The game is moving further away from realism and more focused on game balancing.
The recent updates & changes / nerfs + additions to the USSR tech tree has just proved again that a nation in the tech tree is being pushed with almost propaganda levels while everything else is being nerfed.
If the approach is purely for balancing sake then Italy should receive some desperate love & so does Japan, GB air tree (SAAF F1 CZ/AZ/BZ, SAAF Mirage 3 & SAAF Atlas Cheetah can be added) & the odd vehicle through the other trees. Sadly, only USSR is getting buffed.
Is it us - the players - fault that a tech tree is subpar and not able to perform against other nations? What is the point of continuing a grind if additions are not accurately represented?
In the case of manual reload rate yes in the case of automatic loaders no.
How can you make the argument that the Leclerc’s reload needs to be 6.0 seconds taking in to account the now buffed Abrams reload rate and the denial of spall liners?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but USSR isn’t as good as you think it is.
USSR vehicles not performing as well as other country’s vehicles of same year, or performing as well as older vehicles, is reality.
Sweden really is stronger than the Soviet tech tree.
Same with China & Germany. Stronger IRL & stronger in-game.
You have a game played by kids and adults and Gaijin trying to appease the two age groups. Can’t be easy. You also have an entire planet with big cultural differences to appease. I don’t expect a teenager to view war with my perspective or have my knowledge of history especially if modern tanks are their thing. I would be delighted if my kid had an interest in modern planes and tanks, might be a sign they were onto a good path so it’s not a complaint.
My only gripe with realism is that Gaijin miss what I would call the basics in expectation.WW2 maps for WW2 vehicles, bigger modern maps for modern tanks and planes. Maybe era separation to a degree. I feel some vehicles just don’t fit the canon or meta or whatever like the M109 on every nation at 6.0 BR.
It seems that the game was quite realistic originally but that was a long time ago and no piont longing for those days again.
There are no sides as such ,its just 4 nations vs 4 nations. Any and every vehicle thrown in. It is like watching young kids play soldiers or toy tanks. I think some elements of the game are quite clever and some just plain stupid.
Maybe now WT is so big and diverse it needs a major rework.
Maybe a 3 way era split and fresh map design and real teams.
I agree, and it is sad.
Yes, we are getting some quite realistic things (like how the radar works etc), but generally the matches are getting more unrealistic/arcady. Mixed battles are now for years the norm at top tier, and the encounters are getting more unrealitic by the update.
Therefore I see it very critically, that Gaijin even markes those battles as “realistic […] battles”, which is quite far from the truth. Just look at the teamups in top tier air rb, or ground etc.
We have more team death matches, than tactical battles.
Game doesn’t get balanced around USSR.
Otherwise thermals, thermal pods, AIM-9Ls, AIM-7F/M, DM53 & M829A2, HSTV-L, CV90120, SPIKE-ER, etc wouldn’t be in the game when they were introduced in-game & some of them currently.
cultural differences shouldn’t matter when it comes to objective measurements, like realism.
I agree with the rest though. It is to big and so with the F2P model it is forced to implement constantly new vehicles, which of course gets more into paper-things, since there is only a finite amount of well known stuff.
And therefore I think, we need a real competitor, a new War Thunder.
I mean bc of that tech disparity, the UdSSR have the newest air superiority plane, the newest FOX 1 missile etc. Only for the HMD and the R73, they have the superior tech, time wise, which is implemented, untlike the Data Link etc, which would benefit NATO. Did you already forget, that they only wanted to introduce the spall liner for the new T90 even though it is standard for quite some time before that one in NATO?
Or that the russian ERA is apparently the only one, effective against kinetic ammunitions, or that the missing implementation of the autoloaders as a destructable module, heavily favors the UdSSR?
I don’t think, it is intentional from Gaijin, to favor one nation over the other, but their practices of implementing and balancing stuff, are biased.