Blast from the past w/Feraphic - War Thunder - Simulator Battles
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 04. 2018
- With TAW down, we got bored and fired up War Thunder. I thought you may enjoy the ride.
If you like what I am doing feel free to subscribe:
goo.gl/zjL4jr
And if you really really like my stuff consider supporting me on Patreon:
/ sheriffssimshack
My Discord, join if u like
/ discord
Music from Epidemic Sound (www.epidemicsound.com)
Outro Song (on Livegameplays):
Army Of Angels 1 - Johannes Bornlöf
My coffee inducing Patrons!
Mitchell OFCL
Mae
Michael Dunn
Scott Allender
Elgonidas
Campbell Mullins
Cody Herndon
Scott
Barney Coman
Arjun Jn
Peter Collins
Scallie
james williams
Ellis H. Davison, II
Hans Pahlen
Sigfus Steingrimsson
Patrick Hasse
Sundowner
Thank you very much
Details about my System are on my "About Page"
/ @sheriffssimshack - Hry
the only thing I like about WT SB is how fast you get into action and how easy it is to spot contacts.
I hate the fact it is so easy to spot the contacts, I can't take anyone by surprise. And I don't know why, but I find it more difficult to be accurate in WT than in Il2. Overall I do better at Il2.
@@gorgosanma "hate the fact it is so easy to spot the contacts" but is that more realistic? In real terms, I have no restrictions on things to recognize distance that makes wt so pretty good
And you can still surprise opponents
Personally, I'd say WT is fantastic for some high class arcade fun. Perfect for casual, quick action, adrenaline rush without paying too much attention to simulation and technical aspects. Not to say they do not have realistic elements incorporated in the game, but it doesn't exceed a certain depth.
If one is looking for simulation fun Sturmovik BOX is undoubtedly the place to go. It feels more serious, deeper and rich in simulation fidelity. I love both. It feels like comparing a 1st grade top of the line mountain bike to a sports car if that makes sense.
Say what you will, but despite its blatant flaws and obvious shortcomings War Thunder is the actual pinnacle of balance between flight sim and multiplayer game. IL-2 series, while clearly superior in flight sim department, could benefit much from incorporating many ideas implemented in WT regarding multiplayer. There's a reason servers like TAW and Random Expert are so popular - they bring the much needed element of organized competition to the otherwise hollow, early 2000s multiplayer experience IL-2 offers at the moment.
You're delirious, dude. WT's multiplayer aspects is exactly the reason it's gotten so bad in the first place. Come on, just watch the video, it's basically an infinite furball with bombers thrown in. And those can perfectly fulfill the fighter s' role.
WT is a decent light sim, it's a horrible game.
What has gotten so bad actually? The main reason sim community around WT isn't as strong as it used to be is because at this moment there are more and more viable alternatives around, which wasn't that much of a case back when the game gained momentum. Also the developer haven't been really making any effort to keep the support of the community and players aren't necessarily playing the best thing overall, but they usually support the game they believe has the most potential. That's why IL-2 keeps growing and WT sim is pretty much stale.
Nevertheless the community that grew around War Thunder back in the day and is still very much present around IL-2 was there mainly because the game was so captivating and allowed for an easy multiplayer WW2 dogfight experience. Feature-wise it's a contemporary game, crafted for the times we live in, with easy access to player profiles, friend lists, squadding, clans, customization, events, competitions, ranking boards and other social aspects, while IL-2 seems cumbersome, awkward and outdated, too much dwelled on the past and what flight sims used to be back in the hayday.
Not that it's a bad thing, it's just different. IL-2 is a combat flight sim game, WT is a multiplayer game - one could use some features from the other to become a more complete product. Overall though I'd say WT is a more complete product, while IL-2 is simply a better one.
I disagree. WT was a source of hope for a number of combat flight sim enthusiasts in 2013/14 because, while ClOD was a disaster, 46 was badly aging, and RoF was even more niche-based, the devs claimed to want to make the next flight sim. They justified the choice of F2P by wanting to avoid such a debacle as ClOD had been, and claimed AB and HB would be stepping stones towards FRB, which would be the ultimate mode in WT.
So flight sim enthusiasts tried to help WT go in the right direction, and the forums were full of feedback trying to achieve just that. Then Gaijin achieved incredible success with arcade, and the direction changed 180° (that was around 1.29, iirc).
Pretty much all of the choices that have been made since have gone to mess up the multiplayer experience in WT sim. First it was the implementation of Battle ratings when the community had been asking for historical matchups and rolling planesets for ages. Which is what you get in TAW. The BRs go the opposite way to create a perpetually messed up and unbalanced gameplay with a new meta every patch.
Then the addition of tons of unfinished content, the captured aircrafts, third-person gunners, and so on.
There was never a clear idea of the gameplay the wanted to obtain. In the last months of the old queue, the gameplay was so fucked that in most of the games, you wouldn't even have the time to see an enemy fighter before the game ended.
Then EC was implemented, and that had been requested by the community for ages. Clearly an unfinished gamemode, but the historical EC was the most well-received thing to appear in WT sim since the beginning. It was scrapped immediately.
Since then, EC is developped by a grand total of one guy, who, while he may read the forums often, has multiple times stated that he has his own vision of EC, and if you don't like it, you should quit playing.
Now, I'm no game dev, but I did quit a bit of mission design for a group back in arma. I clearly remember having discussions about it, and what was always getting out of it was that the simplest you go is usually the best. You must have a clear idea of what you're trying to achieve, and avoid coercive answers, trying instead of making it seem like it flows naturally towards the gameplay you want.
Everything in EC is done the opposite way. See the latest addition of air capture zones or whatever they are called. This is ridiculous.
The one good thing about WT is that it enlarges the flight sim community, and in no negligible way. That's very true, and can't be stressed enough.
As for the whole "modern game with social aspects"... Flight sims have been just that: sims. Niche genre, with fairly tight communities anyway. You want leaderboards? Some servers will provide them. Friend lists, squadding, clans is just gimmicky stuff that works just fine with a forum and a discord/TS channel, which all clans in WT will use anyway. Customization in the sense of custom skins is a thing in all flight sims on the market. Communities will also organize events and competitions in all of those. The only difference is that it's community-based, instead of corporate-based, and I personally feel it's better that way.
In fact, I can't think of one feature in WT that I would like to see implemented in ClOD or BoX. There might be one or two if I was to think about it for long enough... but really calling WT the "actual pinnacle of balance between flight sim and multiplayer game" is delusionnal. It's entirely geared towards the F2P multiplayer game side, while neglecting the whole "game" aspect.
I certainly see your point regarding the specifics of game design. You missed mine though. As far as community-based features go, they're just that - features provided by community, not the game itself. You can't really say the features are not needed or useful, if the community itself went out of its way to provide those features. You're pointing out the influence of WT on flight sim community, but fail to recognize the importance of mentioned features in this role. Those "gimmicks", as you call them, are the very reason for what War Thunder accomplished in the genre.
Well, as I said, those "community-based features" do not disappear in WT. Community-based events, squad/clan forums and discord/TS channels are very much alive around WT. That tells me that players willing to organize will move out of the game to do it anyway. I may be downplaying a marginal role here, but really, marginal.
The reasons WT accomplished so much are that:
1./ It's free.
2./ It runs fairly well on even non-gaming/old PCs.
3./ Playstation
4./ Arcade is real easy, and no matter how messed up WT sim is, some people still will go the AB->HB->Sim route if they get sufficiently interested in WW2 air combat.
5./ It's free.
Wow! That was fun!!!! As crappy as WT is, I really liked the revisit. I was thinking of doing so myself a few days back; but then I remembered how crappy 50 cals were in WT and figured the setup time for my controls wouldn’t be worth it. Thanks for the walk down memory lane!
Konate Lassina you'd be surprised then to find that 50 Cals might be the best performing guns in the game right now with the way armour piercing works.
Wow u actually went back to it nice
I don't miss WT for all its headaches and heartaches being completely uncertain whether or not I would have a good time during a session or not. I do however enjoy watching others play it somehow.
The bf-109 engine sounds like a sewing machine on this game.
I adore the 3d models in warthunder, they have some very talented 3d artists. It's a real shame that the WT devs won't put out a high fidelity sim for single player. I mean most players get that the WT engine has to be watered down for net play to be doable but if they just revised and cranked up the sim fidelity for an offline single-player only version and included all their air models, I would gladly pay over a $100 in expansion packs for that. They could make a fortune with the hard-core section of their player base.
All the elements are there minus a cranked up high-fidelity sim model, they could easily have it reside as an add-on with the online component. They are so short-sighted.
I bet they think that if they did this, they would somehow siphon-off the large population of mousekateers that play their online game but in truth it would bring in a ton of joystick-loving hard-core sim enthusiasts. I love IL2 and DCS but their aircraft selection is so limited compared to WT's library(yes I know the reasons for this, detailed interactive cockpits etc). For me WT has some of the best terrain detail I have seen in a game (very optimized) like this. At altitude the detail is terrific. So all the major pieces are already in place.
It's clear to me that the WT devs have done extensive research into each of their A/C for stat gathering so why not give them their full glory in a real sim version of WT. A real shame it hasn't happened.
The AI is really really bad in WT. and the variety of planes gets better and better in Il-2. I personally believe that a proper SP campaign in WT would be a money grave for Gajin.
Ab gives gajin so much more players to milk.
Sure it's bad, any AI is bad when you play hard-core online like you do. But to us more laid back guys that aren't interested in non-stop online action the AI can be more convincing. Right now, without a doubt the WT AI is bad but let's be frank, it's a place-holder since WT focus is multiplayer. I am confident if Gaijen devoted their resources they could produce terrific AI. I saw glimpses of it when I played around with the editor. I saw the naval dive bombers actually using dive bomber profiles so I know there is potential there.
Don't see how the online version would suffer with a complimentary single player version, if anything is would add potentially more players to the online population once they finish with the single player.
n1censte1n
Yeah, just comparing Il-2 BOX to WT SB is like night and day. Unfair to WT due to its older inferior game engine and modeling but if there is a game I want to play it would be Il-2.
That being said SB does the fine dogfighting better than RB, which while accessable to me but nothing but climb-thunder, prop-hanging and circle turning.
Well done.
Cannonfodder43
I may be mistaken, but I thought I watched a WT Dev video where it was stated they updated with a new engine.
Norman D. The engine may be new with Dagor 5.0 but it is still derived from the Il-2 Birds of Prey engine I think. Where as Il-2 BOX while upgraded from Rise of Flight, is infinately better.
[W] While the problems you pointed out about RB are real, given what the game was designed to be in acessability I can't blame them. It can be changed to some extent though.
The real problem is that such a style combined with the small arena maps, favors high flying and high climbing planes. Rendering others useless in the current meta. A far larger map that allowed get in and get out join in on a constant battle area in the style of Il-2 or SB EC would be a very welcome change that would give all a thing to do in RB and other planes space to run or climb.
Throwback to your old channel
9:09 why does the 190 sound like an air conditioning unit.
I think more like a dish washer
I think a more interesting question is: why can you hear the engines of other planes more clearly than the plane you are in?
not anymore. Finally. After years of begging.
19:45 gaijin added gunpods with .50 cals to some US planes. A 36 with them has 10 .50 cals, and now .50 cals have broken damage numbers and work better than cannons. Thats why everyone takes these pods. Oh and also, these pods weight only 22% of their actual weight, becouse Gaijin is a bunch of idiots :D So the pods dont take almost any performance from the plane. Yes the wronp weight was reported with sources months ago, but they dont care :D WT is going really downhill lately :/
- - They do not. Take a single 20mm and compare it to a single 50 cal. You're delusional if you think the .50 does better. The reason it seems like the 50 cal does better is because you're shooting anywhere between six to eight of them on average, whereas the average amount of 20s on a plane is two to four more commonly two.
I think it was the Brits that determined that two 50s were roughly equivalent to a single 20. If you think about it that way, an F6F is basically using around three 20mm, and a P-47 is using four.
Michael R. Foreman Again, take a plane armed with with a single 50 and compare it to a plane armed with a single 20.
I'm not going to spread bullshit around just to make you feel better.
Sparks happen 99% of the time due to network issues, either on your end or on Gaijins. It has nothing to do with their damage.
ok enough
You are technically right, a single .50 cal will in fact do less damage than a single 20mm. That does not change the fact, that .50 cals are ridiculously overperforming, which in conjunction with high firerate, creates a monster gun that tears planes apart in short bursts when there is 4/6/8 of them. Neither the caliber of the bullets, nor the count is as important, as one-second-burst-mass. You see, if you take two planes, one armed with .50 cals, and one with lets say 20mm hispanos, both with identical one-second-burst mass, lets say ~4.5 kg/s - roughly what p47 is outputting, you will quickly notice that .50 cals are indeed doing much much better than 20mm with explosive ammunition. That's not becouse a single .50 cal bullet is doing more than single 20mm bullet, but becouse .50 cal bullet is overperforming, and en masse, outshines the same amount of 20mm "lead" with explosive filler - again, not the same amount of BULLETS, but the same amount of LEAD. Do you understand now?
Do you have a beast of a rig, or what? I found myself not paying attention to gameplay and just staring at the ground. The environment looks real. If I didn't know better, I'd believe you were in a real plane.
Well, the ground textures are better in Il2. I wouldn't say that WT groundtextures looked horrible but you see the age of the game by now.
Sheriff's Sim Shack
My comment wasn't intended to bait an argument about which is better, I've played neither. I had not before watched any of your IL-2 content. I just watched your Hard Fights Over Lush Valleys video. Yes, I agree, it does look more realistic. Although, my only option would be WT.
understood! Just wanted to say that.
MOAR war thunder
When I will understand why the hell P-47 pilots fly at 400 mts from the ground, I'll be a better person.
Come on, man, how do you confuse a Corsair with a Hellcat? :p
can happen in the heat of the moment
Dishwasher
People are still playing this game? Every time i try to get into game there is vacuum on the servers.
DId your Wingman call your kill Nicenstein? XD
Ja, keine Ahnung. Aber er scheint das irgendwo aufgeschnappt zu haben :D
Von den Rocketbeans, vom Krogmeister? oO
Now that fab has life Are you jealous?
?
wie kommt es dass du wieder war thunder spielst
einfach mal wieder reingeschaut.
Schade das du nicht meine Bomber Eskorte warst :D
Do you even lockup in this game o.O?
yeah you do, but less
I do not know why but I can not like this game
no wonder.
is unspeakable, I think I got angry at him after a T34-85 caught a shot of my Tiger-H1 and the SB battles are strange. I played him for a long time but today I do not have any more patience for him
WT just works better in VR and I like the simplicity of it.
VR in IL2 has significantly improved as of late.
maybe i messed up getting the steam version, i cant get the settings right, got to say though inside the plane looks good but out side was terrible