WW2- Early cold war tanks

Game Discussion General Discussion
,
1

WW2 needs to stop facing tanks from the 50s+

1 I am not bias to eany Nation I just believe the game need to care about all nations=

I know tanks like the American T29 T30 and T34 were made after WW2 but they are WW2 designed to fight tanks from there time just used those tanks for example.

And I’m not saying that the Maus needs to be 6.7 it is good were it is at in a 6.7 game u don’t die but in 8.7 u die diffens is fighting M26s or fighting T55am1/amd.

That is a big difference in technology

A TigerII can face a ikv91 a tank with heat-fs and a LRF

Tanks that are reliable on there armor do not need to fight tanks form different reliability l.

For Example the T72 is vere small for a mbt that is so it does not get hit in battle. But say a arl44 a big tank that depends on its armor to protect it.

I just played 30 games of 6.7 and here are the stats
10 games as usa 10 as Germany 10 as ussr. Just to see it there was a bias form my research I don’t see much off a difference in them.

11 full upters
4 0.7 upters
5 0.3 upters
4. 6.7 games
4 0.3 downters
2. Full downters

Stats 172 kills. 102 death.

Not to brag but I proud my self off being a good player and ai have over 20000 game in air rb and g rb combined
And about a 1000 in Arcade and. About 200 ish in sim

Now I’ma go do 30 games of 7.7 only using tanks made after ww2 that are not ww2 concepts or design.

10 as USA. 10 as France. 10 as Germany

7 full upters
3 0.7 upters
2 0.3 upters
4 7.7 games
2 0.3 downters
0 0.7 downters- don’t know y I got no 7.0 games
12 full downters

I did get 7 full down ters in France don’t know y but just some snail magic.

Stats 211kills. 53. Deaths

Say u are playing a tiger 2 u know u can get hit and live from the front that y u can be slow.

Say u are playing the m48 the 7.7 German one that is built for speed and can pin what ever it sees.

A tiger2 vs a m48. Idk if the tiger2 can lfo the m48 but if it can good for him.

Tiger2 aphe, slow, depends on armor, ww2,
M48 heat-fs, fast, depends on speed, cold war.

See 2 different doctrends for tanks but that fight because 7.7 can see 6.7 that not right with me.

I remember win the M1 just was added reminder that made it were the can only be 4 on a team if I remember correctly that need do that for 7.7 seeing 6.7 or just stop 7.7 from seeing 6.7 all together.

Full team of Tiger2s say vs a full team of M103s not fair at all. M103 has heat-fs and a range finder.

Ima stop ranting a just say I won’t to see this game do well but these say last 3 years have been bad for warthunder. I fill like the people that make the changes don’t play there game at all.

And don’t get me started on facing a tank with a stab and apfsds in a tank with no stab and only aphe looking at u char25t don’t move it up to 8.0 plz and don’t say u just wanted to stop facing 7.7 that char is a ww2 concept that’s y it is ok.

Have a blessed day.

#ItsWT_YT on YouTube.

2 Likes
2

There is already a thread about this… And to be honest, it isn’t going well. The seperation of WW2 and early Cold War tanks is an awful idea, and will never come to pass.
Here is the link to the other post:

The game has been seeing a steady increase in the playerbase for those 3 years, and the last year has included alot of changes the community actually wanted. It is hard to say the game is doing bad when it continues to grow and improve.

4 Likes
3

T29 Heavy tank->March 1944->19 months till the end of WW2.
T30 Heavy tank->April 1945->6 months till WW2 ended.
T34 Heavy tank-> May 1945->5 months till WW2 ended.
Not one of these tanks is 1950’s 1950s-era tanks. The only post-war modification to a tank is the M46 Patton which is an M26E2 but was redesignated since it wasn’t likely compatible with the original or didn’t look like an M26 Pershing anymore.

1 Like
4

itd be amazing actually mr payed by gaijin to sow discontent and acceptance of the status quo

5

Okay. What should the ikv 72 fight?

In that case, i would love to club those tanks in my is7

1 Like
6

As long as the game has the stupid bullet damage model where only the APHEs work too well and the HEAT-FS take 5 shots to kill a heavy, the MM of WW2 tanks vs 50s 60s tanks will not change, They have to raise the damage of the APDS, APCR and HEAT to a realistic level to be able to separate it from the tanks of WW2.

7

This isn’t meant to be real life. As many moderators, and volunteers have said the game isn’t a simulation of WW2 V WW2 era equipment it’s just a game about historical tanks, aircraft, and ships. It is not meant to be an ultra-realistic simulation of historical tank-on-tank conflicts. However, there are things I do agree need to change since some things don’t function as they should to their real life counterparts.

8

Ok yes, they have said that they are not strictly realistic, but if in certain things being real you fix problems that the game has, then take advantage, improve the damage of the bullets and separate the WW2 tanks from the post-war tanks, apart from that You balance the British tanks from WW2 too, it is clear that there will be nations in which they will have to continue having tanks that are from the 50s in a game against tanks from WW2, but with realism to a greater or lesser extent the game is fixed.

9

Ah yes, so we shouldn’t have the M46 Patton (formally known as the M26E2 before redesignation) in 1948 not fighting WW2 tanks yet is still an M26 Pershing. Or how about the Centurion I is a WW2-era tank that served after WW2 ended but was being developed and tested during the period.

Cause my dude separation isn’t going to happen. People keep asking this all the time and it won’t happen. Some tanks should not be fighting tanks they historically fought because that puts teams at a massive disadvantage. With no way to frontally engage it.

This is like trying to balance real life by giving 1 guy a rotating musket and on the other side of things giving your enemy an MG-42.

10

The M46 is a tank that was used for the first time in the Korean War and in the game it has the HEAT-FS that gives it the ability to face many post-war tanks in addition to having a much more powerful engine than the M26. The Centurion Mk1 arrived late in the First World War, but it could be said that it belonged to it, since in the following war (Korea) the Cromwell and Comet were used, but as far as Centurions were concerned, only the MkIII was used with the 20pdr, which makes it clear that the MkI and MkII were only transition tanks until reaching the MkIII, so it would not be unreasonable to leave the MkI and MkII with the final tanks of WW2

11

But that’s what I put, everything as realistic as possible, the M46 would confront, for example, the T-54 (1947), but with the changes that I say, the HEAT-FS would do more damage, the APHE would do less damage and apart from that, by dates The T-54 (1947) would only have the APHE bullet, since the APBC bullet is from 1950 and the APCBC is from 1954.

12

My guy the M46 is a M26E2. It’s a WW2-era tank modified to be serviceable after WW2 had ended. The logic you are trying to demand doesn’t work simply because there are tanks that saw combat service after WW2 had ended but were being designed, produced, or shelved and produced late 1944, 1945, or when it ended or even decades later on.

A prime example Pansarbandvagn 301(PBV-301) is a 1960s-era APC, that uses a WW2-era chassis( Stridsvagn m/41) and the 20mm before of the limited serviced SAAB-21 aircraft. By your logic, this thing should fight 1960s-era vehicles cause it was produced in 1961 when the gun and frame were over at this point 19 years old, 23 if you want to be more technical since it was based on the ČKD LT vz. 38 the actual designation for the “PZ-38T” when Germany annexed Czechoslovakia.

Your logic simply doesn’t work, it’s the same demand that so many on the forums have made. Another thing, this isn’t the world of tanks. The game focuses on realism, not simulation. Simulation->WW2 V WW2. Realistic means taking aspects, documentation of its existence, penetration, performance, etc and as best the developers can simulate its actual performance in the game. It’s not perfect with a lot of things missing denied etc. I won’t defend this since I do not agree with it myself.

That said, magically making a shell have more pen makes it no longer faithful to the source material. Gaijin’s calc for ballistics by all means is flawed but some people know how to get a more accurate penetration on the forums who are skilled for this. But you are not helping the cause an M46/M26E2 cannot fight a T-54/55 effectively. It wasn’t designed for it.

1 Like
13

There are multiple threads about this sure. There is also a legion of people playing the game who simply have no concept of the silliness of massively mixed era whether its an immersion destroyer or is simply ruining the gameplay .

I suggested cutting the game in half at tier IV and having two divisions. Not a perfect solution but a very natural cut off point and possibly the best way to separate the old heavy tank doctrine from the later light tank doctrine that replaced it.

At Tier IV there is mild overlap and scop for the devs to maybe move some stuff up or down. I think it a great way to give USA a parallel with German and Russia at what would be the new top tier of 6-7 BR . Get the Pershing or Jumbo up there with the Tiger 2 and Panthers and have some fun as it should be.

As for the minor nations, sadly they are an afterthought as it is any way, not the fault of the player base that there are so many gaps and so much obvious filler in there.

Top tier has nothing above it so a new top tier should work .The lowest BR has nothing below it and still functions. If the devs want to make minor alterations make it all work they can and I am sure they do that at the high HRs anyway.

The player base is not split and is still there playing Warthunder at whatever BR it prefers but the player base are happy.

It could be a chance to give post war and WW2 different maps as the player base have been requesting for a long time, bigger and era specific.

OK so, here comes the legion of experts to tell me how this won’t work but how about the devs come on here and tell us why it wont work and we can all shut up and move on.

14

That the M46 is almost an M26 does not mean that with more engine and HEAT-FS it cannot face things that are a little bigger, in any case I am not saying that it has to face the T-54 (1951) or the T -55, so those first two T-54 would not have very modern bullets, and apart from that it would not be in the same Br exactly, the M46 would be in a space between the last tanks of WW2 and those of the 50s, with which would not be facing the T-54 at all times.
Regarding the issue of Pansarbandvagn 301, it is exactly what you said, it is an APC, it is not a tank, that is why gaijin has put it as SPAA so the Br cannot be touched much on how it is now.
I already stated before that there would be cases in which the Br of some tanks could not be raised, since despite being post-war they are still tanks that are not very competent for their date of entry into service, but in which it can be raised Br is tanks that by improving the damage become much more effective than they were before, for example the Israeli M51 is quite effective for Br 6.0, but with correct damage from its HEAT it could easily destroy any tank up to almost Br 8.3 from the first shot almost without problems, just depending on the shooter’s aim.
First change the damage model and correctly modify the volumetric bullets, then rebalance all the tanks, well not all the tanks, but the majority of tanks that use HEAT-FS and APDS would be more separated from the WW2 tanks, of course the tanks like the M46 or the M36B2 that have HEAT-FS would be seen against tanks from WW2, but at the same time they would also see some tanks just after those from WW2, and if they are tanks like the Swedes that are from the 50s but not They can compete, since they are put in the Br that they have to be in order for them to work correctly. Making the Br based on historical data is not to be followed strictly, it is so that, together with an increase in the damage of all bullet models, there is no imbalance, and that tanks that often depended on their armor are systematically destroyed because the HEAT-FS and APDS kill them with one or two shots.

15

Yea, that isn’t an easy thing to do. It sounds easy, but that would require a massive amount of work on top of what they are already doing. They can’t just stop normal operations and add a massive project like that. They aren’t going to split WW2 from early Cold War, just like they don’t split Interwar to WW2. It creates a progression through through the timetime of armored warfare, and it creates counters for all but top tier vehicles.

Also, learn when to use a period instead of a comma. Trying to quote your post is like translating gibberish since you can’t tell where a thought begins or ends.

1 Like
16

It’s just that a correct damage model should have been done from the beginning instead of making such an exaggerated damage model for the APHE and a disaster for the other bullets. I also know that it takes time to modify it, but it is something necessary for the game, to balance tanks well and don’t depend on which bullet your tank uses to be able to kill.
And yes, I know I abuse commas. Sorry.

17

Yea, APHE may be a bit spicier than it should be, but did you see what happened to APCR? They destroyed it and noone uses it anymore. Having APHE be so strong doesn’t really hurt the game that badly because its equally powerful for every vehicle. The worse offenders are the SPAA that have them, but it’s manageable. If they changed APHE in a meaningful way, I would say the backlash would be quite harsh with people saying they broke the game. I mean, every ammunition type is viable and useful in its own situations. So it isn’t like any of the normal types are useless.

18

Cut the game at Tier IV and the T54 wouldnt be in the game.It would be low rank Div one

19

No one used it back then either. Their making it worse now didn’t change the fact that little to no one uses APCR.

20

This would be more to balance the APHE with respect to the other bullets. It cannot be that for example if you use Germans you kill a lot, on the other hand if you use Great Britain you kill little, and all because APHE kills and Full AP you often need more than two or three shots (even five or six in some cases).
Regarding the APCR, the issue is curious. They have always been bad because of the poor damage and that they bounce at the minimum there is a little angle. If the damage of the APCR was done well, they would do even greater damage than the APHE of the same caliber, but the devs decided to make them useless.