Here is some thoughts of what should happen to / in the game, and yes, this will be mainly aimed at the players.
Stop asking for new vehicles. Stop saying there is no new content being added. If you honestly believe that there is not enough content being added then read this
The more the devs need to work on adding stuff the less time they can work on bug fixes and map designs. Some things is 100% our (the players) fault.
BR separation : WW2 > Cold War > Modern. This is vital - please and thank you. EDIT : Not historical, just not that WW2 and low tech face of against more modern vehicles.
Increased rewards / progression incentive for arcade players. Some people want to have a quick game, make it viable for them to do it without having to brave realistic or sim battles.
Stop complaining about the economy. The more you cap, the more you kill, the more you win, the more you get.
Most battle ratings are fairly well balanced, but does not have to be fair exact. It is OK to have to work on tactics to counter certain vehicles now and again. Top Tier almost every thing is equally balanced. “But filthy, Pansir, BUH” - So what! NATO tech trees sling GBU and AGM like there is no tomorrow, might as well let the one tech tree have a counter.
Do some research - globalsecurity, armypubs, wiki, etc. offers great insight on vehicles, vehicle generation and modifications. Heck, you can even learn about map reading and combat tactics that work well in game.
Stop being toxic to your team - making people angry / disheartened at the match will not result in a win.
No, creating hard limits, top tier metas, and new bottom tiers at each era split would make the game worse. This has been covered to death by even Content Creators and it is a poor idea.
They can have a quick game, arcade is the easiest to get into and most popular game type. Lower rewards are reflective of lower difficulty with lead indicators, pen indicators, and spotting mechanics when compared to GRB.
Somewhat true, but the real earner is long games. That earns you about 2 times more than actions in game.
Yea, I wouldn’t say things are equally balanced. I’m sure people will be by to debunk this. I know that SPAA isn’t equal at all. Especially when one nations top SPAA is classed as a TD and costs 3 times more than standard SPAA and another nations top tier SPAA is a gun based SPAA. Not equal at all.
Average players don’t care that much. They like the game because they get to blow up cool vehicles with cool vehicles.
2- This was already tried back in 2014 - 2015, and it failed.
People don’t want unbalanced biased gameplay; Realism and fairness is far more important to game players than reliving history. Play custom battles if you want WW2 battles.
Besides that, great points whether I agree with them or not.
Oh sweet, thanks for the callout. I really appreciate when people voice their disagreement with my opinions so we can discuss things. Do tell where you disagree with me specifically in this thread, I’d love to discuss the points.
Hell no, ww2 vehicles were used in the cold war era. As long as there are no gross mismatches it’s fine.
Fair, but you call this a general rant, this isn’t really a general WT topic but an arcade topic.
Simply not true in general. Air Sim has a reward limit, at which whatever you do, you will not earn anything. So you are wrong here.
Not entirely true, BRs don’t work because they estimate vehicle performance using the average earnings and life time of the vehicles. This makes the BR system demonstrably wrong, since lifetime and earnings are skewed distributions and the arithmetic mean (average for plebs) does not work onnskewed distributions. So math says nooooo.
While in its worst state yet, grinding in air Sim is the best with the right premium jet.
Can quite literally complete most if not all trees individual trees in 4 days each which is good.
And he was talking about ground rewards which is true.
You get more for playing objective than playing kill hungry yet people complain why they get same rewards as people who get two caps when they got 12 kills!
I agree with you on this honestly since I only play modern vehicles so I would assume separating ww2 from all is for the better.
No, nothing states he is talking about ground. The title says general, so everything he posts needs to always be true in every mode.
This is why blanket general statements are stupid. As always.
Well technically ww2 is more modern than the newer stuff. Historians pretty much agree that the modern age ended between ww2 and the 80s. Modern kinda is the wrong word for new today… And it kinda is the right one, because the naming of the modern age was stupid.
War Thunder’s GRB gameplay is extremely shallow, it’s just: see enemy shoot - destroy - move ad infinitum. No team play involved, no cap or objective based, maps completely suck, some play styles are not rewarded at all and only meta vehicles/nations rule.
It’s about time they add more depth to GRB, its gameplay loop is extremely outdated when you compare it to other games like it, it’s just a glorified team death match. New team based mechanics and game modes would be highly appreciated. Those are my two cents.
Real war is even more shallow than that.
GRB has caps and objectives, by the way.
Meta vehicles aren’t a thing in War Thunder, nor are meta tech trees… neither exist at this point in time.
Other games like it? You mean DCS, whose missions are shallower cause they need to be made by players…
Or WoT whose objective is elimination only… a game mode people hate in War Thunder called Battle.
Sure thing Alvis, sure thing. 10 years from now we are going to be doing the same thing, capping A-B-C over and over again because that won’t get tiring at all.
You know, it would be nice for once if we didn’t do that every time for thousands of hours, because I sure as hell won’t.
More than what we have requires AI overhaul.
Also, there are over 10 game modes in War Thunder currently. You’re not forced to play ground RB.
Ground: Arcade, realistic, sim.
Air: Arcade, realistic, sim, sim EC.
Naval: Arcade, realistic.
Custom battles, naval EC, assault arcade ground, assault arcade air, squadron battles… and more that I may have missed.
Any more requires PVE aspects added, which requires an AI overhaul as stated at the beginning of my post.
Ground battles still have the same gameplay loop no matter what. It is always “cap point, kill enemies on a map with 1-3 caps.” It doesn’t matter what map you are on if you are just going to do the same thing over and over.
Gaijin can make unique and different gameplay, they have done it before in the Advance event a couple of years ago. For some reason they just don’t. They don’t try and add new gamemodes, even though the current ones are getting pretty stale.
Ground sim is nowhere near as polished as it should be, and air arcade and realistic don’t appeal to me, as I don’t play air at all. I think the game as a whole needs to pivot into a more team based experience. Battlefield 5 conquest mode has more depth than all of War Thunder’s game modes combined
Weird since Battlefield’s conquest mode is identical to War Thunder’s standard ticket mode.
Capture points, ticket bleed, and killing as part of it.
Almost as if War Thunder got its inspiration from Battlefield 2 from 2007.