On Historical battles mode

This post was kinda inspired by omggamer.com, some of their articles are very good, especially the last one.

Hello everyone,

today, I’m going to post something about an upcoming historical battles mode. First and foremost, what is actually the upcoming Historical battles mode (likely to come in 2014)? Well, in short, it’s a WoT mode, where historically used vehicles (no paper tanks and prototypes) ride around in their historical configurations (sorry, no more 88mm L/71 Tigers) and numbers (1 Tiger = 10 T-34′s) and fight their historical enemies (so Tigers will meet T-34′s, not AMX-13′s) in certain time periods, probably defined by either years, or battles (July 1943 Prokhorovka for example). It will be played on standard (although roughly corresponding) World of Tanks maps, so the battle of Prokhorovka will not be played on Westfield etc. In addition, it’s possible there will be some new “historical” maps introduced, but maps modelled completely according to reality are unlikely, as they would not be balanced for gameplay (sadly, WW2 forces did not choose the battlefield according to what would or wouldn’t be playable in a computer game 70 years later).

From what we know, this mode will most likely not appear in random battles, but as some sort of “company mode”, using not points, but slots (I’ll get to that later), but it will use standard World of Tanks mechanisms, it will definitely not include “hardcore mode” (one shot kills, no hitpoints etc.). Of course, one might compare this with the War Thunder historical mode. WoT historical battles will go further: Mig-15′s over Stalingrad is not exactly something Wargaming wants.

While I do believe the historical mode has its place in World of Tanks, I am very sceptical about its implementation, for several reasons.

The most obvious flaw is the slot system. You see, you can’t have a simple company point system based on tank “worth”. That was the original idea, if I recall correctly: each historical tank would have its own point “worth” – like company tier point value, only based on various things, such as the availability of that respective tech in that respective year. For example, in 1943, the Tigers were completely dominating, but there were very few of them, while by 1945, the Tiger I was a much less impressive vehicles, but there were more of them around, so logically, in a 1945 battle, Tiger I would have less value than in 1943. Sounds logical and easy, but we all know what would happen: instead of a historical battles of one or two Tigers, a bunch of Panthers and a whole lot of Panzer IV’s vs rare late KV/early IS tanks and tons of T-34′s, we’d have 4 Tiger vs 4 IS battles, because noone wants to play the underdog. Not a very appealing idea.

So – if I recall correctly – at some point it was changed to some sort of slot system, not unlike the way the EU “historical battles” social events work. Each battle has a number of slots for various technology defined for both sides. In other words, for each historical battle, you will have for example 1 heavy tank, 5 tank destroyers and the rest medium and light tanks (depending on the battle). How precisely are these slots defined – whether the German heavy tank HAS to be the Tiger, or the slot is defined as an “elite unit” tank, which could be a Tiger or a Panther in 1943 – that we do not know yet. It would be logical to assume some vague slot definitions will be available (core vs specialist tanks for example), because defining the slots too strictly could lead to mirror battles – and that would get old really quick. And that’s another thing I am a bit afraid of: mirror battles.

Mirror battles – while inherently more fair – have been repeatedly designated as not desired in random battles, because they are simply boring. By a “mirror battle”, I mean a situation where both sides have exactly the same slots – for example 5 heavies and 10 mediums – or, in extreme cases, identical vehicles. While the chance of something like that happening in random battles is very low, in the previously described historical battles system it is actually a part of their design: both sides would have exactly (let’s say) 1 Tiger against 1 IS tank, with 8 Panzer IV’s and 6 Stug’s vs 8 T-34′s and 6 SU-85′s: sounds boring? Yes well, that’s because it is. Even when the slots are more vaguely designed (for example medium slot being shared by either an early Panzer IV, or late Panzer III), it will still IMHO lead to boring and repetitive battles, where the task of the heavy will be to take care of the enemy heavy and whoever wins that match will probably win the battle (imagine the Tiger roflstomping a bunch of stock T-34′s, or vice versa with IS). Not exactly my kind of fun, so I hope the developers thought of that.

Third issue is also obvious: how to make players play the underdog tanks? The obvious solution are of course the various incentives, that don’t necesserily make the gameplay better, but “worth it” (for example higher rewards for playing underdog tanks, special bonuses for killing stronger tanks etc.), but personally it wouldn’t convince me to play an underdog, so I am afraid WG will try to “force” it somehow (for example by some sort of unlocking system: “You can play a Tiger in Prokhorovka only after you finish 50 battles with Panzer IV in that historical battle”). This would bring another set of issues however (for example “where will we get a Tiger player” early on and “where will we get enough Panzer IV players now that everyone unlocked the Tiger” later). This is perhaps the most problematic point, anyone who remembers oldchool World of Tanks “/2 LFG tank and healer” will feel chills running down their spine – and not in a good way.

Fourth issue is obviously the company system itself, that is very clumsy at this moment. I am sure the devs will come up with something automated, such as the World of Warcraft “dungeon finder”, this is only a question of programming, not of game design.

Either way, I am kinda curious how will WG handle it all, but as I said, I’m sceptical at this point.

152 thoughts on “On Historical battles mode

  1. SImple, Just give a T-34 player 2 or 3 lives, once his T-34 is destroyed, he starts in a new one, Identical to the last.

    • Or make it so that Historical Tigers dont have like 1400 HP when a T-34 has 450.
      Make it that a Tiger has like 750 and a T-34 has 500, or something similar.

      Historically speaking Tiger had tough armor for the T-34′s, but when it was penetrated, it blew out just the same, so equalize HP pools.

          • yeah you did and I hereby quote.

            “Or make it so that Historical Tigers dont have like 1400 HP when a T-34 has 450.
            Make it that a Tiger has like 750 and a T-34 has 500, or something similar.”

            anyone would make out through those 2 sentences that you were referring to horse power

            • Not quite. You know why? because we play WoT. and in WoT Tiger has 1450 Health points and a T-34 has 450. Anyone with half a brain will guess he’s talking about Heath points, not horse power.

            • Well you can guess it by the fact that the Tiger dosent have anywhere near 1400 horsepower engine in the game, but it has 1400 health points (also referred to as HP)

          • I read it as Hit Points. You could just use some sense and realise that a Tiger doesn’t have that much horsepower, but it does have that much Health.

            And “yeah you did”

            What, you do the thinking for him now? He was talking about health points, not horsepower. That doesn’t mean you are right when you presume him to be talking about horsepower, not health.

            • “well i’m, sorry if you’re living in a virtual world.
              with no outside life”

              Really? Going to insults when you are proven wrong? Funny thing is your name though and its revalance to your point.

            • Funny thing is your name though

              and you are staying anonymous?

              also the tiger does have 690HP.

              also again hit points is never ever abbreviated.

            • Well if you had any sense for context you would have seen instantly that he is speaking about HP = HitPoints, not HorsePower.
              Its been abbreviated like that since 1987 when first RPGs were made.

              Noone was thinking that he is speaking about Hewlett Packard either even though its a registered Trademark as HP … because everyone knows that it has nothing to do with the rest he is writing about.

              Your inability to sense context makes it seem that you’re the one that lives in his own little world with no outside life

            • as if horsepower would be a major balancing factor instead of hitpoints (called hp since…ever?).
              never go full retard again, plz!

            • “WRONG! as it’s not even an RPG.” – the game might be not a Role Playing Game, but it still has terminology used in RPGs and it has RPG elements as well: crews and tanks earn XP (Experience Points) and can learn new skills and perks and unlock new items (modules).

              Oh, wait… are you talking about Rocket Propelled Grenades?

    • WoT developers are strongly against respawns. They never say it but one day SerB has stated that he views “historical mode” in Warthunder (there it is closer to “hangar battles” conception for WoT) as brake for Warthunder project.

      So I doubt we’ll see more lives for single tank and respawn battles. Named “hangar battles” will use few different tanks from player’s hangar. Well, if it will be implemented.

      • That could get messy. Imagine a team’s ten T-34s all kamikaze into the other team’s Tiger, knowing they can just grab another T-34. At the very least he’d be trapped in a metal prison of burnt out tanks.

  2. “This is perhaps the most problematic point, anyone who remembers oldchool World of Tanks “/2 LFG tank and healer” will feel chills running down their spine – and not in a good way.”
    I take it you mean World of Warcraft? ;)

    I dont know – I wouldn’t mind playing T-34-85′s vs. Tigers. Only one tier difference – And with a bit of teamwork you could down them tigers. And i dislike heavies, meds are just so much more fun…

    I’d really prefer it to be random matchmaking, like War Thunders historical battles, instead of TC/CW. I want to be able to play it solo or with just 1 or 2 friends, much more enjoyable imo then TC/CW.

    • “I’d really prefer it to be random matchmaking, like War Thunders historical battles, instead of TC/CW. I want to be able to play it solo or with just 1 or 2 friends, much more enjoyable imo then TC/CW.”

      Yes, I’ll prefer that too. I’m not a big fan of TC/CW, too. And Right now, I’m not having a problem playing the underdog.

    • A t34-85 would be playable against a Tiger, but what about the period late 1942- late 1943 where there were no t34-85 s?

      • T-34/57

        All of the above can seriously hurt a Tiger. But yes, in 1943, Tigers WILL be formidable foes.

          • 120mm pen vs 116mm armor (30 deg angling) -> shell likely to penetrate.
            And there will be another tank/ TD flanking the Tiger.

            Seriously, Tigers in historical will be less of a problem than KV-1S are now in arcade.

            • 41 degree angling gives it’s front 132mm and sides 122mm

              Assuming my calculations are correct, it has good bounce potential against the SU-85

          • There’s no gold ammo in historical battles? That’s kind of made the whole idea more interesting.

        • T-34-57 never saw combat and so it’s confirmed to not be used in historic battles.
          You’ll either have the T-34/76 (1940) or the T-34/76(1942) models

          • It didn’t see actual service, it saw “field testing”.

            It was produced, and it did fight. All were converted back into normal T-34s.

  3. Our community asked for Assault and Encounter and made a big fuss about it. When they were implemented almost everybody disabled these mods.

    I think the same will happen with Historical Battles. People are needy and ask for a lot of stuff but if you actually give them what they request they will not need it anymore.

    • Who exactly asked for these modes?
      First reaction after the first announcements were:
      “Wohoo… its a different game now – NOT.”

      The removal of a flag and shifted spawn points hardly qualify as “game mode”.

    • Why do people keep on writing “mods”? “Mode” and “Mod” are two comppletely different things.

    • ^ this. I think it would be fun but only a niche would play it…
      Also, would one have to have those historical tanks in the garage or will you just be able to play them? Also, what about ammo, how will they handle gold and stuff…?

    • I don’t think it’s the problem with people asking for a feature. It’s the way they implemented it by using existing maps. Encounter/Assault modes are just too predictable and boring they way they work now.

    • I hate Assault, but I quite enjoy Encounter, you can really force a team to fight you by driving over the cap circle without actually going for a cap.

      • Problem is that WG keeps creating Encounters like the one in Redshire, Mines, El Halluf or Prokhorovka where they stick the cap point into a solid cover and don’t account for the fact that one of the teams has an easier time getting there first. Usually the team that sticks a tank into the cap first wins because then the pressure is on the other team to root out that tank from behind buildings or rocks which they can only do by either winning a hill battle nearby or suicide charging across the field to kill the capping tank. With an organized team that might not be such a problem but in random battles?

      • I truly hate Assault mode. If WG wants Assault in randoms to have a point they would have to start by giving the side that’s defending some sort of handicap. For example the attacking side gets one or two more toptier tanks then the defending side.

        I really like Encounter battles. Especially on Ruinburg and Himmelsdorf, but those are city maps. I hate it on Redshire for example…

        The idea of Encounter is much more easy to implement then Assault is, because waiting around the flag in camo mode until the enemy pops up while being (on paper) equally strong as the attacking side is unfair to the attacking side who have to take the risks and initiative aswell in this mode. Goodluck with that in random battles. Offcourse, you will won some, but logic dictates you will lose a lot more as attacker then as defender in this mode.

  4. What they could do is rather than select a vehicle in Historic mode they just have to click battle and they are given a random tank for that game

    • This works fine as the configuration is preset anyway, so no need for you to pick weapons or such.

    • Just to be clear, I would have no problem being the underdog, I think it would probably be fun. But, if it’s implemented like that I am sure you would have people complaining of the tank they got and committing suicide, easily fixed by counting suicides as team damage or (temp) banning suiciders but I do not see WG doing those.

    • It’s also the only way i see it: to not know before the battle which tank you will get (maybe select the country, but not much).
      We tried on the French community some battles in historical configurations and were surprised to see how the Wolverines were OP. With 3 Wolverines, the Panther and Tiger got raped as we had huge difficulties to spot them when most of their shells were penetrating the German tanks.
      I really think that WG should readjust for the historical mode some parameters of the tanks.

      • what they need to do is give us a historical garage with every tank in its historic conf. for all the battles eg. tiger 1943 conf plus tiger with 1944 conf… and for each battle that is in that year. and what u do is under the battle button u can select historical garage. each tank will have its separate crew with every skill and the crews are locked in the tanks and u cannot sell the them. when in the HG(historical garage) u just press battle and go right into que and there is no platooning available .

  5. I would be curious about this:
    If take the example the battle of prohorovka
    What about ferdis? Will they include them?
    Or pershings?
    Or tiger 2?
    They are late war tanks but superior to the lower ttier tanks… tiger 2 against t34s?
    My historical knowledge is kinda faded already but this differnce between these tanks are just way too much.
    OK a tier VII. can probably fight a VIII. but still it could be kinda unfair….
    especially (i know WG cant do anything about it….) when the teams are unevenly spread on the map..
    example: 2 tiger2 meets 2 su152 and 5 t34 who would win?

    • “kinda unfair” this is just a game. if you think it’s unfair in a game.
      what would you think if you were a USSR soldier up against the power of a 8.8 cm KwK 43 L/71.

      • Sit in the trench and get drunk and wait for the tiger 2 to run out of fuel/breakdown/ get bombed by an Il2 ,get hit by an ISU 152 / IS 122 , Get set on fire by a molotov when the infantry support abandons you due to a particularly intense artillery/katyusha barrage .. Welp you are a german soldier in 1944 .I actually feel worse for him than any USSR soldier .

            • “I wish a horrible death for the man who wrote the script for Enemy at the gates”

              OK, so Enemy At The Gates is typical Hollywood exaggeration, but do you really believe there weren’t NKVD squads shooting down retreaters and deserters? And that the Red Army didn’t throw waves of soldiers, at least in that point in the war, when they felt the situation was desperate enough to demand it?

          • Over the whole war, including the extreme Soviet casualties of the first 2 years? Maybe. But at the time the Tiger 2 made its debut, when the western Allies had just landed in Normandy and the Soviets had launched Operation Bagration? I’d rather be on the Soviet lines to be honest(if steering clear of the entire Eastern Front by 1000 miles wasn’t an option).

    • They plan to do historical battles and include the tanks present in those battles. Considering how few Pershings and actual battles they showed up in so are they unlikely to be included. And those that never fought in WW2 wont show up at all, this means most high tier US tanks for instance.

      • Tiger 2 s were also very rare .. So I suppose Tiger 2 / pershing slots should be very valuable need to be earned / long waiting times .. Then again if they have historical battle korea .. pershing gets a lot of slots there

      • But they could also include Korean conflict as a possible scenario in the historical mode. The game actually covers this period as well.

      • How about Korean war battles? ISs and T-34-85s going up against Easy 8 Shermans and Pershings.

  6. -both sides would have exactly (let’s say) 1 Tiger against 1 IS tank, with 8 Panzer IV’s and 6 Stug’s vs 8 T-34′s and 6 SU-85′s: sounds boring? Yes well, that’s because it is.

    yeeeah, wargaming wouldn’t want it, would they? i mean, then it would really show, if sovjet vehicles are better. they could introduce this kind of battle for all those guys who believe in superiority of russian vehicles in WoT

    • the IS-1 never really met up with the tiger 1 but when it did. the tiger would be obliterated.

    • But remember, all these vehicles would be using their historical configurations, so that would even things up quite a bit.

  7. Well they need to randomize it. So you can’t tell, if you’re going to be a late war Pz4 (with the longer 7.5cm gun) or early war Pz4 (with the short 7.5cm) – resp. Tiger. While you can be pretty sure, to be most of the time the underdog with your Pz2 and the topdog with your kingtiger.
    Anyway, I believe they will find a way, which is more or less good and balanced.

  8. I also expect it will be less popular than people imagine.

    Still, if you wanted less Tigers and more Pz4s in the queue you’d just have a reward system set up to encourage that. Sweet rewards for playing the weaker tanks and diminishing returns on the strong tanks. That’d stop people from spamming Tiger every time they queue but give them a reason to start queueing Pz4.

    Alternatively make it like company battles and let the team decide who gets to be the tiger this match.

    Option three, queueing for a historical battle doesn’t let you choose anything other than nation. The matchmaker groups enough people then assigns them vehicles in historical config at random.

    IMO unless the rewards are special premium reward tank levels of cool this mode will be played even less than company battles.

    • “Option three, queueing for a historical battle doesn’t let you choose anything other than nation. The matchmaker groups enough people then assigns them vehicles in historical config at random.”

      Very interesting idea.

    • Go play WarThunder then. This bullshit with “WarThunder is so good” starts to piss me off.

      I swear one day I will start trolling the WarThunder forums saying ” World Of Tanks is so much better, we even have Stalinist inscription”.

      • WT actually got Stalin inscriptions as well, their just haven’t been any uproad about it there.

      • WoT players already troll them (at least, in russian community). And you know what? Warthunder players have named us “dirty tankers”.

        …They called me also–`yellow fish’ was it not?”
        “Worm–worm–earth-worm,” said Bagheera.

      • I’m really considering that too, but in totally opposite way. The typical WT fanboy way using direct quotes from WoT forum comments by WT players

        They have yet another thread crying about OP planes: “WT has no OP planes everything is historically balanced and you just need to learn how to play”

        Thread whining about nerfing of some premium plane “Wargaming sucks as they change things people have paid for, you will never see that in WT!”

        Thread whining about their new module system “WT has no unlockables everything is already elited, Gaijin will rule all!”

        • Yeah, I don’t play WarThunder, but I have nothing against it, but people playing WarThunder coming here and talking crap is really getting annoying.

  9. Another solution would be like this: player joins a “historical battle” and is automatically assigned to a random tank in it’s historical configuration picked from one of the tanks he owns in his garage. The downside is that it could lead to players leaving the battle unhappy with the tank they got (remedy: limit the number of tanks in your garage to those you’d actually like to play).

      • For an hour? How about 6 hours or a day that would probably deter a lot more then an hour, but I fully agree about the concept of immediate temporary bans in such instances.

        • How about ban them from WoT completely, for increasing time periods (just like when teamkilling)?

  10. It should be done as a Random Battle Mode. You just choose the tank, click “Start Historical Battle” and the MM does the balancing job. Issue – probably longer queues, but so what?

    • not forgetting that there would have to be a lot of changes.

      lets pick a popular example. the panzer IV with a 10.5cm gun.

      they couldn’t use it as the pz.4 never used the 10.5 in combat. as the turret couldn’t take the pressure.

      • And that’s why WG have said many a time ,and it was even mentioned in the OP ,that the tanks will only use historical configurations, or can’t you read?

      • That would be the best option. They just have to put it as a mode (like assault/defence). That could be desactivated as well in the config panel. Set by default, that would bring a lot of people in with low tier…

  11. Not so sure it would be that boring. Weapons and health pools would have to be adjusted slightly.
    SU85 would really not be that bad against Tigers even with the worst gun.

    I would say lots of trials have to be done. A whole new beta section for that part of the game but it can be fun AND I actually still would love to have a mode where they remove the red lines and markers from the enemy tanks. THAT would do probably even more to the concept. I know this is moving away from arcade but in that case the 10 T-34 spamming a single Tiger is a whole different game again. Shooting precisely on moving and not so clearly marked smaller tanks is a mot more difficult for the Tiger now.

    Aiming circle & sniper view (optics) fine, but no red lines around the enemy tanks and no markers on map or in the view would be quite a challenge I think and increase the skill requirements. Could be an “advanced mode” with more rewards (IF you hit/damage something, not just AFK around there) .

    • Apparently there are versions of this already now. Modded. This is pretty much what I was looking for.


      Not so sure why it would be terribly hard to implement as game mode. Let people do the testing while having fun and learn from what they find. WOT could check winrates of these game modes and balance tanks out. I mean that’s what they are doing with all the other ones as well during normal games modes.

  12. One of possible solutions would be to put a human team against AI tanks, antitank guns, bunkers. Wargaming unfortunately said long before that they are too lazy to design such historical missions.

  13. I once wanted historical battles in WoT but i have come to realize that it will probably be pretty much Arcade battles with tank and equipment restrictions and Little else.

    • I agree, but maybe if you give wargaming a few years, they will work on it. You know how fast they work :D

  14. I am actually looking forward to this mode, a lot of historical good tanks in this game are rendered less than impressive because they are placed on equal terms with tanks developed two, three sometimes even decades later!

    Im thinking in particular of tanks like the Matilda, Tiger II, etc…

  15. I think the Historical battles should be generated over a period via a campaign system of 50 battles. Battles progress through a time line of 1939-45. Victories generate production points which are spent to purchase vehicles with a maximum point allocation per battle and a restriction on the maximum number of the “uber tanks”. The leader of a HB Company would decide what tanks are required for each battle and spend the points, surviving tanks are credited to the team, reused or uptraded. This way they can tactically decide what they want to use on any specific map. Battle length would be open ended.

    Spotting rules are different, where hidden vehicles can’t be spotted until close range (200M) or unless they fire say @ 400m. Arty could be used but must be spotted by one of your tanks and fire called for so they don’t automatically appear.

    Capture or battle superiority could be decided when 85-90% of the map is held by one team though not shown on the map except for percentage.

    • it sounds like you just condensed CW and replaced some words with ones centered around history

  16. I don’t think weaker tanks will be that much less popular. When RU server had the Weisse Tiger event, every 6T battle had tons of T-34-85′s.

    The event consisted of a white Tiger P with 14000 health going against 15 T-34-85′s.

    • IS 2 should be worth more than the tiger.. IS 1 equal to the tiger .. IS 1 think in game IS with the 85 mm gun . Tiger 2 on the other hand ……

      • Tiger 2 could be worth 2 IS-2 but since they nerfed tiger 2 lower armor it wont be that hard to kill it. But they said Tiger 2 = with ISU-152 that means ISU with stock gun or ISU-122 which means that 122mm gun but not BL-9. I played few days ago panzer general and thats a good easy source where you can see what kind of tanks or machines each side had.

  17. as one of the Historical Battle organizer on NA server I can tell you what the problem balancing was.

    historical Tiger I Is almost completely immune to T-34s 76mm F-34 gun…. a good player with Tiger I is virtually indestructible while a bad player can be destroyed with lots and lots of effort… Shermans 75mm gun was also impotent

    same with KV-1 completely immune to Panzer III and early Panzer IV

    nevertheless if you take into the account these factors (for example: guns need to have sufficient penetration to defeat enemy armor) as well as individual player skill (pro Tiger player vs noob Tiger player) game play can be very fun (what is more rewarding than killing the boss enemy, even if it took 7-8 tanks)

    Both sides should have a “boss” tank if possible (for example: Tiger I vs SU 152 or 1 Tiger II vs 2 IS-2 or 1 Panther vs 2 M36 Jacksons…..)

    • The problem is that what you will get in an unmoderated battle in such a case (and all the historical battle events were moderated, there were designated commanders etc.) would be ridiculous and unhistorical tactics, such as 5 T-34′s simply ramming/blocking the Tiger and sixth just going behind it, targetting one tiny weakspot and killing it.

  18. Underdog tanks are fun, thats teh entire challange, we who grew up with the old MM (as in no MM) learned to deal with it and a stock pz IV(actually it’s fully upgraded except) can still do some nasty damage to an IS tank if he knows were to shoot.

    • Indeed. People bitching bitching about the MM were not here during the 0.6.X days when PZIVs (before the L70 pen buff) saw IS7 and Mauses.

        • actually yes it was, it was a challenge to do good back then.

          my fondest memory of WoT is still back in beta with my VK36 with the short 88 keeping the enemy IS-4 tracked in murovanka magic forest and dodging it’s turret while my team cleaned up his entire team and then came to help me out. I took no damage hardly got enemy EXP for the match but i really felt like i did something important for the team (back then the IS-4 was a tier 9 and it came sporting the IS-7 gun and was considered the best tank in game (even better then the IS-7 itself))

          • Fun? I could still comomplain about the MM nowadays. It was new and there was a lot to learn and discover these days but playing with the old pzIV against tier 9s?
            I only remember matches happening like this: Move left side. Tier 9? Screw this, change to right flank. 3 Tier 8s? Seriously? Changing side once again.
            Team advances, i drive last because every enemy preferred taking out a little tier 5 first.

            Yeah. And dealing with higher tier enemies was limited to taking out tracks. I’m not sure about you – but i could rage every time a shot didn’t do damage, hit the track and a voice called “critical hit”.

            A challenge? Yes. Fun? No.

        • yeah, much fun, like this one time in a thousand battles i killed this is-4 in my jpIV…oh wait, no it wasnt.
          it was pure shit and made many new players turn on their heels instantly.
          but you get this tough guy look by remembering those good ol times, nay?

          • yes it made a lot of players quit, only the ones that really learned from playing and hung in there stayed making the overall game play better.

            It was though, it was murderous even, but it was fun anyway, plus the fact that HE did damage no matter what you shot and how small your gun so you could always damage enemy tanks even a MAUS with a 75mm gun. you just had to be a bid more tactical with what you did and were you went.

            I remember when i finally got to the ferd and unlocked the 128mm, being able to shoot high tier tanks for actual damage made it all worth the grind, nowadays you just load prem ammo or drive behind the poor sob because he has no idea what he’s doing, entire challenge and sense of achievement is gone.

  19. Of course in historical battles there is also one more problem some of the penetration are totally unhistorical. For example german penetrations are given vs 30 degree armor which should mean that their penetration should be about 15% better. If 88L71 had penetraion 203mm vs 30 degree then vs 0 it should be 233,45mm.
    Many people say that 75L48 is too weak compare what it was in real life that instead 110mm it should have more like 120 or equal with american 76mm gun which some people say it was.

  20. You are being kinda pessimistic about this.

    The slot system almost writes itself … only a few types of tanks in a few configuration where available for each battle, so once you have chosen what battle to play, you have the slot options. Mirror matches will happen yes, but you see this in clanwars and company play as well.

    Playing the underdog is solved by the slot system and the company battle system. This is a team game…. there is no shortage of players who are willing to drive the T1 in the pro leagues is there ???

    And lastly the company system : if they ever implement an LFG system for this it will die instantly. I am NOT going to play an historical battle with a PuG.

        • There are a few people trying around with some historic mods and stuff. Maybe if that would be made more publicly there might be a way to judge the potential.

          With mods and stuff it is always a bit complicated but if you would start a separate section like clanwars without the need to put together entire companies, I am sure you would find a lot of people giving it a try. Maybe put it on the testserver while there is not patch testing going on.

  21. I will not be playing this. It sounds a bit dumb, to be honest. I’ll just continue with randoms.

  22. Equipment restrictions?
    So I guess all non-commander USSR tanks will lose their radios, right? xD

  23. I have no idea why they cant simply allow for national deck battles! The coding involved would take an hour to set up, obviously only for national decks with full SPG/TD trees done, for balance reasons.

    WTF WG???

  24. “And that’s another thing I am a bit afraid of: mirror battles.”

    Mirror battles… where have I seen this before…
    Ah, yes, TC and CW battles are mirror battles most of the time, unless
    you have a group of players that has fun thinking outside of the box.

    • it did see combat not that much but it did.

      when it had a meet up with a tiger 1 the IS-1 would just demolish it.

    • Gotta wonder where all those wartime photos came from then. Or why the Germans thought it necessary to compile tables over what distances their various parts could penetrate its various parts and vice versa.

  25. Playing pub random battles for this long, any type of other mode would be acceptable.

    Here’s a suggestion, a new mode called nations battle.

    Have a person select any 3 tanks, then have mm form teams based on nation like German tanks vs American Tanks or French tanks vs Russian tanks and the tier spread would be very wide.

  26. Pessimistic outlook but nonetheless relevant.

    I think in a TC environment, or better yet, in a Historical style campaign for CWs, the underdogs of a team would make combat far more harder.

    If you just keep it at flat tier points- capped so that you can’t roll a full T6 team in 1943. Arbitary limits of the most advanced tanks of the year make it more tactical- where do you send your top tiers? Etc. Ideally you’d want teams of 15 of more T5s, few T6s and the set T7s (assuming 1943) but with having say, 10 or so tanks of mainly T6 a viable but a better option- possibly harder to deal with.

    It would probably work best in a CWs environment, where you have callers in every battle and practice strats, etc. As opposed to TCs, which can be pubbed up by thrown together teams,. Be a nightmare to figure out the points:chips ratio, but still.

  27. Just make introduced year in tiers, and as introduced i mean acutally but into combat, would be fun… for a while I suppose. Germans would suck till 41-42 then tigers show up, russia would pwn with early t34′s. Matildas would faceroll, etc?

  28. Your afraid of being underdog? Well let me tell you this: 1st you chose nation, 2nd you chose TD/ARTY/MEDIUM/HEAVY. Now you will have 1 crew for every branch and as a reward for historical battles, you will receive only freeexp (expect about 1/3 from regular exp) and of course crew exp. If you chose e.g. Heavy and Germany, you will most likely get into a Tiger or a Tiger2 Tank and fight in 19xx. So theres no way you can chose whether your toptier or not. To make battles more interesting and less mirrored, we can expect Some kind of a tournament. 4 Teams fighting in Himmelsdorf vs each other, battle is won after your team outmatches the opponent team by at least 5 Tanks. The surviving tanks retrait and get minor repairs and face each other in a final encounter battle (perhaps with few reinforcements) on another map. (up to 30vs30). To make the battles more interesting, a comitee of 5 people per team can set the starting positions for their entire team (predefined spots for 3pzkw+1tiger, 4Stug3, 4pzkw4, 3Grille, 1Luchs). There might be even tactical points, which give some extra reinforcements (prior dead tankers) if they are capped. Problem if both teams play completely passive? well engaging should be rewarded properly to prevent this.

  29. Third issue is also obvious: how to make players play the underdog tanks?

    Easy boy… GOLD.

    UP to 250 per day, like the “ticket” system in wowp, but only award in the last reward tier:

    50 Gold: 10 “underdogs” tanks destroyed
    50 Gold: 10 battles wins
    100 Gold 5 “Top dogs” tanks destroyed
    50 Gold for set on fire or deal DMG or track the “top dog” and the rest of team destroy the tank in the “perma track”

    So, play 10 days and get 1 month premium time…

  30. It would seem to me that they’d have to give you the tank to drive, as otherwise many players would be excluded because they do not have a suitable tank (and the tank’s configuration/loadout would have to be changed anyway). For example, I currently have about 26 tanks, which I’m told is a lot, and only a handful of them would be ‘valid’.

    Also, to keep things rolling, it is likely that the side you’re fighting on would also have to be assigned, as otherwise some nations would suffer unacceptably long que times.

    To keep underdogs from suiciding, some sort of bidding system could be interesting. You earn ‘history tokens’ in these matches (and can buy them with gold also, after all, this is WG), and you can bid these tokens to be assigned a ‘top’ tank. But even in the underdog, you have to do something to earn tokens.