Oprindeligt skrevet af Trollgun ©®™:

Oprindeligt skrevet af RockyBrown:

That do three things for War Thunder:
Realistic gameplay
More historical content
Players will have a better time playing your game.

If you feel taht WT isn't realistic enough, then why won't you play IL-2 Tank Crew instead?

Also, allow this gay furry chad to explain to you why historical content would be a bad thing for WT

https://youtu.be/OUjjuNcXptk

Ah yes, the same "Chad" that complains about the B1 Bis being OP while seal clubbing downtiers in a fast paced montage.

At least Ash and Phly tells it like it is, Spookston makes borderline clickbait at times.

Oprindeligt skrevet af Glory:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Trollgun ©®™:

If you feel taht WT isn't realistic enough, then why won't you play IL-2 Tank Crew instead?

Also, allow this gay furry chad to explain to you why historical content would be a bad thing for WT

https://youtu.be/OUjjuNcXptk

Ah yes, the same "Chad" that complains about the B1 Bis being OP while seal clubbing downtiers in a fast paced montage.

At least Ash and Phly tells it like it is, Spookston makes borderline clickbait at times.

Your absolute right Glory

Oprindeligt skrevet af Glory:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Trollgun ©®™:

If you feel taht WT isn't realistic enough, then why won't you play IL-2 Tank Crew instead?

Also, allow this gay furry chad to explain to you why historical content would be a bad thing for WT

https://youtu.be/OUjjuNcXptk

Ah yes, the same "Chad" that complains about the B1 Bis being OP while seal clubbing downtiers in a fast paced montage.

At least Ash and Phly tells it like it is, Spookston makes borderline clickbait at times.

Yeah, he does complain about the dumbest things in WT, but i agree on his point about historical matchmaking

We used to have historical events back in the stone ages, it worked great.
Tank RB also had NPC's and AI controlled field guns and AAA on the borders of the map. I wonder why those were removed.

Oprindeligt skrevet af pzhda'tan:

We used to have historical events back in the stone ages, it worked great.
Tank RB also had NPC's and AI controlled field guns and AAA on the borders of the map. I wonder why those were removed.

because it worked great

I remember this happening to the Italian line once, turned out great.

Oprindeligt skrevet af DeosPraetorian:

Oprindeligt skrevet af pzhda'tan:

We used to have historical events back in the stone ages, it worked great.
Tank RB also had NPC's and AI controlled field guns and AAA on the borders of the map. I wonder why those were removed.

because it worked great

Because it was fun, and contrary to popular belief games with microtransactions want to bottleneck your fun if only to add it to paywalls. Actually that's not contrary that's just the reality of the situation.

Oprindeligt skrevet af Mac:

Rank II by the way...

Goodbye immersion. Pre-war tanks vs. this "THING". Yeah... great idea. Keep up the great work!

Bruh, let's take R3( the one with that 20mm gun) as an example, try imagine fighting against fricking MBTS with this bloddy lunch box, I don't think it's not fair to but these stuff with some world war vehicles, you can even penetrate it with your machine gun...

Oprindeligt skrevet af Trollgun ©®™:

Oprindeligt skrevet af Glory:

Ah yes, the same "Chad" that complains about the B1 Bis being OP while seal clubbing downtiers in a fast paced montage.

At least Ash and Phly tells it like it is, Spookston makes borderline clickbait at times.

Yeah, he does complain about the dumbest things in WT, but i agree on his point about historical matchmaking

I don't think the solution to filling out lineups should be cold war vehicles at Tier 2 tho.

If a country is suffering on some level, like France's AA, they could always use a lend lease vehicle from another tree to stretch out the lineup such as America or Germany.

Its a weird precedent to have a cold war APC so low in the battle rankings due to its performance, and might cause problems down the line for future installments.

for those of you saying its an R3, its not, did you even read the description??? it says low end penetration, please read the description next time. and for the people saying its not supposed to be in the ww2 tank line up, literally stfu its a damn 38T chassis with a 20mm cannon which is supposed to be for AA unless youre actually waffer thin or open top plus sweden needs more AA, so in all fairness it belongs right where it sits currently BR wise

Oprindeligt skrevet af Warbenny:

for those of you saying its an R3, its not, did you even read the description??? it says low end penetration, please read the description next time. and for the people saying its not supposed to be in the ww2 tank line up, literally stfu its a damn 38T chassis with a 20mm cannon which is supposed to be for AA unless youre actually waffer thin or open top plus sweden needs more AA, so in all fairness it belongs right where it sits currently BR wise

Someone above even mentioned that the tank itself and gun are ww2 vintage xd

레알이냐 와... 스웨덴 라인 거이다 풀어가는데 생기면 살짝 시행착오가 생기지만 다풀수있다.

War Thunder is so messed up, First game in my 6.7 tank - up-tiered to 7.7
second game - up-tiered to 7.3
3rd game - uninstall wt

someday y'all will need to ditch the so called "tier" system and start spliting these type of vechicles with eras instead of having modern tech fighting WWI tanks
otherwise, i don't think ppl will stick around

Oprindeligt skrevet af Trig_Zero:

someday y'all will need to ditch the so called "tier" system and start spliting these type of vechicles with eras instead of having modern tech fighting WWI tanks
otherwise, i don't think ppl will stick around

What modern tech is fighting WWI tanks though, i don't see Abrams and Challenger tanks curb stomping Mark V landships or A7Vs.