Jump to content


Similarities Between WoT Gameplay + Real World Combat.


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

TungstenHitman #1 Posted 22 January 2019 - 11:51 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25612 battles
  • 4,669
  • [POOLS] POOLS
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

Hi guys,

 

I'd like to share my observations with you guys if I may, since we are all tank fans I'd imagine and probably like me, you guys are also interested in the various wars and conflicts throughout history, not for the awful atrocities and loss of life, but only for the technology and tactics used to achieve the wins and like me, I'd guess you guys would also have an interest in not just tanks, but any military hardware.

 

So, I'm not a soldier nor am I going to be speak of things I have never experienced or be an armchair general. I don't know what it's like to fight in a war and I hope I never have to. What I would compare between this tank games gameplay and real world combat is as follows.

 

1. Superior training, experience and knowledge with inferior technology still trumps ignorance and better technology. We can see that just like in real world engagements, in world of tanks, a player with a lot of experience and knowledge can achieve great victories even with inferior and dated tanks. A lower tier tank in the hands of an experience player who knows his tank, the enemy tanks and the terrain in which he fights usually always wins vs the inexperienced who doesn't know his tank, doesn't know the enemy tank, how to effectively fight with his tank, doesn't know combat tactics and doesn't know the terrain(map) or have local knowledge of the area in which he fights. The inexperienced player/players with the better, more advanced tanks, will lose the engagement nearly every time. We've seen this throughout history across many wars and conflicts right to this day and so long as the technology gap doesn't get ridiculously big, will always continue to play out this way I dare say.

 

2. Intel is crucial. Take, open maps, one team has a couple of good light tank players, they spot the enemy movements, this intel goes back to their team and sets their team(or at least should depending on again, experience) into motion as to where they will go to engage the various targets. A team with a couple of bad light tank players however, has no intel of what the enemy is doing until it's too late, will have little to no time to react and is effectively blind which more often than not results in a crushing defeat. Throughout history and to this day we have seen how this plays out exactly the same during wars and conflicts and how the armies with the intel on enemy movements and plans, get the jump on the enemy, know what they are going to do and go about defeating them while the army with no intel, is often just demolished comfortably because they basically had no idea what was coming or planned by the enemy.

 

I'm sure you guys have also spotted your own similarities between how this game plays out and real world combat and conflicts. I'm sure there are a lot, do share, I'm sure they'd be interesting points and should be entertaining.



shane73tank #2 Posted 23 January 2019 - 12:01 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 30217 battles
  • 2,075
  • [BC-X] BC-X
  • Member since:
    03-01-2014

if it’s a fair fight you’re doing it wrong and do everything as if you are a one shot spring to mind

 



NoobySkooby #3 Posted 23 January 2019 - 01:18 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 15779 battles
  • 4,221
  • [DENK] DENK
  • Member since:
    09-23-2011
in real life there would be infantry support, plus air cover, plus before any tanks ever got close to combat the forward area would be 'softened up by artillery' I'm pretty sure.

DracheimFlug #4 Posted 23 January 2019 - 09:00 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 9756 battles
  • 4,195
  • Member since:
    11-13-2014

View PostNoobySkooby, on 23 January 2019 - 01:18 AM, said:

in real life there would be infantry support, plus air cover, plus before any tanks ever got close to combat the forward area would be 'softened up by artillery' I'm pretty sure.

 

There is not always air cover or artillery support. Either or both could be more important somewhere else at the time, the enemy likely has air power too and might have air superiority, etc. Plus especially in modern combat, the tanks are as likely to be supporting the infantry as the other way around. It is not a given that the enemy has any tanks at all.

TungstenHitman #5 Posted 23 January 2019 - 10:56 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25612 battles
  • 4,669
  • [POOLS] POOLS
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

Pay to win and gold spammers. Just thought of this similarity too. Take the U.S. army, what a total pack of gold spamming wallet warriors. You could see their more recent conflicts in the Gulf. They had pay to win premium tanks etc but also when they came up against the slightly tougher tanks they pressed the 2 key, in this case, it was depleted uranium and spammed the old tough soviet era domed turrets effectively with gold ammo lol! 

 

They also run their tanks with improved vents(air con) and crew with food(by the look of them)) and sniped from redline like a boss(improved optics) while the enemy with their stock tanks had poor view range, no gold ammo and no vents or food, which in a desert environment, is pretty rough going :P


Edited by TungstenHitman, 23 January 2019 - 11:00 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users