World war mode - Discussion and Speculation

[guiltyspark1 2,811]

I have been thinking recently about how the game is slowly coming together and its final polish is beginning to shine through the beta smudgyness. We have probly around another year or so of new content to wait for in the form of other nations (british tanks ect) , maps , and general features (like the landslide of features that came out of absolutely nowhere last patch). There is also the ships thing. Which might take even longer.

 

But after all of this content is created. We face a problem.  One of those problems is we have Excess content. Let me explain. Gaijin went out of their way to basically create almost every aircraft/tank imaginable for us to use. The problem is that in the current way the game works , most of them become useless and only a select few are chosen by a mass amount of pilots. So they have created this content for seemingly no reason.  Things like seaplanes for example are pointless unless there is a change in the game formula.

 

Which is my next point.

 

World war mode.

 

We dont even know what it is yet. But the devs said they have something like 3 competing ideas , none of which we have any sort of details on.

 

So here is the fun part , lets all get assuming.

 

I ASSUME one of the ideas is a giant combined arms game with ships , tanks ,and aircraft all collaberating in one big server. The problem with this idea is obvious. Its a MASSIVE undertaking , even with all the vehicles already created.

 

But this MASSIVE battle idea fixes the problem of excess content. Seaplanes will have a tactical advantage because you can launch them from ships and docks/islands without airfields.  Light planes like the Po-2 can be used along with the night fighters IF gaijin figures out how to implement early radar.

 

In fact. This massive battle thing also gives the player TONS of new roles they can play that are not really possible in the short matches we have now. Here are some examples

 

-Recon plane

-artillery spotter

-night fighter

-night bomber

-seaplane

-strategic bomber (b17, b29)

 

 

anyway.

 

The reason im bringing this thread up is that for gaijin to do this. they need to know a few things

 

1. Does the community want something like this?

2. how can they monetize this new mode in a fair way that will be inviting to brand new players (no unlocked planes/tanks/ships) and not pay2win.

3. will the community put up with potentially a long media blackout with no info/updates

 

 

I think point number 1 is pretty obvious.

 

but point 2 and 3 are very important questions. 

 

Server fees for actual MMO's are expensive. hella expensive. This is why most MMO's have a subscription fee. But this monthly subscription fee is proven to actually scare away players. so how will gaijin monetize this new mode in a way that is inviting , but can still cover the costs of the servers?

 

and then there is question number 3.

 

make no mistake. If they decide to invest into doing this. It will take a long time. Maybe a year or two. and the features would likely be kept under wraps to keep competitors from trying to gauge the market demand. Entire country wide maps would have to be created with the same level of detail we have for our current tank maps. think about that. just think of the glitches that would have to be stomped.  So would the player base put up with the wait? or would they rebel and dump the current game and play something else costing gaijin money that feeds the devs and gerbils

 

 

what does the community think?

 

edit as of april 29th 2016

 

oh wow it turns out based on the two dev blogs i might have been onto something.

 

Looks like gaijin is really looking into expanding vehicles into their roles.

Edited April 29, 2016 by guiltyspark1
Do not use red text, it is reserved for moderator use only.

[Zpartan06 373]

I think those shrewd Russians at Gaijin have a guaranteed themselves jobs for the next ten years, that's for sure.  I expect them to finish up Ground Forces and Navy Forces by 2019 the latest, then maybe develop World War Mode for 1-2 years, release lets say 2021, then operate that in place of a true sequel.

 

War Thunder: The gift that keeps on giving.

[AdmiralDonutz 1,731]

That it's not going to happen until 2020, comrade )))) more content ))

[sabaton_ 3,821]

I don't want the world war mode, not yet until the game is fixed!!!

 

Also we need more tech trees (japanese tanks, british tanks, and the italian planes)

And I almost forget it, before anything we must see how naval forces will behave in mixed battles, you know the 380mm would troll tanks if they get mixed, also naval AAA would be deadly for planes

[guiltyspark1 2,811]

I don't want the world war mode, not yet until the game is fixed!!!

 

Also we need more tech trees (japanese tanks, british tanks, and the italian planes)

And I almost forget it, before anything we must see how naval forces will behave in mixed battles, you know the 380mm would troll tanks if they get mixed, also naval AAA would be deadly for planes

>not until the game is fixed

 

did you read the thread?

[*Samurai_-Sniper- 155]

i want infantry introduced

[Zpartan06 373]

i want infantry introduced

 

NOOOO 

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[*Samurai_-Sniper- 155]

NOOOO 

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

ok we will just pretend there was no infantry in world war 2, will make perfect sense in world war mode

[guiltyspark1 2,811]

i want infantry introduced

as long as they are AI controlled i dont see a problem.

 

If they are player controlled it could ruin the game completely

[*Samurai_-Sniper- 155]

as long as they are AI controlled i dont see a problem.

 

If they are player controlled it could ruin the game completely

why would it ruin the game

[Zpartan06 373]

as long as they are AI controlled i dont see a problem.

 

If they are player controlled it could ruin the game completely

 

Yeah i should have specified. AI controlled targets like pillboxes, trenches, vehicles, convoys, trains and camps that shoot back could be good.

 

Reason why it wouldn't be good to add infantry into WT is that we're here for the vehicles.  Land, Air, and Sea.  There are many other great games out there that do infantry combat much better than War Thunder, and we dont need another WWII FPS game.

 

Additionally, infantry rarely interacted with aircraft and ships, only tanks.  They would be extremely limited in their role in mixed battles with navy and air force elements

[droppopWT 931]

I want a mode where I can fight Me-262s in my P-51, where I don't have to worry about being put in Norway (map selection), and where my Tiger doesn't have to see IS2s.

 

Oh, and snow maps for GFs.

[HMSD33Dauntless 1,257]

If you're given missions and carry out unique fights, then I'd love this. So the leaders say stuff like:

"Germany has taken over here. Russia will flank there, and we'll attack here."

[*Samurai_-Sniper- 155]

Yeah i should have specified. AI controlled targets like pillboxes, trenches, vehicles, convoys, trains and camps that shoot back could be good.

 

Reason why it wouldn't be good to add infantry into WT is that we're here for the vehicles.  Land, Air, and Sea.  There are many other great games out there that do infantry combat much better than War Thunder, and we dont need another WWII FPS game.

 

Additionally, infantry rarely interacted with aircraft and ships, only tanks.  They would be extremely limited in their role in mixed battles with navy and air force elements

but were talking about world war mode here.... um yea i dont get your point soo there went infantry in the air or on the sea sooo just dont have them in game ok. infantry was the most important part of any army, ferdinands were mainly destroyed by infantry. if you want a real historical battle and not this battle rating system putting ww2 tanks up against post war tanks the you need infantry to make it a real game. infantry and tanks go together like pees in a pod. you still havnt given a convincing answer to why not have infantry. appart from having some more annoying bots that you dont even take any notice of and just drive past them. just to add it would be combined infantry and tanks on the same map i think your thinking of another game, i wouldnt want to see a infantry only game, alogh they would probably have to have a infantry only mode to start just for testing before the combined. it would be awsome, you would have all different types, snipers, machine gunners, anti tank gunners, and all sorts of other infantry roles added.

Edited March 12, 2015 by *Samurai_-Sniper-

[Admiral_Obvious 1,037]

why would it ruin the game

Probably because the rating would go from T (or 12+ if you use the EU system) to M (or 16+). It's OK to have NPC AI, but if you add player controlled people outside of a "box" fighting people "inside boxes" the rating will go up, for that reason alone.

It's pretty hard to simulate getting shot / having a gun without a big bump in the rating for the game.

In theory, based on the demographic of this game, that would be a loss of about 7 to 12 percent of the player base, if parents bothered to pay attention to ratings for games (which a few do apparently, ain't that nice). To be honest, the 13 to 17 year old crowd contributes a good portion of their parents money to games like this. Edited March 12, 2015 by Admiral_Obvious

[Jefafa 416]

I read the part about the game needing to be fixed before the world war mode....

 

Yeah it REALLY needs fixing!!!

 

American planes at the moment usually ROFL stomp everything if it's a good team. But alas even a team of utter scrubs flying bearcats and tempests can beat a team of Germans playing only 190 A5's and at best F8's.............yes I've been getting those matches all day today as the Germans.

 

Only in Russia can a company like Gaijin get away with this bullsh*t.

[guiltyspark1 2,811]

but were talking about world war mode here.... um yea i dont get your point soo there went infantry in the air or on the sea sooo just dont have them in game ok. infantry was the most important part of any army, ferdinands were mainly destroyed by infantry. if you want a real historical battle and not this battle rating system putting ww2 tanks up against post war tanks the you need infantry to make it a real game. infantry and tanks go together like pees in a pod. you still havnt given a convincing answer to why not have infantry. appart from having some more annoying bots that you dont even take any notice of and just drive past them.

>drive past them

 

The infantry would be the main target for most tanks. you have to understand that the tank was literally invented to stomp infantry.

 

You would be clearing positions in your tanks. clearing towns of enemy soldiers

 

you wouldnt "drive past" any enemy infantry.

[*Samurai_-Sniper- 155]

Probably because the rating would go from T (or 12+ if you use the EU system) to M (or 16+). It's OK to have NPC AI, but if you add player controlled people outside of a "box" fighting people "inside boxes" the rating will go up, for that reason alone.

It's pretty hard to simulate getting shot / having a gun without a big bump in the rating for the game.

In theory, based on the demographic of this game, that would be a loss of about 7 to 12 percent of the player base, if parents bothered to pay attention to ratings for games (which a few do apparently, ain't that nice). To be honest, the 13 to 17 year old crowd contributes a good portion of their parents money to games like this.

im pretty sure cod is the most popular game for kids so i dont think a rating would hurt the game.

[Admiral_Obvious 1,037]

>drive past them

The infantry would be the main target for most tanks. you have to understand that the tank was literally invented to stomp infantry.

You would be clearing positions in your tanks. clearing towns of enemy soldiers

you wouldnt "drive past" any enemy infantry.

This, and the fact that most infantry squads carried a few AT grenades, just in case.

[guiltyspark1 2,811]

Yeah i should have specified. AI controlled targets like pillboxes, trenches, vehicles, convoys, trains and camps that shoot back could be good.

 

Reason why it wouldn't be good to add infantry into WT is that we're here for the vehicles.  Land, Air, and Sea.  There are many other great games out there that do infantry combat much better than War Thunder, and we dont need another WWII FPS game.

 

Additionally, infantry rarely interacted with aircraft and ships, only tanks.  They would be extremely limited in their role in mixed battles with navy and air force elements

this is important.

 

The trucks , trains , convoys ect could be major missions for not only tanks but aircraft.

 

resulting in a loss of resources for the other side

[*Samurai_-Sniper- 155]

>drive past them

 

The infantry would be the main target for most tanks. you have to understand that the tank was literally invented to stomp infantry.

 

You would be clearing positions in your tanks. clearing towns of enemy soldiers

 

you wouldnt "drive past" any enemy infantry.

i would drive stait past them if they were bots. i drive strait past bot tanks, its a waste of time killing bots when you have players to kill. 

[guiltyspark1 2,811]

i would drive stait past them if they were bots. i drive strait past bot tanks, its a waste of time killing bots when you have players to kill. 

in a map the size of europe you are rarely going to be running into players around every corner.

[Admiral_Obvious 1,037]

im pretty sure cod is the most popular game for kids so i dont think a rating would hurt the game.

I know, I'm just making a point, it can make a difference though.

I look at ESRB ratings before I buy/play games, and I assume some parents do (or should). If the rating gets bumped up, it will get some attention.

[*Samurai_-Sniper- 155]

this is important.

 

The trucks , trains , convoys ect could be major missions for not only tanks but aircraft.

 

resulting in a loss of resources for the other side

if they were bots it wouldnt be a loss to the enemy team at all, if they were player controled and actually had a role in battle like suppying ammo, gas or new players to replenish the battle it would be a loss if they were destroyed. bots are pointless. 

[*Samurai_-Sniper- 155]

in a map the size of europe you are rarely going to be running into players around every corner.

this reply dosnt make any sense