"American airplanes deserve to absolutely stomp every single opponent and remain uncontested. American hardware is simply superior and untouchable, it's realistic, look it up". (Playerbase has absolutely zero incentives to play the underdog against current US aircraft, besides also having less/worse tools to fight against them) "Wow this game is so dogshit. Russian mains just cry and quit the matches all the time".
youre completely right people wanting to turn war thunder into dcs when the game was never intended to be that is completely dumb dcs already exists for these to people to play
If you get close enough to see the markings then the blue name or tag should automatically show on the top of the aircraft, if not then its literally an enemy
@@kh2b573 he was probably on that "rumble" match where everyone fights everyone, including their own nation. this is a huge problem i have with WT SB too. not to mention the captured vehicles that are used in combat
DCS is also a game, it's Digital Cockpit Simulation for a reason because outside the cockpit the simulation stops lol. Also after the new patch DCS runs even worse ICANT
Let me just say, that as someone who plays both games regularly, I wish for War Thunder to become a bit more DCS-ish and for DCS to become a bit more War Thunder-ish and then meet somewhere in the middle. Both DCS (+ server owners) and WT can learn from each other. Simple example: The radar modelling in WT is standardized, while in DCS every dev basically does what they want in terms of accuracy. If ED would provide a *good* standardized radar modelling that every 3rd party dev could use as an API type of thing, that would make it easier for devs, and players alike. Example 2: In DCS, all heat seakers can lock through clouds, while in WT that is realistically modelled. Example 3: In WT, we have radar frequencies and bands. In DCS, this is not the case. Example 4: In DCS, we dont have a queue system for lobbies, you gotta spam the join button if a server is full, while in WT, this is not the case. Example 5: In DCS, we can have settings, where players control boats, a carrier, tanks, AA, helos, and planes all on the same map, this can't be done in WT. Instead of a vs. situation, I would love the two games to learn from each other.
I play a variety of sims all falling into a different level of realism. If I want to play something ultra-realistic, I'll play DCS or Falcon BMS and LARP as a pilot. Sometimes I want something a little quicker to get into, and sometimes I want to just lowest barrier to entry for just blowing stuff up. Each game/sim has its place and they don't need to all be super realistic.
idk having multi pathing so high made radar missiles effectively pointless sim is sitll hilariously unbalanced by instead ofa grippen flying on the deck with periodic on spawn camping is an f-15c at like 6000m throwing amraams down spawn camping redside needs a buff of some kind
Sim has muh realism people, RB has people that want to gut that gamemode and turn it into 3rd person sim, and lots of people who would be better served playing AB are shamed into playing RB It felt weird to step back and think about how some players equate higher fidelity with higher skill, scold others into turning the gamemode they play into a different gamemode, while being too scared to play the existing game or gamemode that already caters to them
that ball anoys me so much i leave to cockit open and after a little bit of time or around 517kph it breaks off. Also noticed you get better sound of nearby engines with the canopy open.
5:00 thats hilarious Also with the remark about the potential of the game at 7:30 I'm gonna have to disagree with your opinion. While I do agree that It shouldn't be as big and drawn out because getting dukied on by saddam25 while getting damaged by flak is definitely not fun I think what everyone would like more is for the game to have more variation and opportunity in terms of objectives and dynamics that different game modes can bring instead of just the average braindead tdm with some ticket bleed on the side. Yes flak should probably just be a visual addition until certain terms of a game are met and bombing AI is definitely boring in most cases, but combining these things with stuff like taking off and landing on carriers, intercepting a bomber fleet that needs to be destroyed before a certain amount of time or else one team will lose tickets, or even a more in depth version of world war and dynamic multiplayer campaigns for a way to get people involved in different ways will give us more options then just 1 tdm option. I think what a lot of people want are more opportunities to work together with randoms and their friends (despite how toxic the community is) and to be incentivized to complete objectives to get rewards and to add variety to the game rather than just brain dead metas in certain BRs. For a while I've found myself hopping on 7 different BRs from different countries just to feel something different from the game. I and many other people want to be able to not only hop into a game and get some quick action and quick fun but also be able to have the option to take some time in playing other gamemodes on a game that's so accessible and that has so many different vehicles and an already defined community and assets that can all come together to make something fun and not too hardcore at the same time.
The problem with war thunder is the way gaijin designs it and the economy to maximize suffering and uhappiness while being addictive, so you buy premium. Their priority is to make f2p player genuinely suffer and feel unhappy
I hate that they reverted the RWR and radar. I’m not sure why they treat it any different from ir missiles and irst mode. People die from sneaky Ir missiles with no warning all the time. And nobody bats an eye. Even so, I’d be interested in a middle ground solution, but every radar is detectable by every RWR seems like a broad bandaid. Maybe they can detect pings, but not radar track, lock or launches from radar bands their RWR doesn’t detect.
I agree that when you try to add realistic/simulation elements into a game that was never meant to be a simulator, it really leaves a bad taste in everyones mouth. I dont necessarily think that lowered MP is a realistic change as much as it is a poor balancing decision. 60m MP is no more realistic than 100m and now that we have had time to see the results, the decision was made for old gamemodes that have barely been touched in years, just like your mother. So were stuck with oversaturated fishbowls and everyone has 4-8 fox3 or fox2 missiles. It doesnt make any sense with or without 60m MP, it doesnt work and never did.
Personally i enjoy DCS and in my opinion the ground battles shuld be the benchmark for flight mode since the most important things are simulated really well there is no fuckery with real life stuff that hinders gameplay similar to multipathing. Because in my opinion it is hindering the gameplay. Not everything heve to turn in to a WWI or a WWII dogfight. High tier is a clusterfuck and if you only have to have the skill to fly close to the ground to defeat the missles that is not a skill.. Multipathing shuld only effect pulse seekers like Aim 7 F, R3R but even than multiptahing had an effect on Aim 7 F at ~5m so yes 60 m is way too much. Non of the PD seekers shuld have this effect applyed to them (eg Skyflash). I would highly recommend you Il2 Bos, it is between DCS and WT give it a shot.
conical scan seekers were also severely effected by multipathing even from the different parts of the aircraft being launched on which is why 50 % of the time 7e/f missed even if it launched successfully
@@a.e.richardson218 it was a commulative effect. In vietnam planes flown all day wepons if not fired werent changed this caused degradation/faults in electronics. This is why the F model came with solid state electronics. My problem is that this thing effects missles wich it shuld't
@@berlin128g british tests that lead to the development of the skyflash showed it was prone to inaccuracy due to signal strength reflected from different parts of aircraft
Didn't the latest updates make it more realistic? Getting killed from kilometers away by fox 3's. Completely wasting your time. Just like real life, all that time training just to get killed instantly by a missile. Welcome to modern combat, sucks ass.
yes, i hate how we can see each other. If it was radar oriented or with the implementation of AWACS this would be a lot better, allowing shittier planes with less range to stealth their way into the MAR
I dont want DCS i just want a slightly less complex version of FC3 Thats all. HOWEVER if people want a handholding gameplay experience in WT i do not think that should be in sim. Im fine with air rb having 1km high multipathing and unrealistic rwr but it gets really annoying when sim is turned into an arcade ADHD shooter. The pace and weight of gameplay is acceptable for WW2-korean war planes but once you reach stuff from the late 60s the gameplay loop (in sim) becomes unbearably toxic
In the very first days of War Thunder, maps like Normandy would take 4+ hours and nobody would see opfor the whole time because the Germans took off in Normandy and the Brits/US took off in England. Bombers made a whole lot of sense with their fuel loads. I don't know what the historical development timeline is, but I'm pretty sure it started on PC only, because I specifically stopped giving them money over the integration of crossplay. At first crossplay was awesome because consoles were at an extreme disadvantage for stereotypical analog stick reasons. Then the snail ironed out all the "luck rolls" in the netcode and started building the game you play today.
I stopped giving them money because the game went from feeling like a legitimate match of skills to knowing the snail artificially loads the deck for certain classes of player.
read this if you actually want to, here's my opinion Warthunder is a game, a game which is based off of real factual vehicles, weapons, sensors and weapon systems each vehicle in the game IS a depiction of a REAL LIFE vehicles that are designed for tasks that are meant for real world conditions, why do you think there's psychotic die hard players who leak actual classified documents, as stupid as they are they're trying to prove how poorly gaijn has implemented vehicles and technology not reflecting real-world physics, non of it has been properly done and when I mean properly done I don't mean 1 to 1 with the real life counterpart, I mean properly as in terms of physics, There's real physics involved in all of these aircraft this is why some of them are slow, fast have better radar and don't sure you cant simulate any of this to a 100% but warthunder is completely devoid in terms of physics, whereas DCS fakes it while incorporating minor simulations, which in turn give the results of real life physics. now back to the newer realistic" changes I love the multipath change why? IT forced everyone up into higher altitudes where your Missile performs at its best, it made the terrain useless unless you want to break lock and go cold and completely removed that ground hugging furball meta and you're telling me that you prefer this? Hell yeah DCS is fun, I understand that you feel empty when an AI kills you using its overpowered man pad systems but that's because dcs has designed the AI to be as realistic as possible where warthunder AI is a lot more player friendly, this is something that makes sense because warthunder is mostly a pvp, In DCS when you get locked by a SAM site and get a missile sent your way instills genuine fear and adrenaline, all you got on your mind is that one fucking missile and that adrenaline pump its awesome man, same goes for when a f14 sends a phoenix at you, forcing you to go on a full defense and break that missile, and dogfights in dcs are so much more rewarding and much much more satisfying. Even If dcs made a game mode with the same spawns and small maps as warthunder Air Sim, you'd get the same exact thing however, players would still prefer dcs. The way warthunder is designed just doesn't allow this fear EVEN when its player AA that is shooting at you. What do you mean that the thing that warthunder does well ~ "the quality of the fights?? the quality of the flight models" dogfights in warthunder are SOOO awful, sometimes they can be fun especially when its a one on one but guess what you can't because the game is unrealistic, there's 16 players in the damn lobby and you're all stuck in the center of the map, where you cant even rate fight because the entire team is about the third party you, you cannot BVR why because once you get into a good altitude you're already in the MAR of the enemy why because these maps are small and it doesn't give you enough time to plan your attack because its unrealistic, why cant you dodge fox3s even when you know the theory, you can concentrate on defeating one missile because there's 5 more aircraft that's also guiding an Aim 120 at you, you cant go cold at this point because you're in MAR meaning you're fucked. EC maps work but it still funnels all the players down into one area. And don't even get me to go on about the flight models, warthunder has the shittiest flight models to ever exist. When people say make warthunder realistic they don't mean MAKE Warthunder DCS, there's a difference. They mean making the game realistic so that your vehicle does what it was actually designed for. what are the changes that influence realism and yet influence better gameplay? spread players out, reduce player numbers, increase map size, change layouts of air RB, change how mission objectives work so it encourages player spread, also trust me when they add ECMs they're just gonna half ass it again and fuck it up. in terms of unbalance I partially agree, however this shouldn't mean that the clearly better side should be nerfed unrealistic because the other side suffers, instead they should introduce other gameplay tactics which are more suitable for Russian planes, more terrain in which they could hide their scent and make their way so that they can pop up and make sure that the enemy is in the MAR. however there's vehicle marks which totally disable you from stealth movement, which also adds to the numerous things that count as unrealistic which are also negatively affecting gameplay.
15:55 there’s a problem with implementing 2v2’s, 4v4’s etc. gjn said that they just don’t have enough resources - servers and money to buy more of them or to upgrade already existing ones Some people don’t believe that the company that sells a ton of prem vehicles and stuff cannot afford more servers but I personally rather believe them cause salaries in this company are really high and there’re a lot of people who work there so it requires a lot of money to pay them, also they constantly adding a whole bunch of new planes/maps/missiles/mechanics, fixing bugs etc etc and these all not only for air to air battles but also for naval and ground battles. Also cause it is a Russian game I think they also have to think thrice before buffing/nerfing anything, making regional prices, adding camo’s, signs etc cause of political reasons (they are literally between a rock and a hard place rn, to make NATO side as powerful as it is = to get fucked by Russian government, make red side as powerful as red side countries want it to look like = to get fucked by sanctions from the west🙃) So basically my point is that even though they can do something wrong (and they really do something, for instance new BR’s and some old ones are kinda weird - the F-8U is 10.3 while the F-8E is 10.0 in sim or the F-16A is 13.0 while the F-16AJ is 12.7(might be changed though)) that’s not because devs are stupid, don’t want to work or greedy. And they really work hard to make the game better and they’re really good at it that’s why it is literally the best game of its kind rn And people that tells something like “oh I play both DCS and WT and DCS is so much better blah blah blah”, just one question for them - why do you even play WT then? And the answer is actually pretty simple - that’s because playerbase in WT is like 100x times bigger than in DCS and that’s literally because WT is not DCS and this allows them to find 16v16/12v12 lobby in a couple of seconds at any time of the day in RB or to enter and enjoy EC sim lobby without spending 10 years to learn how to just start left engine and it also doesn’t req to have 1k$ HOTAS and VR to be able to just play the game
@@WTCHANNEL109-kj1ik gl to play DCS without good HOTAS and VR/Tracker, first statement is exaggerated, what I meant is that without spending an enormous amount of time (for a game) you won’t be able to even take off/land not to mention using weapon systems (Air-to-ground especially)
"American airplanes deserve to absolutely stomp every single opponent and remain uncontested. American hardware is simply superior and untouchable, it's realistic, look it up".
(Playerbase has absolutely zero incentives to play the underdog against current US aircraft, besides also having less/worse tools to fight against them)
"Wow this game is so dogshit. Russian mains just cry and quit the matches all the time".
RIGHT, any sim mode including vehicles is so infuriating when you can't trust the vehicles you see.
Totally Agree
youre completely right people wanting to turn war thunder into dcs when the game was never intended to be that is completely dumb dcs already exists for these to people to play
My only issue with Sim is IFF. I’ve been shot down by aircraft with friendly makings that were actually on the enemy team.
teammates are enemies in blue. you can't trust it in RB, why would they let you trust it in sim?
@@satagaming9144 it was an enemy AI flying a US f-86 Sabre, markings and all. I was flying a US phantom.
If you get close enough to see the markings then the blue name or tag should automatically show on the top of the aircraft, if not then its literally an enemy
@@kh2b573 he was probably on that "rumble" match where everyone fights everyone, including their own nation. this is a huge problem i have with WT SB too. not to mention the captured vehicles that are used in combat
DCS is also a game, it's Digital Cockpit Simulation for a reason because outside the cockpit the simulation stops lol. Also after the new patch DCS runs even worse ICANT
Let me just say, that as someone who plays both games regularly, I wish for War Thunder to become a bit more DCS-ish and for DCS to become a bit more War Thunder-ish and then meet somewhere in the middle. Both DCS (+ server owners) and WT can learn from each other.
Simple example: The radar modelling in WT is standardized, while in DCS every dev basically does what they want in terms of accuracy. If ED would provide a *good* standardized radar modelling that every 3rd party dev could use as an API type of thing, that would make it easier for devs, and players alike.
Example 2: In DCS, all heat seakers can lock through clouds, while in WT that is realistically modelled.
Example 3: In WT, we have radar frequencies and bands. In DCS, this is not the case.
Example 4: In DCS, we dont have a queue system for lobbies, you gotta spam the join button if a server is full, while in WT, this is not the case.
Example 5: In DCS, we can have settings, where players control boats, a carrier, tanks, AA, helos, and planes all on the same map, this can't be done in WT.
Instead of a vs. situation, I would love the two games to learn from each other.
I play a variety of sims all falling into a different level of realism. If I want to play something ultra-realistic, I'll play DCS or Falcon BMS and LARP as a pilot. Sometimes I want something a little quicker to get into, and sometimes I want to just lowest barrier to entry for just blowing stuff up. Each game/sim has its place and they don't need to all be super realistic.
idk having multi pathing so high made radar missiles effectively pointless sim is sitll hilariously unbalanced by instead ofa grippen flying on the deck with periodic on spawn camping is an f-15c at like 6000m throwing amraams down spawn camping redside needs a buff of some kind
"realism is secondary to creating a fun game" as the camera pans over to the anime girl on the wing
legend
Sim has muh realism people, RB has people that want to gut that gamemode and turn it into 3rd person sim, and lots of people who would be better served playing AB are shamed into playing RB
It felt weird to step back and think about how some players equate higher fidelity with higher skill, scold others into turning the gamemode they play into a different gamemode, while being too scared to play the existing game or gamemode that already caters to them
man I wish I was good at arcade...
that ball anoys me so much i leave to cockit open and after a little bit of time or around 517kph it breaks off. Also noticed you get better sound of nearby engines with the canopy open.
5:00 thats hilarious
Also with the remark about the potential of the game at 7:30 I'm gonna have to disagree with your opinion. While I do agree that It shouldn't be as big and drawn out because getting dukied on by saddam25 while getting damaged by flak is definitely not fun I think what everyone would like more is for the game to have more variation and opportunity in terms of objectives and dynamics that different game modes can bring instead of just the average braindead tdm with some ticket bleed on the side.
Yes flak should probably just be a visual addition until certain terms of a game are met and bombing AI is definitely boring in most cases, but combining these things with stuff like taking off and landing on carriers, intercepting a bomber fleet that needs to be destroyed before a certain amount of time or else one team will lose tickets, or even a more in depth version of world war and dynamic multiplayer campaigns for a way to get people involved in different ways will give us more options then just 1 tdm option.
I think what a lot of people want are more opportunities to work together with randoms and their friends (despite how toxic the community is) and to be incentivized to complete objectives to get rewards and to add variety to the game rather than just brain dead metas in certain BRs. For a while I've found myself hopping on 7 different BRs from different countries just to feel something different from the game.
I and many other people want to be able to not only hop into a game and get some quick action and quick fun but also be able to have the option to take some time in playing other gamemodes on a game that's so accessible and that has so many different vehicles and an already defined community and assets that can all come together to make something fun and not too hardcore at the same time.
The problem with war thunder is the way gaijin designs it and the economy to maximize suffering and uhappiness while being addictive, so you buy premium. Their priority is to make f2p player genuinely suffer and feel unhappy
I hate that they reverted the RWR and radar.
I’m not sure why they treat it any different from ir missiles and irst mode. People die from sneaky Ir missiles with no warning all the time. And nobody bats an eye.
Even so,
I’d be interested in a middle ground solution, but every radar is detectable by every RWR seems like a broad bandaid.
Maybe they can detect pings, but not radar track, lock or launches from radar bands their RWR doesn’t detect.
I agree that when you try to add realistic/simulation elements into a game that was never meant to be a simulator, it really leaves a bad taste in everyones mouth. I dont necessarily think that lowered MP is a realistic change as much as it is a poor balancing decision. 60m MP is no more realistic than 100m and now that we have had time to see the results, the decision was made for old gamemodes that have barely been touched in years, just like your mother. So were stuck with oversaturated fishbowls and everyone has 4-8 fox3 or fox2 missiles. It doesnt make any sense with or without 60m MP, it doesnt work and never did.
6:57 cultured Battlestations knower, BSP video when?
Personally i enjoy DCS and in my opinion the ground battles shuld be the benchmark for flight mode since the most important things are simulated really well there is no fuckery with real life stuff that hinders gameplay similar to multipathing. Because in my opinion it is hindering the gameplay. Not everything heve to turn in to a WWI or a WWII dogfight. High tier is a clusterfuck and if you only have to have the skill to fly close to the ground to defeat the missles that is not a skill..
Multipathing shuld only effect pulse seekers like Aim 7 F, R3R but even than multiptahing had an effect on Aim 7 F at ~5m so yes 60 m is way too much. Non of the PD seekers shuld have this effect applyed to them (eg Skyflash).
I would highly recommend you Il2 Bos, it is between DCS and WT give it a shot.
conical scan seekers were also severely effected by multipathing even from the different parts of the aircraft being launched on which is why 50 % of the time 7e/f missed even if it launched successfully
@@a.e.richardson218 it was a commulative effect. In vietnam planes flown all day wepons if not fired werent changed this caused degradation/faults in electronics. This is why the F model came with solid state electronics.
My problem is that this thing effects missles wich it shuld't
@@berlin128g british tests that lead to the development of the skyflash showed it was prone to inaccuracy due to signal strength reflected from different parts of aircraft
Didn't the latest updates make it more realistic? Getting killed from kilometers away by fox 3's. Completely wasting your time. Just like real life, all that time training just to get killed instantly by a missile. Welcome to modern combat, sucks ass.
I wish they'd add like radar stations across the map for each team And if you don't take them out, people can tell where you are
yes, i hate how we can see each other. If it was radar oriented or with the implementation of AWACS this would be a lot better, allowing shittier planes with less range to stealth their way into the MAR
@@goldfishPACIFIER yeah each team can have dar and jammers or whatever
@@clicktresni6298 im sure ecms are gonna be insanely op, even though in real life its not that much of a differance
I do like you ragging on DCS, but WWII sim comparison should be IL2 :)
I dont want DCS i just want a slightly less complex version of FC3 Thats all. HOWEVER if people want a handholding gameplay experience in WT i do not think that should be in sim. Im fine with air rb having 1km high multipathing and unrealistic rwr but it gets really annoying when sim is turned into an arcade ADHD shooter. The pace and weight of gameplay is acceptable for WW2-korean war planes but once you reach stuff from the late 60s the gameplay loop (in sim) becomes unbearably toxic
^ Not good enough for high tier
Squish are you playing with vr or binded looking i cant tell?
This was unexpectedly wholesome
DCS is also a game
9:35 you gotta hit those
Dcs is a game aswell
In the very first days of War Thunder, maps like Normandy would take 4+ hours and nobody would see opfor the whole time because the Germans took off in Normandy and the Brits/US took off in England. Bombers made a whole lot of sense with their fuel loads. I don't know what the historical development timeline is, but I'm pretty sure it started on PC only, because I specifically stopped giving them money over the integration of crossplay.
At first crossplay was awesome because consoles were at an extreme disadvantage for stereotypical analog stick reasons. Then the snail ironed out all the "luck rolls" in the netcode and started building the game you play today.
😂😂😂 u stopped paying because you couldn't seal club console players anymore. Awwwww you poor child
I stopped giving them money because the game went from feeling like a legitimate match of skills to knowing the snail artificially loads the deck for certain classes of player.
DCS is a game too, just don't tell hoggit.
DCS is a lifestyle.
read this if you actually want to, here's my opinion
Warthunder is a game, a game which is based off of real factual vehicles, weapons, sensors and weapon systems each vehicle in the game IS a depiction of a REAL LIFE vehicles that are designed for tasks that are meant for real world conditions, why do you think there's psychotic die hard players who leak actual classified documents, as stupid as they are they're trying to prove how poorly gaijn has implemented vehicles and technology not reflecting real-world physics, non of it has been properly done and when I mean properly done I don't mean 1 to 1 with the real life counterpart, I mean properly as in terms of physics, There's real physics involved in all of these aircraft this is why some of them are slow, fast have better radar and don't sure you cant simulate any of this to a 100% but warthunder is completely devoid in terms of physics, whereas DCS fakes it while incorporating minor simulations, which in turn give the results of real life physics.
now back to the newer realistic" changes I love the multipath change why? IT forced everyone up into higher altitudes where your Missile performs at its best, it made the terrain useless unless you want to break lock and go cold and completely removed that ground hugging furball meta and you're telling me that you prefer this?
Hell yeah DCS is fun, I understand that you feel empty when an AI kills you using its overpowered man pad systems but that's because dcs has designed the AI to be as realistic as possible where warthunder AI is a lot more player friendly, this is something that makes sense because warthunder is mostly a pvp, In DCS when you get locked by a SAM site and get a missile sent your way instills genuine fear and adrenaline, all you got on your mind is that one fucking missile and that adrenaline pump its awesome man, same goes for when a f14 sends a phoenix at you, forcing you to go on a full defense and break that missile, and dogfights in dcs are so much more rewarding and much much more satisfying. Even If dcs made a game mode with the same spawns and small maps as warthunder Air Sim, you'd get the same exact thing however, players would still prefer dcs.
The way warthunder is designed just doesn't allow this fear EVEN when its player AA that is shooting at you. What do you mean that the thing that warthunder does well ~ "the quality of the fights?? the quality of the flight models" dogfights in warthunder are SOOO awful, sometimes they can be fun especially when its a one on one but guess what you can't because the game is unrealistic, there's 16 players in the damn lobby and you're all stuck in the center of the map, where you cant even rate fight because the entire team is about the third party you, you cannot BVR why because once you get into a good altitude you're already in the MAR of the enemy why because these maps are small and it doesn't give you enough time to plan your attack because its unrealistic, why cant you dodge fox3s even when you know the theory, you can concentrate on defeating one missile because there's 5 more aircraft that's also guiding an Aim 120 at you, you cant go cold at this point because you're in MAR meaning you're fucked. EC maps work but it still funnels all the players down into one area. And don't even get me to go on about the flight models, warthunder has the shittiest flight models to ever exist.
When people say make warthunder realistic they don't mean MAKE Warthunder DCS, there's a difference. They mean making the game realistic so that your vehicle does what it was actually designed for.
what are the changes that influence realism and yet influence better gameplay?
spread players out, reduce player numbers, increase map size, change layouts of air RB, change how mission objectives work so it encourages player spread, also trust me when they add ECMs they're just gonna half ass it again and fuck it up.
in terms of unbalance I partially agree, however this shouldn't mean that the clearly better side should be nerfed unrealistic because the other side suffers, instead they should introduce other gameplay tactics which are more suitable for Russian planes, more terrain in which they could hide their scent and make their way so that they can pop up and make sure that the enemy is in the MAR. however there's vehicle marks which totally disable you from stealth movement, which also adds to the numerous things that count as unrealistic which are also negatively affecting gameplay.
Holy yap factory
@@TransportSupremo lmao
femboy Me 163 Komet huh?
Normal viiid :)
Made by some kind of psycho
Aaaaw
15:55 there’s a problem with implementing 2v2’s, 4v4’s etc. gjn said that they just don’t have enough resources - servers and money to buy more of them or to upgrade already existing ones
Some people don’t believe that the company that sells a ton of prem vehicles and stuff cannot afford more servers but I personally rather believe them cause salaries in this company are really high and there’re a lot of people who work there so it requires a lot of money to pay them, also they constantly adding a whole bunch of new planes/maps/missiles/mechanics, fixing bugs etc etc and these all not only for air to air battles but also for naval and ground battles. Also cause it is a Russian game I think they also have to think thrice before buffing/nerfing anything, making regional prices, adding camo’s, signs etc cause of political reasons (they are literally between a rock and a hard place rn, to make NATO side as powerful as it is = to get fucked by Russian government, make red side as powerful as red side countries want it to look like = to get fucked by sanctions from the west🙃)
So basically my point is that even though they can do something wrong (and they really do something, for instance new BR’s and some old ones are kinda weird - the F-8U is 10.3 while the F-8E is 10.0 in sim or the F-16A is 13.0 while the F-16AJ is 12.7(might be changed though)) that’s not because devs are stupid, don’t want to work or greedy. And they really work hard to make the game better and they’re really good at it that’s why it is literally the best game of its kind rn
And people that tells something like “oh I play both DCS and WT and DCS is so much better blah blah blah”, just one question for them - why do you even play WT then? And the answer is actually pretty simple - that’s because playerbase in WT is like 100x times bigger than in DCS and that’s literally because WT is not DCS and this allows them to find 16v16/12v12 lobby in a couple of seconds at any time of the day in RB or to enter and enjoy EC sim lobby without spending 10 years to learn how to just start left engine and it also doesn’t req to have 1k$ HOTAS and VR to be able to just play the game
"spending 10 years to learn how to just start left engine and it also doesn’t req to have 1k$ HOTAS and VR to be able to just play the game"?
@@WTCHANNEL109-kj1ik gl to play DCS without good HOTAS and VR/Tracker, first statement is exaggerated, what I meant is that without spending an enormous amount of time (for a game) you won’t be able to even take off/land not to mention using weapon systems (Air-to-ground especially)
@@user-jy6cn3jy8g "spending 10 years to learn how to just start left engine."
You clearly haven’t heard of Tuuvas.
@@goldmastersimulations it’s as handy compared to HOTAS as to eat soup with a fork