating. Today, however, BR compression and the relentless addition of modern vehicles and features have diluted the focus on realism and historical accuracy, making the game feel less cohesive.

Conclusion

I don’t know if the way the game has changed is necessarily bad, I just feel like it is.
But I think I have a point looking at how toxic and frustrated the players are today compared to a few years ago - especially considering the game had a lot more bugs and broken vehicles then it does today.

So I’m definitely not calling for a reset of the game or anything like that. But I would love to see at least test matches that are more oriented at the game’s roots and which could permanently become an option as a game mode. This would allow all the players to see what is better; “OG sytle” War Thunder or the new one.
Btw with “matches that are more oriented at the game’s roots” I don’t mean just removing all the new vehicles. It would involve things like BR decompression to create environments for conventional tanks that fit better to them for example.

And everybody who says we War Thunder doesn’t have enough players for that; people have already said that when the game had 60.000 players at it’s peak ;)

5 Likes
2

Mostly disagree. Heavy tanks that don’t suffer from BR compression are still very strong vehicles. I don’t really understand this complaint in general.

Agreed. Rank V-VI is in a sad state due to players just skipping over it, or spamming premiums. No one genuinely cares for that (and other tiers), and it makes for bad gameplay.

We need BR decompression, and better designed maps.

That should just be the default state. Don’t lock decompression behind not being in the main MM.

Tanks should be able to go to 14.0, and air could get to 16.0 without causing any issues. More gamemodes for both air and ground are needed, too. We had the advance gamemode a couple of years ago, and it was decently received. It provided new gameplay without hindering certain types of tanks.

1 Like
3

Been playing since closed beta and in most ways the game is better then ever. Like most games that evolve people are going to diverge with the games changes over time and the game isn’t perfect but it never has been.

I most part disagree with your conclusions.

2 Likes
4

The core issue we face for all game modes.

7 Likes
5

Gaijin is looking for your wallet, without similar competition they will do whatever they want with little to no consequence. We do complain and sometimes boycott but at the end of the day, we don’t have any other option.

1 Like
6

@_Marco
1- Speed meta isn’t a thing.
2- The more tactical the team the more they win.
3- BR compression was mostly fixed over the last few years via decompression. There are still a few problem BRs that need addressed, but that’s about it.
Realism is irrelevant to BRs, historical accuracy is irrelevant to BRs.

7

You all work yourselves up so much on things by spamming topics and making out that things are so drastic and immediate ‘need’ that it just makes it hard to honestly think we play the same game at times.

(Edit - . )

1 Like
8

That’s highly debatable, and not true. It’s better in some places than it used to be.

As an example, the M26 and Tiger II P are both not good enough for 6.7, but too good for 6.3. You also can’t move their 6.7 heavy counterparts up without undoing past decompression.

You also have the Leopard 2A5 at the same BR as the Strv 122s and 2A7V.

Agree, but players rarely try to do that.

10

M26 when firing APCR is exactly 6.7. Remove its APCR and it’s 6.3 again.
And the exclusive difference between Tiger IIP and H is the turret front, and more people are learning the onion than not.
Leopard 2A5 is equal to the 2A7V and Strv 122.
Strv 122 trades ammo for armor.
2A7V gains a bit more hull armor, same round same turret armor.

Armor is the 2nd to last thing in the onion that matters.
Mobility, decisions that keep you unseen, and not getting hit matter more.

11

It’s very blatantly worse than the T26E5 at the same BR.

That turret front is the difference between being killed by a 76mm Sherman or T-34-85, vs not being able to be penned by 90mm APHE. Do not lie and say they are equivalent. If you genuinely think the II P and II H are equivalent tanks, I can not take any of your opinions seriously.

2A5 has worse armour at the same BR, that is exactly what compression is.

Armour still does matter. Acting like it doesn’t is just incorrect.

12

I’ve been saying T26E5 should be brought to 7.0 since it was introduced.
2A5 has marginally worse armor, yes it is worse, but the idler wheel weakspot exists the same on 2A7V as anything else. And close quarters environment and 2A7V is identical to 2A5.
2A7V only gains armor in medium to long range engagements, similar to T-90M and T-80U.

Also my posts take armor seriously.

13

I’ve only been playing since 2019 but even I can tell you the game has gotten a lot worse than it was 7 years ago. Some matches feel unplayable with players that are able to see me through terrain across the map. There’s less stealth when it comes to playing scout tanks and more “I hope this guy doesn’t one shot me when I peak out over this hill.”

Matches have just become fast paced frag fests with little to no impact on the tanks you use besides how much damage it can do and how fast you’re able to move.

We can argue about what tank/plane has the “better stats” when we all know the numbers don’t mean anything and the wiki is outright wrong at times; The main issue is just the way the game plays now.

1 Like
14

t26e5/t26e1-1 is also 6.7 much better armor and gun(t26)
II P and II H arent the same armor the II P turret face is way weaker than the II H turret
2A5 has less spall liner, slightly worse round
armor does matter, compare T-90M armor to every other top tier tank armor(there are other example also)
ammo and armor matter

1 Like
15

T26E1 does not have a better gun, it reloads every 16 seconds.
Spall liner only slightly matters for one shot after armor is penned, most of the time spall liners don’t save crew.
In-fact, spall liners have saved exactly zero tanks I’ve shot at, and I’ve shot at them using HSTVL.

16

You have never played a 2a7 or 122, how would you know this? As a 2a7 enjoyer I greatly disagree with this.

  1. The 2a7 has spall liners which the 2a5 lacks, making it much more survivable.
  2. The armor also makes quite a difference, bouncing shots in close quarter engagements much more than the 2a5/2a6.
  3. The armor is made much better by all the inexperienced players not knowing where to shoot. Almost any engagement with a prem noob is made extremely easy (0 brain power required) because of the armor, where as on other tanks I do not feel like this would be the case.
1 Like
17

does not have a better gun is wrong
It in fact has a slower reload but better gun
Fair point, tho having it is better than none(given its the same BR, more stuff = more chances to survive)
You shot at, there are other people who get saved by spall liners(not all the time but they do save sometimes)

18

@realshatterisbad
It’s funny how your username wants to nerf the damage of aircraft guns…
To your point though, I’ve fragged every tank at top BR, and I’ve fragged well over 1000 tanks.
You need to know their armor array to do well, if you’re playing them you don’t need to know anything; which makes your post’s bad statement of “you haven’t played them” entirely irrelevant.

The only thing that matters when discussing armor of tanks is studying the armor and facing them, you learn nothing about the armor of vehicles playing them.

1- I’ve yet to see evidence of consistent [meaning common] situations where spall liners protect tanks.
For other players, over 50% of their shots frag the enemy tank irrelevant of spall liners. For me it’s 100% of shots.
2- I already address this here:

Read posts before replying.
3- Players had to learn to shoot for idler wheels in 2019 due to T-series tanks, it’s not a new tactic.

19

So you are just going to throw that in here without any explaination?
Ofc it is because armor is getting more and more useless thanks to all the fast reloading and high penetrating tanks today + the new vehicles today are faster on average + the removal of hullbreak removed the biggest disadvantage of light tanks

That doesn’t mean it didn’t get less tactical. Yes it still is a tactical game, but just LESS tactical

Some vehicles got moved up by like 1 BR. Wow what a great BR decompression!

Show me where I wrote that it was.

4 Likes
20

@_Marco
This is a discussion of ground: Positioning is everything, not positioning speed just positioning using the tank you have.
It’s why I have a similar performance in Challenger 2s as other top tanks.
Using positioning of maps for the speed you have develops the performance of your vehicle far better than using an HSTVL [the fastest tank in the game] for every engagement. Especially since HSTVL is extremely situational even compared to Challenger 2. My stock performance in Black Night and Challenger 2E is quite the spectacle in how positioning even using one of the slowest MBTs in its slowest form still can bring results when used within its parameters.

Map positioning.

As for decompression, it’s been 1.3 - 1.7BRs of decompression thus far.

21

Not true, having good armor doesn’t just help you stop shots, it makes enemies aim before taking a shot which slows down their reaction time. The 2a5 can be penned virtually anywhere in the front plate, where as the 2a7 you actually have to aim.