Jump to content


Another Fantasy tank - why?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
26 replies to this topic

gingermick #1 Posted 02 August 2013 - 10:19 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 32157 battles
  • 20
  • [2RTR] 2RTR
  • Member since:
    05-02-2011
Why are they making more and more fantasy tanks?  Keep it in real life or you may aswell call it Fantasy and Science Fiction tanks

LeKauz #2 Posted 02 August 2013 - 10:22 AM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8827 battles
  • 3,680
  • Member since:
    05-25-2012
Which tank do you mean?

And: If you prohibit tanks that weren't mass produced or were fictional, you destroy the german and chinese techtree,kill half of the french techtree, as well as bann the russian, english and american tier X tanks... ohhh and yes: No more fictional tanks means that they have to delete most of our ingame SPGs...

Edited by LeKauz, 02 August 2013 - 10:27 AM.


Lancasthor #3 Posted 02 August 2013 - 11:14 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 19049 battles
  • 586
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010
From all the things, this is bothering you the most?

How about a minigame where you have to hit x for about five hours to get your track fixed?
I'd rather cut some slack from realism and historical accuracy over smooth, enjoyable and competitive gaming experience.
This includes using rather unique and intresting designs within the tank trees.

Using theoretical not-even-a-prototype -values to justify nerf or buff can be slightly questionable though.

Boomer7 #4 Posted 02 August 2013 - 11:34 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9439 battles
  • 368
  • [BM] BM
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011
Would also be interested which tank you mean.

But by changing how the techtree is done you could easily fill it without resorting to tanks which were only experimental or on blueprints.

Most tanks got various modifications over their lifetime that you could fill quite a few slots. (See Warthunder where there are often planes in different slots which have only minor variations, some seem even identical).

For example take the well known Panzer IV.

Version A: short 75mm gun, 14mm armor front, 20mm turret, 250 HP engine
Version B: short 75mm gun, 20mm armor front, 20mm turret, 300HP engine
Version C: short 75mm gun, 20mm armor front, 30mm turret, 300HP enginr
Version D: short 75mm gun (new mantlet), 20mm armor front, 20mm armor side, 30mm armor turret, 300HP engine (there was also a test version with the 50mm gun but never mass produced)
Version E: short 75mm gun, 50mm armor front, 30mm turret, 300HP engine
Version F1: short 75mm gun, 50 armor front, 50mm armor turret, new wider tracks
Version F2: 75mm L43 gun, otherwise same as F1
Version G early: 75mm L43 gun, 80mm armor front, 30mm armor side,
Version G late: 75mm L48 gun, same armor as early, added skirts on turret and sides
Version H: added Zimmerit and mostly changes that eased production
Version J: dropped Zimmerit, more changes for ease of production

Even if you group them up a bit say the really early ones A-D, then the mid series E-F1, F2-G early, and then the late ones G late to J you could fill 4 slots with one tank.

The Panzer III for example got to version N in production.

But Wargaming decided mostly to clump all tank variations into one vehicle and tier, and so using more tanks even if it means using only design studies.

Eokokok #5 Posted 02 August 2013 - 11:46 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 18742 battles
  • 6,162
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012

View Postgingermick, on 02 August 2013 - 10:19 AM, said:

Why are they making more and more fantasy tanks?  Keep it in real life or you may aswell call it Fantasy and Science Fiction tanks

Just to troll you and force you to stop playing, that alone would make game better...

gingermick #6 Posted 02 August 2013 - 02:16 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 32157 battles
  • 20
  • [2RTR] 2RTR
  • Member since:
    05-02-2011
So the game would be better if I didnt play?  is that what you are saying?   if so why?

Iam just saying, that proper, real tanks' performance was measured, with these fantasy tanks, that were just design studies, were projected capabilities, and if I was tasked with making a tank, of course I would promise that it would be able to go at superspeed, would have a big rapid fire gun etc, but real tanks had to go through real testing and basically - reality.

I feel that with the more and more fantasy tanks in the game, players wont choose real tanks because the fantasy tanks are better, so that what is meant to be a near-historical simulation (I know you cant fix tank tracks that quickly - I understand playability) but it will come to the state where there will be battles of "drawing board" tanks vs "drawing board" tanks, so it becomes a fantasy game.  Now if thats what you want - fine, but at least admit that you are now not playing an historical simulation game.

Eokokok #7 Posted 02 August 2013 - 02:27 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 18742 battles
  • 6,162
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012
Fantasy vs real has nothing to do with tank performance, that is the first major flaw in your argument.

90% of tanks in this game are upgunned from what they had in real life, even your precious real life tanks, that's the second thing.

And third - I feel that somebody with 13k games should have a little higher eff then you, and by a little I mean at least at my level. I'm average now in term of stats, I make shitload of mistakes, yet I have little over half of your game experience... You are just one of the 75% of players - army of red and orange, that make this game slightly worse with every patch due to balancing the game itself around the lack of skill. Sad way to go.

LeKauz #8 Posted 02 August 2013 - 02:30 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8827 battles
  • 3,680
  • Member since:
    05-25-2012
This is a game --> Balance is very important, historical correctness is kind of nice but not as important as the balancing
Do you use the "outside the tank" camera view? That's unrealistic, too.
:teethhappy:

Edited by LeKauz, 02 August 2013 - 02:32 PM.


gingermick #9 Posted 02 August 2013 - 03:49 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 32157 battles
  • 20
  • [2RTR] 2RTR
  • Member since:
    05-02-2011
Yes, I do use the outside of the tank view, I know its a game.  So what if I have nearly 13k games under my belt, Iam obviously not a very good game player, its a game.  But if the game wants to have some historical accuracy, which it obviously does or it wouldnt have the tanks it has, then I believe that the fantasy tanks lessens its creditability.

Please dont slag me off because I have an opinion that may be at variance with the game, Iam trying to elicit debate, and please dont think that my opinion should be lessened due to my ability or lack of ability in being able to play the game.

LeKauz #10 Posted 02 August 2013 - 03:55 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 8827 battles
  • 3,680
  • Member since:
    05-25-2012
The most of us are not trying to troll you with your stats, stats are not relevant to this topic :smile:
I just think that the "sci-fi" vehicles are important for the game as we play it.


It's "world of tanks" not "world of mass produced, trial proof, real tanks" in my opinion

Edited by LeKauz, 02 August 2013 - 03:58 PM.


gingermick #11 Posted 02 August 2013 - 07:30 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 32157 battles
  • 20
  • [2RTR] 2RTR
  • Member since:
    05-02-2011
I agree its "world of tanks", and dont get me wrong a good and enjoyable game, thats why I keep playing it (and to be honest hadnt realise I had played nearly 13k battles!),

I just think that as time goes by, and the Devs are "compelled" to add new things to keep older players interested that there is a danger of the fantasy tanks being so much better than the real tanks, that no one will want to play a real tank, because they are so much worse compared to the fantasy tanks.

Askorti #12 Posted 02 August 2013 - 08:55 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 11776 battles
  • 1,137
  • Member since:
    06-24-2012

View Postgingermick, on 02 August 2013 - 07:30 PM, said:

I just think that as time goes by, and the Devs are "compelled" to add new things to keep older players interested that there is a danger of the fantasy tanks being so much better than the real tanks, that no one will want to play a real tank, because they are so much worse compared to the fantasy tanks.
There is no such an option, as all tanks are balanced, no matter if they are real or blueprints.

ralroost #13 Posted 04 August 2013 - 09:45 AM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10387 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    12-18-2011

View PostLeKauz, on 02 August 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:


It's "world of tanks" not "world of mass produced, trial proof, real tanks" in my opinion

It's also not 'world of howitzers' but I seem to get annihilated by spgs pretty often.
I get what the original poster is saying, there are so many 'only-on-paper' designs in the game, and the vehicles which were actually produced often seem average by comparison. For example the panther is widely regarded (in reality) as one of the best tanks of the war- its horrendously under represented in the game. It's probably the worst grind in the german tree that I've experienced so far. "too many dumb fantasy-tanks" is the reason I've received from a few friends who I tried to get into the game. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy driving the VK series, AMX AC series, and so on.

The argument that we shouldnt care about 'fantasy tanks' being added to the game is silly; at a certain point, why have real tanks in the game, or play tanks at all? At least in my opinion, the whole reason I got into the game is my interest mainly in tanks that were built.

As an afterthought, can anyone actually direct me towards whatever wargaming based the t28 prot and t71 on? Or the GW panther? Usually when looking for information, the only stuff I can find is in WOT libraries....

Zarax999 #14 Posted 04 August 2013 - 01:00 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 10117 battles
  • 3,249
  • [TWC] TWC
  • Member since:
    04-08-2011
GW Panther can be found on Panther & Its variants by Spielberger.
T28 prot and t71 are on Hunnicut's books IIRC.

Rather than the paper projects often the problem is with misenterpreted research by Wargaming, which led to abominations such as GW Tiger P and AFK Panther.

ralroost #15 Posted 04 August 2013 - 09:26 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 10387 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    12-18-2011

View PostZarax999, on 04 August 2013 - 01:00 PM, said:

GW Panther can be found on Panther & Its variants by Spielberger.
T28 prot and t71 are on Hunnicut's books IIRC.

Rather than the paper projects often the problem is with misenterpreted research by Wargaming, which led to abominations such as GW Tiger P and AFK Panther.

Does wargaming document what they base the vehicles on somewhere? I haven't seen it if they do.
What do you mean with misrepresented research?
Also that new tier 9 or 10 american artillery looks pretty fantastical ...

Zarax999 #16 Posted 04 August 2013 - 10:37 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 10117 battles
  • 3,249
  • [TWC] TWC
  • Member since:
    04-08-2011
Not anywhere player accessible.
As for the misrepresented research, I wrote some stuff here: http://zxhistory.blogspot.com

Boomer7 #17 Posted 06 August 2013 - 11:34 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9439 battles
  • 368
  • [BM] BM
  • Member since:
    11-08-2011
well would not say all prototypes are good, a lot of the VKs in the german line are pretty shitty. :)

As the Panther was mentiones, he has the same problem the Tiger and to a lesser degree the Tiger II has.

The opponents he fought against are Tier V-VI tanks in WoT.

The other issue which mostly bites the germans is the hitpoint pool, in real tank battles if you penetrate the armor it is game over for the enemy in more then 90% of the cases. So does not really matter if a 50mm, 75mm, or 120mm shell travels through your tank, if it has made it past your armor, you are toast.
But here you can survive 5,6 or more penetrating hits, as long as you have enough HP.

And another "issue" for the german tanks is the view and spotting system, with their good optics and guns they could engage targets 1000m and beyond, something you can not do here as most maps are not even that big. If you close to 100m your accurate gun is not that big of advantage any more as the enemy can hit you as easily.


Fact is this is not a tanksim, its an arcade game with tanks, technically they could also have used flying hover tanks from the future and it would not have made any difference. Was just a clever marketing strategy to use the iconic tanks from WWII to drive the players to the game.

XPuntar #18 Posted 09 August 2013 - 09:46 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14529 battles
  • 1,967
  • Member since:
    08-19-2012
WoT is a 3th Person Ego shooter with tanks mostly at "melee" range.

note: "Melee range" actually means.soldier range engagement with assault riffles (100m - 300m)

Ragoutrabbit1 #19 Posted 10 August 2013 - 03:51 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 4732 battles
  • 319
  • Member since:
    12-03-2012
Because with out those fantasy tanks you might as well shut the game down, you'd be down to maybe a dozen tanks in each tree which would mean the game would get boring fast.

Alkibiades #20 Posted 21 August 2013 - 10:08 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 41226 battles
  • 32
  • Member since:
    12-23-2011
Actually, I do think that a focus on more realistic, historical correct tanks would improve the flavor of the game. Of course, some trees simply need a couple of prototype-tanks. But many players want to have the opportunity to play mainly historical correct tanks, so why not build some more "historical" and some more "fantasy"-trees? By the way, what always bothered myself was that some tanks looked very cool in real life, but have some wierd looking top-turrets or top-guns in wot (Chaffee, Panther, KV-2). There must have been a way to balance them without this.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users