War Thunder - WWII-Vietnam war Era tank and air battle game

[InFO Digger]

Goddammit, am I going to have to follow this thread just for the news of regular sperg leaks of military secrets?

 

[millais]

In addition, if you don't mind paying for a base game and DLC, IL-2 Great Battles has 2 Flying Circus DLCs (the first one is plenty enough for most cases), which includes a map, multiple WW1 biplanes, decent damage and flight models (at least on par with the rest of the game) plus some campaigns. Plus it's the only one I know of that allows you to take potshots at other fighters with a pistol (I haven't played Rise of Flight so I don't know if you can do that there as well).

Rise of Flight started that gameplay element. You can wield a variety of pistols or a flare guns from your cockpit, even committing suicide by shooting a flare directly into your instrument panel. I was never able to achieve one of those high-deflection pilot headshot kills that you see in all the youtube videos of RoF, but I did once sheer off the upper wing of a SE5a by dumping multiple clips of Mauser pistol rounds into it after running out of machine gun ammo earlier in the fight.

 

[I need more BMWs]

Has WT ever data leaked on any Russian planes before? Not that I am aware of since I barely follow any WT leak scandals.

People were talking about some SU-57 leak but they were really just translated patent files.

A few people also believed MiG-29 docs were leaked but that didn't actually happen because they're so freely available.

 

[I need more BMWs]

Goddammit, am I going to have to follow this thread just for the news of regular sperg leaks of military secrets?

No, since you could already find most of the documents that were "classified secret leaks".

 

[Seventh Star]

I uninstalled after too much bugs and bullshit from this game. The new BP is lame as fuck and teammates are all mouth breathers.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Rise of Flight started that gameplay element. You can wield a variety of pistols or a flare guns from your cockpit, even committing suicide by shooting a flare directly into your instrument panel. I was never able to achieve one of those high-deflection pilot headshot kills that you see in all the youtube videos of RoF, but I did once sheer off the upper wing of a SE5a by dumping multiple clips of Mauser pistol rounds into it after running out of machine gun ammo earlier in the fight.

Then add more pistols and you won't miss.

 

[Wilhelm Bittrich]

In addition, if you don't mind paying for a base game and DLC, IL-2 Great Battles has 2 Flying Circus DLCs (the first one is plenty enough for most cases), which includes a map, multiple WW1 biplanes, decent damage and flight models (at least on par with the rest of the game) plus some campaigns. Plus it's the only one I know of that allows you to take potshots at other fighters with a pistol (I haven't played Rise of Flight so I don't know if you can do that there as well Rise of Flight did it first).

Flying Circus is basically just a graphically updated Rise of Flight and IMHO not worth the price just for fancier graphics. TBH, if you want to fly the old WW1 vintage scouts Rise of Flight is still a good choice.
If you play the free base game of RoF and buy all of the dlc planes it's still less money than Flying Circus will cost you.
Tbh, their DLC policy EA style cash grabbing is one of the main reasons why I still play IL-2:1946 and haven't touched IL-GB for quite some years now.

 

[BlackDragoons]

I really really want to like this game but its complete bullshit. I rather go back to the HP mechanics of World of Tanks then continue to play this and I don't even touch the naval aspect of this game because its not good at all.

 

[Just Some Other Guy]

Eh, WoT is way shittier.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

War Thunder ground battles are a real surprise if you're not into militaria. You take something like a tank, expect it to be like slow duels between giants, any other game conditions you to think about it that way, but then it turns out realistic tank battles are more like an artillery duel at extreme range where you strain to see, fire off the instant you see something move, ton of thinking put into it because you can fire off twenty shots at the enemy and fail to do anything but will probably get one-shot killed the instant you move.

Are there any games with campaigns based around being armor?

 

[The Foxtrot]

War Thunder ground battles are a real surprise if you're not into militaria. You take something like a tank, expect it to be like slow duels between giants, any other game conditions you to think about it that way, but then it turns out realistic tank battles are more like an artillery duel at extreme range where you strain to see, fire off the instant you see something move, ton of thinking put into it because you can fire off twenty shots at the enemy and fail to do anything but will probably get one-shot killed the instant you move.

Are there any games with campaigns based around being armor?

Gunner, HEAT, PC! is a good tank sim centered around late Cold War combat (1985 specifically). Right now it's in early access, and you have the US Army and Nationale Volksarmee (East German Army) so far. It's pretty damn realistic, as well, staying faithful to what the two sides current in game would have had in the Fulda Gap in 1985. The engagement ranges are also pretty realistic, you're shooting hundreds of meters across fields.

So for the US Army, expect to be using the M60A1 and M60A3 a lot more than the M1 Abrams. And no, the Abrams isn't invincible, a T-72M (the NVA's best tank) can absolutely fight it and win.

You aren't limited to just tanks, though. You can also use the M2 Bradley or the BMP-1, and their ATGMs are very usable. I get scared shitless a LOT more in a T-72M from a Bradley bringing its TOW launchers to bear than an Abrams aiming at me.

 

[Margo Martindale]

Now that they let you use unicode letters in names, reminder to kill all players in game who have chink names. good chance that one of them is using an aimbot too so prioritize them

 

[Fruttasecca]

War Thunder ground battles are a real surprise if you're not into militaria. You take something like a tank, expect it to be like slow duels between giants, any other game conditions you to think about it that way, but then it turns out realistic tank battles are more like an artillery duel at extreme range where you strain to see, fire off the instant you see something move, ton of thinking put into it because you can fire off twenty shots at the enemy and fail to do anything but will probably get one-shot killed the instant you move.

Are there any games with campaigns based around being armor?

Warthunder ground battles are CQC knife fights that have nothing to do with how tanks actually operate. Its a shame because the game has potential but these retarded maps and game modes hold it back

 

[Darkholme's Dungeon]

Warthunder ground battles are CQC knife fights that have nothing to do with how tanks actually operate. Its a shame because the game has potential but these retarded maps and game modes hold it back

That would imply it isn't by design. You think gajoob would have enough shits to code in better AI infantry to screen tanks? Please.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

Warthunder ground battles are CQC knife fights that have nothing to do with how tanks actually operate. Its a shame because the game has potential but these retarded maps and game modes hold it back

Well, if that's a CQC knife fight Battlefield is even worse. Is it the flags that are the problem? Like the poster after you mentioned, there's no infantry, which I find disappointing because the presence of ground forces to shoot at is one of the thing that makes War Thunder's air mode and Titanfall good. Of course modelling infantry and crew artillery would be a lot harder. In real life I don't think you'd want to put a tank anywhere that close to the objective, the tank supports the infantry.

 

[Fruttasecca]

Well, if that's a CQC knife fight Battlefield is even worse. Is it the flags that are the problem? Like the poster after you mentioned, there's no infantry, which I find disappointing because the presence of ground forces to shoot at is one of the thing that makes War Thunder's air mode and Titanfall good. Of course modelling infantry and crew artillery would be a lot harder. In real life I don't think you'd want to put a tank anywhere that close to the objective, the tank supports the infantry.

yeah what the game really needs now is more random buggy bs with minimal player input lol and no tanks dont support infantry they operate independently Battalion/Platoons

Also nobody likes AA in AirRB.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

no tanks dont support infantry

X to doubt
Armor may be its own unit but it is used side-by-side with infantry, infantry protects the armor, armor protects the infantry. Occasionally get a huge armor v armor battle but I have never read, seen, or heard anything to support the idea that tanks are not primarily used in combined arms warfare.

@millais back me up

 

[NerdShamer]

Occasionally get a huge armor v armor battle but I have never read, seen, or heard anything to support the idea that tanks are not primarily used in combined arms warfare.

Nearly every tank battle that I heard of had at least half an battalion of infantry involved on at least one side, except for Hauptmann Whitmann's rampage in a Tiger...That also killed some random British soldiers.

Okay, an exception could be made for the rare ambush against an enemy column; but even when you had dozens of tanks rolling across an open field, you still need infantry to kill off the stragglers.

and no tanks dont support infantry they operate independently Battalion/Platoons

But he's technically right about the platoons.

Of course, he's also acting like an absolute retard over it

 

[Seventh Star]

Economy changes coming. I hate these russian kikes.

 

[Ughubughughughughughghlug]

I have figured out that Realistic with joystick is the best air mode.
Simulation mode is the most intense, theoretically the best, but the map is just too damn big and without ID on enemies you spend most of your time trying to chase a tiny speck that may or may not be hostile. It's not like it's actually realistic anyways, because in real life you'd sortie together in a wing, not just be chasing random planes.

Realistic, on the other hand, you lose some of the flight control realism and you're somewhat at a disadvantage, but you can enjoy flying to the front in a way that isn't any fun with keyboard and mouse, still feel a sense of pride in staying alive, and can get back into a fight fast enough to actually learn how to shoot sort of. Arcade is just impossible, the advantage of the mouse and aim can't be competed with in that mode.


Ayo, you nibbas play Enlisted? I tried that out recently. Another Gaijin property, some people say they're experimenting with doing infantry in War Thunder but I'd think they wouldn't sell a whole separate game of DLC just to cannibalize it. The cool premise of it is that everything is squad based, it's only 12 v 12 but you choose a real-life historical unit to play as and your bots follow you around and you can switch to them at will or when you die. Tanks and airplanes are some of the higher-level squads, and DLC includes real-life famous vehicles and soldiers like Audie Murphy. For something to just pick up and play, it's excellent.

However, there's some problems that arise after, like, a day of playing. It's still a F2P grindfest like War Thunder, and in this case one where important things like having, say, a panzerfaust or close air support would really matter. It does each side of a campaign as its progression, so basically, you can't just be a main for a country, you have to main a country on specific maps. Your choices (at least you can play each major) are Americans vs Japs, WAllies vs European Axis in North Africa, WAllies vs Germans in France, and three Soviet v German campaigns. So that's something going for it, good selection, but individually kind of forgettable maps, classic case of quantity vs quality (contrast to the lovingly hand-crafted maps of something like Battlefield 1).

The bots are also straight retarded. They just aren't capable of doing their job, and this means that their theoretical use as spare spawns for when you die is greatly reduced because often they'll all be dead by then, or they'll die when the same machine gun burst that got you gets them. It's a shame, because I absolutely love games implementing bots to inflate count, but even compared to bots in things like Isonzo (which are at least crack shots) these are useless, more of a shooting gallery where you can tell which one is the human player from them actually reacting.

Long term, games like Enlisted will outlive shit like Post Scriptum and even Hell Let Loose because:
1) Tactical gameplay doesn't mean anything when PC players don't actually communicate
2) The bot-attached-to-players concept means that you can create a massive battle (like, you can have over 100 soldiers on a map) while having small player counts, which means the game's lifespan is way more secure
3) It may not be real high quality but it's fun and easy to get into

PS It's also kind of kiddyish in its presentation, soldiers shout taunts and stuff at each other that just doesn't feel like the action movie vibe of Rising Storm or the seriousness of Battlefield or Isonzo. Not war is hell, war is glorious.