The Q&A is their answer to our question here
I know, but I believe they said that would be the third devblog they would post within this change, meaning there should be one more between now and the 3rd. I could be wrong though.
well i want some historical accuracy, but not at the cost of ruining game balance.
there will never be that kind of perfect scenario.
queue MM (current MM) creates game as soon as there are 10 players in one team or when you have waited too long and fills it with bots. requirements for this kind of queue 1-10 players in one team
equipment based MM will be more complex and will require multiple of previous queue just to match same effectiveness (lets say that mm will just match low, mid and high end weapons), so requirements 3-30 players in one team (btw oversimplification, that number should be cause of weapon distribution)
equal number of human players requires MM to have 6-60 players at any given time in queue.
similar average team skill would just kill MM cause it would need 10 times number of players to actually make somewhat equal team (btw equity sucks). so that would mean that at any time there would need to be at least 60-600 players for queue to work.
and now complicate this with different sides cause you have japanese vs us, us vs germany, germany vs soviets and historical accuracy (cause 6 campaigns) and you would need 360-3600 players in queue at any given moment for only 6 campaigns. sure there is some overlap in weapons used in early and late war, but historical accuracy would force 6 queues.
and i didnt even include equal number of console players… so do you now understand why it is impossible to have “perfect MM”
Third devblog is the Q&A
Of course I’m talking more about the “upcoming” MM with all players in the same pool. Just MM’ing them by those criteria and not simply their gear.
It’s clear that a lot of people are concerned with historical inaccuracies stemming from this update. I am just going to post my solution here in case it gets buried.
1 Like
What a good idea!
TLDR: T50 fought in the Battle of Moscow.
You’re right about the possibility of the 4th and 22nd tank brigades not having T50s during the battle of Moscow. I looked at the stats table again, and it shows a ‘total’ for the number of tanks in each unit. The author wouldn’t be listing a total if the tally was incomplete.
Here’s the link to that table:
However, I could prove to you that the 150th tank brigade fought during the Battle of Moscow, as the 150th Tank Brigade was listed in Moscow’s battle order.
(Battle of Moscow order of battle - Wikipedia)
You may say that the 150th’s T50s could be destroyed by the time the unit participated the Battle of Moscow. I would argue that it’s possible, but unlikely.
Background information followed by reasoning:
The Battle of Moscow began on September 30th, 1941, when Germany’s Army Group Center started an offensive along its whole front towards Moscow. Before this, the front there was in a relative stalemate. The stalemate from August 1st to September 30th was a result of the Army Group being on the defensive. The Soviets launched a limited offensive against the Army Group, which gained little positional advantages while sustaining some losses. Meanwhile, the bulk of Army Group Center’s armored force went to secure its flanks by reinforcing Army Groups North and South’s respective offensives.
The Soviet’s Bryansk Front was formed on August 14th, Southeast of Army Group Center during that time. It consists of the 50th, 13th, and badly depleted 3rd Armies. The Bryansk Front’s made a report of its armored strength on Sept. 27, 1941. The report shows that it contains the 150th tank brigade, which has 8 T50s.
Because there wasn’t any major fighting in the Bryansk Front before the beginning of Army Group Center’s Moscow offensive, I think it’s unlikely for the 150th tank brigade to deplete all of its T50s in less than three days after the report was made.
The 13th Army was soon encircled and destroyed. The 50th and 3rd were withdrawn to defended Moscow’s Southern flank. The Bryansk front was disbanded on Nov. 10, and its units were merged into the Western Front. The 50th Army successfully defended Tula in the Tula Defensive Operation, the fifth of the seven sub-operations that constituted the ‘Moscow Strategic Defensive Operation’.
Sources:
(Eastern Front animated: 1941 - YouTube
Bryansk Front - Wikipedia
Tula Defensive Operation | Operations & Codenames of WWII
In addition, I found a photo of a destroyed T50 belonging to the 150th, dated October 1941:
The source of the photo is below. It also contains 2 pictures of T50s from the Leningrad Front:
Click triangle to see picture of knocked out T50. The other picture is on the link above.
1 Like
I found the source on Internet Archive.
(The rifle story : an illustrated history from 1776 to the present day : Walter, John, 1951- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive)
Indeed. In some cases, there may be more deviations from historical accuracy than what we currently have in the game.
So more force-fields around russian troops taking 2 smg clips to kill instead of one, and electric T-34 tanks cause the current ones still can run away even with a red hit on their engine.
Doubt you devs STILL read all of this at this point (if you do, respect!)
But if you do…
Just make polls after you release the Q&A dev blog. Will be much easier and help everyone.
5 Likes
Interesting.
My count is
Probably ppl I teased who blocked me. 
Kinda glad now that I think about it. My threads have less garbage in them 
4 Likes
Guess we missed a lot of crap.
2 Likes
I’ll say it again. Matchmaking a la War Thunders Battle rating is utter trash. It breaks the game. it ruins the historical immersion.
I see some dumbasses writing here proposing this and that and try ± this and that and whatnot, it doesn’t work, you still ruined the game. You don’t get it.
All you get is a cesspool of shit.
For the arguement of more fun and mixture, no doesn’t work like that, people will fully equip their squads with what the best they have. All this system will bring is only top their have players and rest is dead. All players will do is play Battle of Berlin with Assault Rifles.
And once this change is done, next stage is remove restrictions on maps, cause no one plays them, and soon enough we all run around with StG 44 on whatever map.
NO historical immersion, NO variety, no fun. and game goes stale and eventually dies out in the sand. but not after adding more premiums bullshit cosmetics, event skins with fictional bullshit, soccerballs, shoes, whatnot. and all of a sudden your playing the worthless WarThunder again.
5 Likes
So, outside complains and crying, what is your suggestion?
Merging every campaign and making it rating based sounds like a very bad idea for the Japanese faction imo. Like… Armor and weapon wise… They’re lacking somehow… True it is mentioned that certain rating will represent certain time period, but im afraid i might see a rating compression soon where tigers feast on shermans and crusaders in tunisia (the only surviving tiger is captured in africa iirc) just coz the allied infantry is kitted with thompsons and BAR’s. Or Japanese seeing shermans, or even the sherman crocs. Or even seeing a king tiger in normandy mowing down every armor it sees. Me personally? Would be very excited for that, its semi-historical. But people would complain about it and call out balance. (even tho allied strong suit is supposed to be their CAS that represent their air superiority, personal opinion) It would be great to have different characteristics to each faction like german with their armor, russian with their derpy guns and tons of rockets, the allied with their explosive galore CAS, and well… idk what to say for the japanese, amphibious tactics maybe? Isn’t that much more interesting than just making everything “level” with a rating to make it “balanced” while making every faction feels the same? This is my first time writing things, and im really sorry if it’s a bit much and hard to comprehend. I just love this game and want it to stay fun, challenging and realistic.
BANZAAAAI!
I already wrote my suggestion earlier in post.
Which is add season where you for week or two get incresaed xp in a specific campaign, and get bonus unique squads, weapons, cosmetics for that campaign to sweeten the deal. Then have more mini events for dates of specific battles where you get xp and cosmetics rewards to sweeten it.
That way you create rotation in the game and all are on one campaign increasing the number of players able to match against. that way you can play whatever campaign you feel like, but most will play the current season campaign because boosted progression and cosmetics/weapons/vehicles as cherry on top to make it feel interesting and worth it.
My suggestion is to NOT break and ruin the whole concept of the game but improve on it instead.
This new concept of a game is a completely different game, more like War Thunder which is a cesspool of garbage.
Constantly having to up and down their made up battle rating based on conceptual strength of vehicles/weapons and peoples rating with them, which is flawed to say the least.
a certain campaign with what weapons/vehicles tech they had there at certain time and point in history removes all this stupid nonsense.
You add what was available 1941 to battle of moscow and that’s it. no need to keep adjusting and spending time on made up battle rating.
At it’s core it’s terrible since it completely ruins the concept of the game, which is play battle of Stalingrad and use what squads/weapons/vehicles they had facing of against what they faced right there and then. Immersed in a historic event feeling like you get a chance at history.
1 Like
- I dont want to research 5 mp40
- I dont want to have 2 different progressions for 1 period
- I dont want to lose my t-50
- I dont want to play full against MKb/Ferdorov squads
- I dont want to see WP spam
- I dont want to see unequipped noobs in my team
- I dont want to research 50% of the game
Your suggestion doesn’t solve any of these problems.
And they are solved by new system.