Jump to content


Realism Mode: Improved spotting, minimized HUD, nation versus nation, realistic tank characteristics...


  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

freddiebox #1 Posted 08 August 2017 - 02:19 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 376 battles
  • 80
  • Member since:
    12-16-2016

Now I'm fully aware of similar topics already being posted about implementing a realism mode into the game  but I have but not found one yet with the same ideas.

 

Before the liberated chunk of the community for lack of a better word begin derailing the topic with their if you don't like it don't play it baloney, I would never pick any other game of the same genre over World of Tanks. Yes, I know War Thunder got both realism and simulator modes but that's not the point. I'm sticking to World of Tanks because of content and replayability. Of course I find joining a realistic battle in War Thunder amsung but only for a couple of battles due to the lack of content. I'm simply suggesting to implement a realism side of the game to satisfy all kinds of players involved in World of Tanks. I'm sure both arcade and realism mode would attract just as many players if not more and not to mention bring over War Thunder players. Now, before you skip this thread please stick around for a bit longer to read the game element ideas I have for a realism mode.

 

- Realism battles should be as any other random battle but you get the option to random an arcade or realism battle from the get-go.

- Players looking to queue for a realism battle must have their tank in question fully researched to make the battle fair.

- Realism battles are only nation versus nation, meaning if you pick an e.g. German tank you are matched up against players of another nation e.g. France.

- The matchmaker for realism only pair up players of the same tier to yet again make the battle as balanced as possible.

- The HUD is minimized to only the necessities.

- Tank characteristics are changed to fit realistic values, like speed, turret rotation speed, traverse speed, firepower, etc.

- Weakpoints will get more significant in this battle mode and the skill of the player. Knowing how to angle your tank properly and knowing where to aim will be decisive.

-  Less RNG allaround; the battle is dictated by player skill and not by Wargaming's aid to new players.

- By doing well in a realism battle players earn a little more credits and experience points than they would in arcade.

- Artillery is limited to max one artillery pice per team or none at all. Really depends on how you people feel about artillery receiving realistic firepower values.

- Spotting tanks should be much harder by completely removing the coloured outlines when you aim at enemy and friendly tanks. Spotting should be map-based only.

 

My main issue with World of Tanks is not being able to join battles with e.g. Germany versus the Soviet Union, nation versus nation battles. By having a realism mode this could be the answer. And do keep in mind when replying to this thread I'm not asking to be rid of the normal arcade game, just suggesting to add realism as an option. It certainly won't bring down the value of the game, but the opposite is true.

 

 


Edited by freddiebox, 08 August 2017 - 03:20 PM.


Balc0ra #2 Posted 08 August 2017 - 02:31 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 66256 battles
  • 16,237
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Nation vs Nation already was here, and was removed. It was hidden in randoms. It just clearly showed some balance issues between nations on some tiers. Hellcats dominating tier 6. And T29's steam rolling Tigers. And IS-3's raping Tiger II's.

 

Now it would be worse. With a team full of hidden mobile Skorpions on a open map. Or a team full of Defenders on a corridor map.

 

Historcal battles suffered the same fate. As in they did attempt to stage known historical battles, with an historical tank setup vs the tanks that did partake in the battle. As in a US team with stock hellcats and easy 8's vs a a handful of German tanks... inc 2 King Tigers. Issue was that only Tiger II's lined up. And no one wanted to play the US. Thus nations with the "weakest" historical changed value would be ignored with regards to your suggestion on changed values for "balance". And no one would want to play those. 


Edited by Balc0ra, 08 August 2017 - 02:40 PM.


commer #3 Posted 08 August 2017 - 02:46 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 38082 battles
  • 1,995
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011
If you think there is no RNG in real life you are funny. The RNG in game is unrealistic because in real life you get different kinds of RNG. Your tank will overheat it's engine, break down for no reason, a shell won't fire or someone in the crew will make a mistake. Also in real life IS tanks and Tigers fought against trier 3 and 4 tanks. It would be waaaay more unforgiving than you think

Browarszky #4 Posted 08 August 2017 - 02:50 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16096 battles
  • 3,729
  • [I-S-L] I-S-L
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

View PostBalc0ra, on 08 August 2017 - 01:31 PM, said:

Nation vs Nation already was here, and was removed. It was hidden in randoms. It just clearly showed some balance issues between nations on some tiers. Hellcats dominating tier 6. And T29's steam rolling Tigers. And IS-3's raping Tiger II's.

 

Now it would be worse. With a team full of hidden mobile Skorpions on a open map. Or a team full of Defenders on a corridor map.

 

Historcal battles suffered the same fate. As in they did attempt to stage known historical battles, with an historical tank setup vs the tanks that did partake in the battle. As in a US team with stock hellcats and easy 8's vs a a handful of German tanks... inc 2 King Tigers. Issue was that only Tiger II's lined up. And no one wanted to play the US. Thus nations with the "weakest" historical changed value would be ignored with regards to your suggestion on changed values for "balance". And no one would want to play those. 

 

Okay, then. What would it take to make it work in a multiplayer/pvp setting? There have been a host of war game simulations in the past three decades for single player.

 

From an alternative PoV, if we were looking into a kind of realistic simulation/historical battle mode, wouldn't you expect the odds to be stacked up against one or the other side, at least in many cases. Of course, you could opt for a semi-realistic set up, where some of the factors could be balanced out to make the battle result less predictable, as it were.

 

Fog of war should be a major factor in this. Also, I think one mechanic that could be used to balance the teams is that if one nation has better tanks, they might actually have less fewer of them...



freddiebox #5 Posted 08 August 2017 - 03:08 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 376 battles
  • 80
  • Member since:
    12-16-2016

Instead of pointing out flaws, like Browarszky suggests let's look at what could make such a game mode work. War Thunder made it work and I'm sure World of Tanks can do the same if not better.

 

I agree if a couple of tanks turns out to be unbalanced in realism mode they could simply limit said tanks to max one per battle. I'm not saying realism battles hould be forgiving, in fact it should be the opposite. If a Sherman have a stand-off alone against a Tiger then the Tiger got the best odds winning unless the circumstances drastically change in the Sherman's favor, and based on the skill of the player driving the Sherman. Realism battles in War Thunder is far from forgiving. Encounter a tank outclassing you in War Thunder all you can  do is pray for good luck. This battlemode is supposed to be challenging, why the rewards are higher. And as I said no one is forcing players to participate in realism. And what I mean by less RNG allaround means you will hit what you aim for. Of course a little variation wouldn't hurt, but the game shouldn't limit the skills of players in such a gamemode. Perhaps a way to balance this would be to simply remove the outlining of enemy and friendly tanks in sniper mode. Make it much harder to spot tanks. (Added this to the OP).


Edited by freddiebox, 08 August 2017 - 03:11 PM.


Sir_Bad #6 Posted 08 August 2017 - 03:11 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 45091 battles
  • 494
  • Member since:
    10-08-2011

View Postfreddiebox, on 08 August 2017 - 01:19 PM, said:

Realism battles are only nation versus nation, meaning if you pick an e.g. German tank you are matched up against players of another nation e.g. France.

 

 

Why do I get the feeling this was done before in any way, shape or form? Must be my mind playing tricks on me. 

 

I'm sure people would stand in queues to play their T-34s against Jagdtigers or their M4s against Tiger 2s. Because  that went so well last time....

 

The only way to implement a historic gamemode into the game, would be by letting bots play as the cannon fodder tanks. The devs said that themselves. If you would only put equally tiered tanks into one battle, it would kind of defeat the purpose of it being historically accurate.



freddiebox #7 Posted 08 August 2017 - 03:16 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 376 battles
  • 80
  • Member since:
    12-16-2016

View PostSir_Bad, on 08 August 2017 - 03:11 PM, said:

 

Why do I get the feeling this was done before in any way, shape or form? Must be my mind playing tricks on me. 

 

I'm sure people would stand in queues to play their T-34s against Jagdtigers or their M4s against Tiger 2s. Because  that went so well last time....

 

The only way to implement a historic gamemode into the game, would be by letting bots play as the cannon fodder tanks. The devs said that themselves. If you would only put equally tiered tanks into one battle, it would kind of defeat the purpose of it being historically accurate.

 

Not asking for a simulation battle focusing around historically accurate battles. My definition of realism in these type of games are nation versus nation with alot of arcade elements removed. What I consider historically accuracy is simulation battles as can be found in Edited where you are limited to only the commander's view or cockpit with no third person camera and lietrally all and any arcade element removed. Sure this sounds lovely and all but maybe a step too far?

Edited by Asklepi0s, 10 August 2017 - 04:11 PM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to advertising another game


Jumping_Turtle #8 Posted 08 August 2017 - 03:30 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 61258 battles
  • 5,301
  • [CNUT] CNUT
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013
I think the best option for this would be tier 9. Seems like the most balanced tier at this moment.

Browarszky #9 Posted 08 August 2017 - 03:51 PM

    Colonel

  • Player
  • 16096 battles
  • 3,729
  • [I-S-L] I-S-L
  • Member since:
    12-03-2013

View PostSir_Bad, on 08 August 2017 - 02:11 PM, said:

 

Why do I get the feeling this was done before in any way, shape or form? Must be my mind playing tricks on me. 

 

I'm sure people would stand in queues to play their T-34s against Jagdtigers or their M4s against Tiger 2s. Because  that went so well last time....

 

The only way to implement a historic gamemode into the game, would be by letting bots play as the cannon fodder tanks. The devs said that themselves. If you would only put equally tiered tanks into one battle, it would kind of defeat the purpose of it being historically accurate.

 

What if.. they would scale the rewards based on how big a challenge it would be? That way those who would take a T-34 would be rewarded higher relative to those who choose to take a Tiger, and so on.

 

View PostSir_Bad, on 08 August 2017 - 02:11 PM, said:

 The only way to implement a historic gamemode into the game, would be by letting bots play as the cannon fodder tanks. The devs said that themselves. If you would only put equally tiered tanks into one battle, it would kind of defeat the purpose of it being historically accurate.

 

Well, even if we could only have 'historical battles' as PvE operations, that would be kind of cool, too.

 

View Postfreddiebox, on 08 August 2017 - 02:16 PM, said:

My definition of realism in these type of games are nation versus nation with alot of arcade elements removed. What I consider historically accuracy is simulation battles as can be found in Edited  where you are limited to only the commander's view or cockpit with no third person camera and lietrally all and any arcade element removed.

 

Having nation vs nation battles would greatly increase the immersion factor. The third person camera violates the FoW pretty radically, to put it bluntly it is IMO kind of a legalized cheat because it gives you information you would not have in any RL or simulated environment.

 

 

 


Edited by Asklepi0s, 10 August 2017 - 04:12 PM.


SABAOTH #10 Posted 08 August 2017 - 03:54 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 36793 battles
  • 2,914
  • [-133-] -133-
  • Member since:
    08-28-2011
Hit Points :hiding:

laulaur #11 Posted 08 August 2017 - 06:24 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46604 battles
  • 986
  • [BLAUR] BLAUR
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View PostSir_Bad, on 08 August 2017 - 02:11 PM, said:

The only way to implement a historic gamemode into the game, would be by letting bots play as the cannon fodder tanks. The devs said that themselves. If you would only put equally tiered tanks into one battle, it would kind of defeat the purpose of it being historically accurate.

 

Yeah, i think this can work only if they do something like the PvE mode from Armored Warfare.

A team of 5 (or maybe more) players matched against lots of bots.



Slyspy #12 Posted 08 August 2017 - 06:28 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14202 battles
  • 16,687
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011
Sounds awful to me. The game is absolutely not designed to support this kind of mode, as Historical Battles and Confrontation have highlighted in the past. You are essentially asking for a whole new game. 

freddiebox #13 Posted 08 August 2017 - 06:32 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 376 battles
  • 80
  • Member since:
    12-16-2016

View PostSlyspy, on 08 August 2017 - 06:28 PM, said:

You are essentially asking for a whole new game. 

 

And that is somehow a bad thing to you? 

 

Jokes aside Edited   implemented three different military branches in their game from aviation to army and to naval warfare over the past few years and made it work. Nothing is impossible and certainly not for a game with veterancy like World of Tanks. Wargaming is almost done working on their brand new graphics update to their engine, something people thought impossible as well a while ago.


Edited by Asklepi0s, 10 August 2017 - 04:13 PM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to advertising another game


IncandescentGerbil #14 Posted 08 August 2017 - 06:33 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35679 battles
  • 1,443
  • Member since:
    11-24-2015
I like the idea of a realistic mode whereby Russian crews are are so crippled by the poor ergonomics of their tiny tanks that their rate of fire is halved... Although having a realistic aiming time for WW2 era tanks would make the game too tedious even for TD players.

Edited by IncandescentGerbil, 08 August 2017 - 06:37 PM.


Slyspy #15 Posted 08 August 2017 - 06:40 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14202 battles
  • 16,687
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View PostIncandescentGerbil, on 08 August 2017 - 06:33 PM, said:

I like the idea of a realistic mode whereby Russian crews are are so crippled by the poor ergonomics of their tiny tanks that their rate of fire is halved.

 

Also where the French are immobilised because they fuel supply lines are so poor, were the Germans are generally late to the party because their railroads are in pieces and they can't move during the day, the Japanese don't turn up to the battle because their tanks don't really exist and the Chinese spend all their time fighting each other in Stuarts and BTs, the Czech tanks wear German and then Soviet markings and the Swedish don't really get involved. The US tanks are generally fine and serviceable so no change there while the Brits are modelled accurately in that they are always slightly flawed but somehow get along. 
 

View Postfreddiebox, on 08 August 2017 - 06:32 PM, said:

 

And that is somehow a bad thing to you? 

 

Jokes aside Edited  r implemented three different military branches in their game from aviation to army and to naval warfare over the past few years and made it work. Nothing is impossible and certainly not for a game with veterancy like World of Tanks. Wargaming is almost done working on their brand new graphics update to their engine, something people thought impossible as well a while ago.

 

Then just play Edited  
 

Edited by Asklepi0s, 10 August 2017 - 04:14 PM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to advertising another game


jabster #16 Posted 08 August 2017 - 06:42 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12537 battles
  • 23,379
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View Postfreddiebox, on 08 August 2017 - 05:32 PM, said:

 

And that is somehow a bad thing to you? 

 

Jokes aside Edited   implemented three different military branches in their game from aviation to army and to naval warfare over the past few years and made it work. Nothing is impossible and certainly not for a game with veterancy like World of Tanks. Wargaming is almost done working on their brand new graphics update to their engine, something people thought impossible as well a while ago.

 

Why not play Edited   instead then if you want more realism?


Edited by Asklepi0s, 10 August 2017 - 04:14 PM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to advertising another game


laulaur #17 Posted 08 August 2017 - 06:43 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46604 battles
  • 986
  • [BLAUR] BLAUR
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

View PostSlyspy, on 08 August 2017 - 05:40 PM, said:

 

Also where the French are immobilised because they fuel supply lines are so poor, were the Germans are generally late to the party because their railroads are in pieces and they can't move during the day, the Japanese don't turn up to the battle because their tanks don't really exist and the Chinese spend all their time fighting each other in Stuarts and BTs, the Czech tanks wear German and then Soviet markings and the Swedish don't really get involved. The US tanks are generally fine and serviceable so no change there while the Brits are modelled accurately in that they are always slightly flawed but somehow get along. 

 

You forgot the Soviet tanks that pretty much roflstomped all Europe...

Slyspy #18 Posted 08 August 2017 - 06:46 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 14202 battles
  • 16,687
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-07-2011

View Postlaulaur, on 08 August 2017 - 06:43 PM, said:

 

You forgot the Soviet tanks that pretty much roflstomped all Europe...

 

No I didn't, the Gerbil had already mentioned them. Hence the "Also".

IncandescentGerbil #19 Posted 08 August 2017 - 07:26 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35679 battles
  • 1,443
  • Member since:
    11-24-2015

View Postlaulaur, on 08 August 2017 - 06:43 PM, said:

 

You forgot the Soviet tanks that pretty much roflstomped all Europe...

Not so hard when you have significantly more tanks than your opponent. Doesn't necessarily mean that the tanks were good on individual basis. 



jabster #20 Posted 08 August 2017 - 07:27 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12537 battles
  • 23,379
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View Postlaulaur, on 08 August 2017 - 05:43 PM, said:

 

You forgot the Soviet tanks that pretty much roflstomped all Europe...

 

Interesting defintion of pretty much all.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users