Yes, but there is atleast more balanced than if it was at 6.7 due to the changes in tech. It is also better to have it at 1 BR than 2. Also at top tier, you can get into even higher BR games because of the existence of air, and higher MM levels.
1 Like
Not really getting you there.
Not having a tier above is simply that.
I know that if there was new top tier then work would be needed but I think it would be constructive and beneficial work such as making the USA competitive with German at 6-7 BR which they could and should easy be.
It have become apparent with the Spallgate saga and the M1 issues that Gaijin uses creative license as and when it likes so to tie up the loose laces at Tier IV should not be that difficult. Italy ,France,UK etc many need some late forties early fifties vehicles but they are still in the meta.
If China and Japan are weak then they are no more weak than they are currently. A bad nation line up is a bad nation line up regardless of a tier split.
I think a clear line to make the transition from WW2 to Cold war would be beneficial in game play, Immersion and also encourage those who are firm WW2 players to cross the line and proceed up the ladder.
There would still be a few heavy and slow tanks in there but many are early variants where later variants are available. T34 or some IS as examples.
I don’t think such a split is beyond the intelligence of Gaijins devs(although with the map issues I am beginning to wonder)
Maybe WT could tie in CAS to weak land trees and make them fair in other ways other than a Tank for tank SP shootout.
They are. You get a couple good heavies, tons of CAS choices, and a couple good light tanks.
Then the early cold war tanks would only ever face tanks much better than they are, unless a ton of decompression is done. And by that point, it would’ve been easier to just decompress regularly.
They could do it, but i highly doubt they could do it well.
1 Like
A hell of a lot of people on here would disagree. The Jumbo and Pershing being much higher in BR than equivalent German or Russian counterparts. Plenty of US tanks which are no better than 6.7 Germany being placed at much higher BRs.
Are you saying that Early cold war tanks don’t currently face tanks much better than they are? At least WW2 tanks would have to face them also. At least the tanks facing Cold was would be cold war themselves not WW2.It would be no differnt to tier 1
Well you might be correct but then why are any of us here ?
Top tier is a bit of a special case. Now, I personally haven’t yet played it despite my absurd number of hours in the game, most of that was F2P and top tier didn’t really interest me all that much, so I spent my time grinding out pretty much all nations at once instead of sticking with a main to the “destination” of top tier.
However, for my perspective, tank in War Thunder reach a very similar level of capabilities around top tier. Compare a Leo 2A4 to a 2A5, for instance. They’re both exceedingly mobile. Even though the 2A5 has a higher penetration shell, they both generally aim for the same weakspots on every tank. The armor is better on the 2A5’s turret, but the breach weakspot still exists. They have all the same kit otherwise, LRF, gun depression, reload rate, etc. They generally can do the same things, it’s just the 2A5 can do it a bit easier and safer. Put a 2A4 in a 2A5’s place, and with careful and skilled play, you should be able to make it work. And that’s with two tanks that aren’t even in the same BR bracket.
Compare that to, say, the 5.7 to 6.7 gap. A Tiger H1 compared to a Tiger II H. The differences in armor and gun are immense. The long 88 can render a lot of tanks the H1 would struggle with complete non-issues. The armor renders the II H frontally immune to a decent selection of guns that cut right through the H1. Put an H1 into a II H’s place, and only exceedingly careful and skilled play will be able to achieve similar results.
Generally, mid tiers have much more BR compression, and the capabilities of tanks vary wildly compared to top tier. Top tier guns in particular are very similar, there aren’t tanks that sacrifice firepower for other advantages, like the Jumbos. Nor do they sacrifice things for armor that is completely negated by full uptiers, again like the Jumbos. This inherently makes them less bothered by uptiers than many midtier tanks.
It’s also worth pointing out that BRs are pretty decompressed at high tier, at least around top tier itself. There are only a handful of 10.7 tanks, and only China realistically has a lineup up there (One I’m sure is pretty unpopular for obvious reasons). Even 11.0 is pretty rare, with only Japan having a lineup (And even among top tier nations, Japan’s high mobility autoloading capability allows it to work in uptiers better than most). Most lineups tend to be around 10.3, which cannot be uptiered to top tier, or 11.3, which can only see a partial uptier.
3 Likes
Good luck fighting IS-3/4s, T-44-100s, and even possibly IS-7s with WWII tanks!
if you bothered to read the discussion you would see those tanks are not even together. Whole idea of separating them.
From what? All of them are from WWII.
like I said, read what is already there.
None of them saw service in WW2 for what its worth and none of them are tier IV
And then what is your argument with them seeing service?
There are tons of prototypes in the game, as well as tanks, that were in service yet did not see combat ever.
It was in service, but not used in clombat.
Mate I’m not getting into that old chestnut its all been done, like I said if you bothered to read anything prior you would know. I and others suggested cutting the game at Tier IV to solve the op’s issue and stating a first Division from 7- top tier .
Gaijin might want to reevaluate certain vehicle a little around 6-7 BR but many are asking for that anyway. Some nations have had glaring gaps for a long time so no change there.
Agree. WW2 and Cold war should be separated. Not because cold war tanks are “OP” per se, but because they are dumb. People actually want historical battles and they want a historical gameplay dynamic. WWII was the heyday of heavy tanks and I bet people would love intense battles where armour actually worked - and to beat the top-tier heavies you have to flank with faster light tanks, or bring out the big guns with heavy tank destroyers, and where range actually made a big deal for armour efficacy. Cold War tanks completely destroys this dynamic by totally upending the triangle of mobility/firepower/armour - suddenly you can have light tanks that can zip around everywhere and pen the UFP of fully-angled top-tier heavy tanks from 1200m. Very dumb. Those playstyle with HEATFS slinging tanks has it place but it should not be in low tiers - it should not be a ubiquity across basically every BR.
3 Likes
Oh really? Yeah, good luck with a Chi-Ha against a Pershing or Sherman!
Good luck against a KV-1 or T-34 with a Panzer 1/2!
Historical MM is dumb, and would not work. Germany mains already cry, now imagine them having a single case where they have a chance to win (in Africa). All the rest, and they would have like 5% win rate.
EDIT:
Also, how would you even play with Sweden then? Or possibly with Swiss tanks (if they will be added)?
They did not take part in armed conflicts for ~200 years.
Look, I understand where people come from with this idea of Era matchmaking, splitting the brs, whatever you want to call it. I disagree with it because will destroy dozens of vehicles, the games progression, and effect aircraft in an even more negative way than ground. I usually love debates/discussions, but I will have to make my exit from this discussion. Nothing is going to sway your opinion here because you feel so strongly about it, and any factual information has been ignored or called irelevant. You comparing society’s problem with equality with and issue in a video game has made me realize that you see this as a crusade that must be won for your side, not what is better for the game and playerbase as a whole.
1 Like
No I don’t feel that strongly about it and I suspect it will never happen. I am simply saying it would be nice, it would be useful for many, and tier IV is probably the only place you could do it if you were going to do it which Im sure Gaijin wont.
It is a common forum issue to assume everybody is a raging fanatic over every issue .Its just a game above all.
My point is that all the faults a split might reveal are there already, we have a top tier already and a bottom tier already and if those two things are a problem, then they are a problem already. Its nothing new. We have some glaring gaps in some nations and Gaijin already seem unable to fill them and we already have up tiers and some dreadful mismatches.
You are reading far too much into this but don’t think Im targeting you, the forum in general is far too fanatical over what is a simple and in reality, rather poor and shallow shoot em up. Most suggestions are simply ways to make the game a little better and bring in some depth.
You take care Bro.
How is the seperation of ww2 and cold war tanks a bad idea?
It just needs to be implemented correctly…
1 Like
We already have the tier system ,don’t forget that and we have players with half developed line ups with vehicles at differing BRs in that line up.
Please use this topic
1 Like