Not really much to enjoy about the game, it is ok as a bit of a time waster like Candy Crush or Cookie Clicker, not particularly noteworthy enough to waste time or money on.
It has far too many flaws and problems to rank or rate it as anything better.
1 Like
One thing I wanna bring attention to is the ground vehicle damage models. There are COUNTLESS vehicles that are missing hitboxes and armor values on a lot of different features/shapes/equipment that would actually make big impacts on them. Things like different spotlights on tanks (m60a2 for example), M728 for example has that whole crane around the turret that is completely missing from the damage model. Tons of vehicles have no collision on boxes, diving equipment etc… too many to name. These changes would only make things more realistic and accurate. I don’t see any reason why they should be omitted, a few polygons to the vehicles wont hurt performance, specially seeing the insanely high detailed models being put into aircraft damage models currently.
Another point I would like to bring up: The Camera from tank gunner sight setting. I think it is a big shame that this feature isnt enforced in normal RB battles and I personally feel it would be a huge improvement to have it enforced in RB, keeping the option available for AB.
In a game about unlocking different vehicles each one with all their different designs and quirks, the offset on the optics adds some pretty good variety to it.
It is also obviously pretty unrealistic and frustrating to have people shoot you through tiny gaps in buildings or around corners without having to expose half of what they should IRL to see through the optics!
This would all require another skill to be mastered in game. I honestly think it would be a substantial upgrade to the game.
1 Like
Yeah it’s really wierd, really not sure why this is. Partially probably because some of them outdated, but the KV-2 model 1940 was added ages ago and has an extremely detailed damage model, so that’s not much of an excuse. Thankfully they are slowly, very slowly but surely getting updated.
Your second point I’m not sure I agree with though. Yes, it’d be more realistic and would limit cheeky shooting spots, but it would also makes the game much harder to play. One of, if not THE strongest point of War Thunder is how it blends vehicles perfectly between feeling realistic and being easy to control and use. Forcing new players to fire the gun from the gunner’s sight would hinder this a lot I think, and would turn away new players even more than they already are.
Interesting points though, thank you for the input!
- The Urgent Need for Battle Rating (BR) Decompression
As an Air Realistic Battles (Air RB) main, I will focus primarily on air matchmaking, though BR compression remains a universal issue across all game modes. Currently, matchmaking compression completely destroys the balance across multiple generations of aviation.
The Prop-to-Jet Transition: It makes absolutely no sense for late-era propeller aircraft to constantly face early jet-engine planes, where the performance gap is mathematically insurmountable.
The Top-Tier Fox-3 Absolute Chaos: This issue is equally disastrous in the modern jet brackets. For instance, early F/A-18 Hornet models sit around the 12.3–12.7 BR range. On their own, their flight performance and characteristics are highly impressive. However, these jets suffer immensely due to their compressed matchmaking environment.
How are these Semi-Active Radar Homing (SARH) missile-reliant jets supposed to fairly fight in a match flooded with 13.3+ Active Radar Homing (ARH) Fox-3 missiles? Because a vehicle’s viability is ultimately defined by its comparative competitiveness within its bracket, even a fundamentally great jet is instantly relegated to ‘absolute trash tier’ simply because it is constantly uptiered into a completely different technological era.
- Atrocious Grinding for Tech Tree and Squadron Vehicles
The current progression pacing has become exhausting and deeply unrewarding for the player base.
Squadron Vehicles: Even if you maximize your activity within a squadron, you are strictly capped at 20,000 research points every 3 days. Since high-tier squadron vehicles require roughly 600,000 points, players are forced to wait a literal 90 days just to unlock a single vehicle. This artificial time-gating is unacceptable.
The 9-to-5 Nightmare: The standard tech tree grind is no better. The RP requirements are tuned so harshly that an average player working a 9-to-5 job would need nearly a year of consistent grinding to reach a top-tier vehicle—even with an active premium account.
While I understand that Gaijin needs to regulate content consumption speed to maintain player retention, forcing a year-long grind for top-tier jets just to play a single, repetitive game mode is a disaster. Air RB has devolved into a basic Team Deathmatch combined with a mini-base bombing speedrun. If we are expected to invest this much time, Gaijin needs to implement more dynamic, engaging, and objective-driven game modes for Air RB.
- Absurd Premium Vehicle Pricing Tactics
To be clear, I have no issue with the developers introducing premium vehicles to monetize the game and support ongoing development. However, the current pricing model has completely lost touch with reality.
Charging $80 USD for a single digital asset is frankly absurd. Major AAA studios sell entire, ground-breaking new games for $69.99 to $79.99. When a single premium pack in War Thunder costs as much as—or more than—a massive standalone title like GTA 6, Gaijin’s microtransaction pricing strategy feels completely disconnected from the value it actually provides to the player.
I love this game and want to see it thrive, but the combination of severe matchmaking compression, exhausting progression loops, and predatory pricing makes it incredibly difficult to stay invested. I hope Gaijin takes this constructive criticism seriously.
1 Like
Well dam, that survay felt like something people get offered money to complete ( just having a joke )
I honestly hope that GJ would look at the results and see that the playerbase is pretty much ( at least those that use the forums ) in line with each other on what we believe the issues are and what we’d like to see been worked on/ implimented.
I would like to add that i think a section you may have missed is what era of vehicles we’d like to see added to the game. For years I’ve read hundreds of post and comments about the content added been focused in some cases almost exclusively to higher/top tier and players would like to see some mid tier stuff added also.
It would have also been interesting to see people vote on if there Air / Ground / Navel players. As some Air mains wouldn’t care about the same issues a ground main would when it comes to Aircraft, and vice versa when it comes to Ground vehicles and Navel assets.
Overall i think a relatively decent survay but I know that GJ wont take notice, they wont see it and eventually it will get lost in the void that is the Forums archive.
I’ve thought about the optics thing making the game harder to learn, it’s true but i dont think it would be a big issue. Most players probably start playing in arcade mode and still have to make a jump to learn a few things in realistic mode I think. In most optics you can see the cannon being to the side so its not hard to figure out that the round will be coming from there and not the reticle center, of course like irl this would be mainly an issue for closer ranges, and since the game has the hit camera players could learn to adjust easily.
I play with the camera on the sight, and I dont really have an issue changing between tanks, ive only had maybe 2 or 3 where the huge optic offset was a major thing
Salt the snail
Sail the Snalt
3 Likes
War Thunder Review
Rating: 4/10
War Thunder offers a huge selection of vehicles and impressive graphics, but for many casual players, the experience can become frustrating over time.
One of the biggest issues is the rank progression. Advancing through the tech trees requires a significant amount of grinding, especially at higher ranks. For normal gamers who don’t play every day, unlocking new vehicles can feel slow and repetitive.
Another downside is the game’s approach to historical accuracy. While War Thunder is marketed around real military vehicles, many battles feature vehicle matchups and scenarios that feel far removed from actual historical engagements. Players looking for authentic battlefield recreations may be disappointed.
The monetization is also hard to ignore. Premium vehicles, premium account time, and various paid boosts can provide noticeable advantages in progression speed. Although skill still matters, the game often feels designed to encourage spending money rather than simply rewarding gameplay, giving it a pay-to-progress atmosphere that many players view as bordering on pay-to-win.
Overall, War Thunder has plenty of content and an active community, but the heavy grind, questionable historical authenticity, and aggressive monetization make it difficult to recommend. There are other military vehicle games that offer a more enjoyable and less frustrating experience for casual players.
Verdict: A visually impressive game held back by excessive grinding and monetization. There are better alternatives available for players seeking historical battles and a fair progression system.
Dude go to steam that’s where you leave reviews
Cause it ain’t make for people like that, it’s an MMO fella
That’s not what it means smh this isn’t historical battle simulator and the game would suck really bad if that was the case. dude might be saying “Buff Germany” without even Realizing.
What do you expect, it’s a free to play game?
Every time I see someone mention graphics in this manner I begin to think they’re not actually gamers and are simply art gallery watchers.
1 Like