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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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…
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.
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.
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.
Introduction date means nothing in WT, because they balance off of player statistics. If it was, the 8.0 AMX-30 would be facing T-72s, and not early T-54s/55s.
Is that large section exclusively top tier ground?
Winrates are a measure of team skill, and lineup strength. They shouldn’t be used for balancing, and we don’t have access to the true winrates.
You can’t be serious right? The Chinese test reports on that missile show it was complete garbage, and none of the claims lined up. In game it has two engines and is modeled to get twice the boost it should have, launch angles the flight manual says it can’t be used at, and other problems.
Known, we have relatively decent info on this.
F4s are capable of carrying and launching Aim-120s, I provided photographic proof. And simply saying “it needs updated” isn’t hard to do. Software updates are something we do all the time. The rest of that is nonsense.
I see this quoted alllll the time… but its funny how it only seems to benefit russian tech trees. Why not let them fall behind and push the Uk and Sweden up?
No
The numbers line up with complaints that we see. So we know the numbers are close enough.
What happens when they run out of room to give the russian tech tree a 20 - 30 year advantage? Do they just stop adding things at that point? “Oh sorry guys we can’t balance the F18 because we ran out of fictional performance for the USSR tree, so we wont be adding it”.
So what is next the F18 (1978) gets introduced with the SU-47(1997) the Mig 35 (2016) along side the J20 (2017)? and the F22 is still “too good”?
Lets reverse roles. Let them introduce the F22A (1997) and the SU-30 (1989) and see how it feels.
IRL Phoenix missiles are trash against modernish jets, but they’re fragging Tornado IDS’s in War Thunder when they’d fail 100% of the time in real life due to the countermeasure set.
I literally just said how it benefits France, are you dense? The AMX-13 also faces Tiger IIs (and the FL11 version is 4.3), when in reality it is from the '50s.
How is it bad that newer Russian equipment is as good as older non-Russian equipment? Should the game be deliberately imbalanced because you are personally biased against Russia?
Where else is it?
You ignored me saying “Winrates are a measure of team skill, and lineup strength.”
Either that or they buff Russian stuff, but NATO players would whine so much if they did that. The most likely scenario is that stuff just stops being added to Russia, while other natiosn keep getting higher BR vehicles.
Win rates are a measure of aircraft performance. This is very evident in real world data like when the Pakistan Air Force F16As obliterated the Indian Air Force Mig 29s with no losses. Mig 29 has the worst combat rating of any 4th gen fighter with a 1 - 3 negative KDR.
I am sure they will pull out some secret document prototype that never made it out a wind tunnel and add it. “we saw this in a 1990s comic once and thought USSR tech tree needed it”.
Unironically this makes sense. France kept an active unit of post war German tanks in service. They had 48 I think? Finland kept the Panzer IV and so did France in service into the 60s. So they were active during the Korean War. This is historical.
