Thats no true, the F4F does not have the software needed to fire Semi active radar homing missiles (SARH) F4F ICE was an upgrade package that allowed it to carry the AIM-120, Early F4F’s were simplified for cost, they did not even have ballistics computers. We actually have all of these versions now, F4F Eerly F4F and F4F ICE
We have aircraft in this game loaded with weapons they never carried. In this case I have demonstrated with a photograph of the F4 Phantom II launching an AIM-120. So it is possible with that airframe and platform. Which means its more real than many implementations that are given grace by russian aircraft in game.
Essentially it is possible. Meaning it should be implemented given that state of other aircraft in the game (Mig 29s could NOT carry 6 x R27ER and could only fire them straight and level, yet here we are).
Do you actually want that? Like have you actually put thought into this? you realise that Most top tier American aircraft are much older than what they are fighting in game, Like the F14 first flew in 74 and the F15 in 76, These would be fighting MiG-21/23’s, not Su27/MiG29’s. Also how about Sweden? Most of their low tier stuff is post war, do you want something that has a BR of 1.0-4.0 to be fighting things like the pattons or t54’s?? Or Israel, which uses WW2 vehicles but Israel only became a nation in 1948. So would their shermans have to fight T54’s Leopard 1’s Pattons etc. ? Or the US used the F4J in a different time period than the british, who bought the USN’s old F4J’s. Should it go in its histoically accurate br or go in an ahistoric one with the US phantom?
The whole notion of “We need historical matchmaking” Makes perfect sense until you actually look at the tech trees.
let me guess, your a german main who plays ww2 heavies and wants to seal club 75 shermans and cromwells becuase thats what you see in documentaries. Im guessing this becuase its only ww2 german heavy tank players that ever ask for this
6 Likes
Best i can say is bug report it then. Gaijin gives vehicles ahistorical G-loads, so it might be a bit more than that specific value even if it gets adjusted.
Various versions of aircraft exist, and each one is put into service when it’s introduced. Rather than keeping the same aircraft, they continuously improve and upgrade them. (Block naming, Upgrade programs etc)
Historical matchmaking is essential. Relying solely on win/loss ratios, kills, and deaths to determine a vehicle’s Battle Rating (B.R.) doesn’t align well with the vehicles currently in use.
While I’m not a German main, I am a War Thunder enthusiast (I main all nations, don’t believe me, just check my player card). Facing a Tiger tank with a Sherman would be an exciting challenge, even if the odds are overwhelming. Accepting defeat in such situations is part of the experience.
What bothers me is being killed in-game by a vehicle that has inflated stats that don’t accurately reflect real-life performance, and solely done for balance purposes is what gets to me, hence why i want historical match making to be intorduced.
1 Like
A few Years ago gaijin did an event for the annaversary of the normandy landings (D-Day) where its exactly what you were saying Shermans vs panthers and tigers, and guess what. No one wanted to play USA. Everyone was playing Germany leading to long queue times. I honestly do not care for historical matchmaking, if you do, go play dcs or something. I just want a balanced and fun game, War thunder is not a super historically accurate game, its not a simulator. Again, go play dcs or if you want ground, GHPC.
Also, your completly fine with stuff like the F15 F16 F14 dominating everything else. Just remember when the F14A was first added. It would be like that but much worse
4 Likes
So what? Do you want historical matchmaking for those aswell? Ill use the F4 example again. The US used the F4J much before the british did. So the british one should have a higher br?? even though its worse in every way?
Historical matchmaking makes no sense what so ever
5 Likes
“balanced” is a strong word that doesnt correlate with war thunder
1 Like
That would just be unbalanced, and it would screw over anyone that isn’t Russia, USA, and Germany.
Low tier Sweden, most of France, and most of Japan would be unplayable. Should an AMX-13 be fighting t-55s? Or should the 8.0 AMX-30 be fighting early T-72s? Russia would dominate low tier due to the t-34s and Kv-1s being introduced earlier than other ingame counterparts.
I don’t see how that would be fun or enjoyable for anyone but the ones dominating the match.
I get why Gaijin doesn’t do that. Sometimes it would lead to certain vehicles going much higher than they are now due to a minor change.
2 Likes
Thats not how i remember this event. I recall first spawn P-47s and P-51s absolutely bodying tanks from the air, while I averaged 7-8 kills a game with the Achilles and Firefly on brainless Wehraboos who thought they were going to get to easymode
TCS for F-14A
Russian only dominates those tiers because they are modeled terribly wrong, with things like view ports being invincible armor. If they were historically correct, then it would be an entirely different game. They were begging the US in WW2 for equipment. Russia lost more tanks in WW2 than all other nations combined. 83,500. UK Lost 15,800, US 10,000, Germany 45,000…
Lets be honest… Russian tanks didn’t do well in WW2. 8x the losses of the US. The game just heavily favors its home nation.
Fast forward to the Gulf War… That didn’t work out at all for Russian built tanks. Absolutely obliterated. 3,300 Iraq tanks destroyed to 30 US Tanks destroyed (including the friendly fire incidents).
Fast forward to the invasion of Ukraine. The tanks are performing at half their claimed stats. No jack in the box effect in game. ERA that is grossly over performing. We have tons of videos from Ukraine showing the most modern Russian tanks getting stomped.
Things wouldn’t be as bad if Russian vehicles were not so exaggerated in performance in this game.
We are currently in possession of a T-90 and modernized undamaged T-80 and we are not impressed.
3 Likes
Actually not a single american tank was “destroyed” due to enemy fire, there were some mission kills however.
I think a more impressive stat is not a single American Abrams Crew member died during all of desert storm. even the ones that were hit, everyone lived
3 Likes
I agree, this is a very impressive feat, and speaks to the technology of the vehicle. Unfortunately it is deliberately not modeled correctly, while other nation vehicles are vastly over performing what we have seen in Ukraine.
I did purposefully not say due to enemy fire. Their were some real screw ups…
Russian bias is very real in this game.
2 Likes
I dont think theres a bias towards russia, just look at top tier air, the R77 is the worst Fox 3 and the Su27 has the worse performance, but I do believe that russian tanks are overperforming due to the lack of sufficient documents and the way war thunder is played, NATO tanks are designed for more long ranged engagements. they were designed for the european plains. Russian tanks are similarly designed for this but work better in close quarters due to their low profile and better side armour.
2 Likes
I havent played ground rb in a while but the last time I played it I was using the Leopard 2A7 and got a long range tunisia map and it was German+US against some other nations inclduing USSR(i honestly cant remember) and we were dominating. They were stuck in spawn
Russian tanks sucked IRL. The T-34s aren’t modelled wrongly, volumetric exists. It is arguably worse in some German tanks too. How would you make it historically correct without ruining the games balance?
And a video game isn’t IRL. Reliability and other stuff isn’t modelled, and that’s a good thing. There is no Russian bias.
That just doesn’t exist outside of a small section of the game. Russian tanks are incredibly easy to kill at nearly all BRs, and if you can’t kill them, you need to aim better.
If that were the case, the USA wouldn’t have the best air tree by far. And that Russian tanks at most BRs are easy to kill. T-72s die easily, T-55s are only janky when using Heat, IS tanks are partly overtiered.
In air, the USA is unmatched, especially at higher BRs.
1 Like
Their is certainly Russian bias in this game. It is clearly prevalent, no other nation has missiles overperforming to comical levels like the R27ER. Their are tons of reports of incorrect and missing arms options from other nations. The Object 279 fiasco was a comedy show.
Can you name other nations littered with failed prototypes? Yak 141 but no F15 Active or F15 Tailless with omni thrust vectoring? how about 2014 aircraft introduced along side 1985 F15C II MSIP? " The first MSIP II aircraft was F-15C 84-001, first flown on June 20, 1985 . MSIP II was still underway at the time of the Persian Gulf war of 1991" Or how about 2023 tanks being introduced for only one nation in the 2S38 a year ago? Where is our Leopard 2A8?
These gatekeeping excuses that leads to these one sided additions need to be called out for what they are.
That isn’t true at all. It exists in large sections of the game.
Currently:
Russian Win Rate Top BR Ground RB = 68%
USA Win Rate Top BR Ground RB = 34%
For Air Top Tier BR in RB Win Rates =
Japan = 71%
Italy = 71%
China = 66%
Germany = 62%
Sweden = 59%
France = 59%
USA = 59%
Russia = 54%
Israel = 54%
USA is tied for 7th Place. Russia is tied with Israel right behind USA.
I wouldn’t call 7th place “dominating”
I see you’re claiming NATO is Russia again.
R-27ER is not overperforming.
Object 279 is over-BR’d currently with all of its equivalents at 8.7.
Unknown, cause this information is confidential.
All unknown, cause this information is confidential.
On top of that, what does team skill have to do with alleged bias?
Correct, Mig-29s in War Thunder only carry 2x R-27ERs. They’ve never carried more than 2.
Not sure why you’re begging for F-4 to carry AIM-120s… thus indirectly suggesting Mig-29s to carry 6x R-27ERs though… neither are possible.
1 Like