Listy’s Trouble with Historical Battles

Hello everyone,

we have another guest article today, this time by Listy, well-known poster and article author, his work got featured even on official WoT portal. Enjoy!

Author: David “Listy” Lister

For the last few months, the history battles mode has been in game. Its fair to say that so far the mode has been one giant flop, much to mine and several other person’s annoyance. When it first came out, I was a good little player and I brought a Panzer IVH solely for HB and queued up each day. But I only ever got two games in. After the first couple of days, every time I queued the counter would hit five minutes and boot me back to the garage, because the Matchmaker couldn’t find a game.
This got me thinking and the results of those musings are contained here along with a couple of possible fixes.

The problems with HB are sort of everyone’s fault. While yes some of it is Wargaming’s fault, other faults lie with you, the players – in part. My take on why HB have been a flop is simple: Everyone is queueing in the most overpowered of the tanks available to the battle. How many teams did you see in the Ardennes that were mostly made up of Hellcats for example?

Taking the biggest and most powerful unit is entirely human nature and only a tiny portion of us would take lesser tanks for a challenge, it’s not a new problem. I’ve been playing table top wargames of one sort or another for thirty years now. I’ve worked with a couple of table top war games companies, and I’ve worked with two computer games companies, that basically produced an electronic version of a table top wargame.

We had the same problem, but it was easier to balance. In a table top wargame, you can balance it by ramping up the points cost. Suddenly, that two platoons of Tigers isn’t such a good idea, when your opponent puts down two companies of Shermans, its even less fun when the opponent puts down an infantry battalion, supported by a full Royal Artillery regiment.

Of course Wargaming knows this, they used to produce wargames in computer form. They even seem to have tried the points-based approach for each side. However, when each person only gets to select one tank, then of course they’re going to pick the best one and it causes the points-based system to break.

It’s not helped by Wargamings insistence on sticking invented or prototype tanks in game. Equally the real tanks are overarmed or a horrible mixture of sub marks. It means you have a much smaller selection of tanks to work with. The final straw is the tank selection. Take for example the Tobruk HB, that’s coming up. There’s no chance of getting a game simply because the Matilda is in the line up. The Germans have maybe one gun in their line up, that when firing premium will be able to hurt the Matilda. So no, I fear that the line up will be 100 Matilda’s 10 Valentines and 4 Germans. All waiting for a game until the five minute timer runs out.

So, what to do about it? Well, the first one is to motivate the player base to play the lesser side. Something as simple as the under dogs getting a bonus to XP and credits. In the Tobruk one, again a bonus 10% XP and credits for all the Germans might go a way to solving the issues. Of course, it’s likely that it won’t have such a massive effect, especially when you have Matilda’s crushing you.

The next idea on what to do is simple – be more selective about which missions you create. For example, look closely at the Siege of Tobruk and find a time frame, when there were no Matildas or Valentines. I actually have another perfect example of a potential HB, that suffers from everything I have outlined, but can be fixed by being a bit more selective.

But first, a bit of history about the battle:

Operation Bluecoat in Normandy 1944. It was an attack by the British 6th Guards Tank brigade, equipped with Churchill tanks. During the first day the British shoved the Germans back several miles and during the day’s fighting, the British encountered Jagdpanthers – but still prevailed. The next day, they were in advanced positions and had to hold against German counter attacks, but the pace of advance had outstripped their supporting units (such as the M10C’s).

Here’s a short list of the tanks involved:
British: Churchill MKIII-VI, Stuarts, M10C Achilles.
Germans: Tigers, Jagdpanthers and possibly some Stug’s and Panzer IV’s (I forget if the later were involved but its likely).

So how to make a HB out of that? Well, the first stumbling block is the lack of correct marks of Churchills. Although the tanks are technically in game, they’re badly mixed up and don’t have the right modules. Equally, WG has focused on so many fantasy tanks that the core tanks, like the M10C Achilles, aren’t in the game. But let’s just magic away that issue, what else is wrong?

WG’s current system of listing every tank in the whole campaign and sticking them in the battle creates massive imbalance. In this case, it’s the Jagdpanther. It would brutally murder every tank involved on the allied side and everyone would queue those tanks up. So what to do? Well, the Jagdpanthers were only in action on the first day. So for an Operation Bluecoat game, how about this:

Map: Redshire, Westfield or Prokhorovka. All have the correct terrain feature (a wooded hill) to stick the Assault point on. There are about four other maps that are possible, but all have more pronounced issues.

Game Mode: German Assault

British: Churchill MKIII-VI and Stuarts.
Germans: Tigers, and Stug’s and Panzer IV’s

The Germans would have limited time and tanks to force the British off the hill. However, if they rush headlong, the British will be outnumbering them and the Churchill has a high ROF. Although the majority of the shells fired by the British can’t hurt a Tiger, some will roll high enough to hurt. Equally, the Tigers can bounce off the Churchill’s armour, but should generally go though.

Both sides have advantages. The Germans have firepower and armour, but are up against a time limit. The British have a defensive position and can inflict damage on the Germans at a rate the Germans will have to be careful of. The good news is the Bryansk Front HB in the next patch actually looks to have decent selection of tanks on both sides with no seriously overpowered tanks. So hopefully Wargaming is getting its eye in.

Silentstalker’s Addendum: Here, I somewhat disagree with Listy on the Bryansk tank choices, the KV-1 heavy tank will be facing L/43 Panzer IV at best and has potential to be the “Bryansk Matilda”, but we will have to see.

71 thoughts on “Listy’s Trouble with Historical Battles

  1. They should be handing out better rewards so players can have a reason to play HB. Like an extra 2x exp for winning or losing and more silver bonuses. The ones right now are crap

    • this .. but also, the problem with HB in WoT is (for me) simple … it’s nothing new. They scewed up a bit by introducing the horribly unbalanced Confrontation mode, which majority of the playerbase hated. HB are just Confrontation mode + unsual ammo loadout (not like it’s half near being historical, looking at you SU-152 HEAT in Kursk) and – the paper/blueprint tanks and guns/modules. Nothing fancy and historical, like calculate the shell drop for yourself, all of the tanks still get vertical gun stabilization of late cold war era tanks, etc etc. That’s why nobody fucking plays it. Historical battles are not historical enough for people to care.

      Like with the last example, if the germans had to calculate the sheel drop by themselves, british Churchills would be better off a bit, since they can’t stand a lot of hits from the big german guns, yet their high RoF guns would be faster at getting the right range in, making their small chances of penetration higher a bit compared to the germans

  2. The fact you gotta queue manually and buy ammo specifically for the battle is the problem, the more active actions the player is supposed to do the less popular the mode will be.

  3. Listy’s idea for the HB doesn’t change the fact, that next to nobody will want to take a PZ IV H, and everybody will want to be in ze Tiger.
    The same way nobody will take a Stuart, but everybody will queue up in a Churchill on the british side. And another problem, Churchills are not very popular in general, so there will be even less players willing to play as the Brits.
    Effect? People waiting in a queue in their tigers while there are almost no Brits.
    Advantageous position? Do you think, that a regular scrub WoT player will think about it? All they will see is “Hurr durr, Tigers vs churchills, gonna club in my tiger! ROFL LMAO trolololo”

    • I also rebought Pz IV for HB. I got battles (when this mode were still played) almost instantly. I think the biggest problem is MM and balance. On Kursk most of my battles looked like: 1 Tiger, 1ferdi, and 13 Pz IV vs 5 Su-152, 9 KV-1s and one T-34. And five battle like this in the row. How this is balanced? Balaton in other hand was infested by ISU-152. Ardennes was real showcase how one tank dependat is this mode. If King Tigers drivers (usualy 2) were sane, battle changes into seal clubbing. If both were “red barons” US win were swift and easy. Skill US side in most cases were irrelevant.

  4. From that Q&A from SerB, I do not think they even care that historical battles will be successful. The historical battles flop is what finally drive me to warthunder.

    • I am noticing players actually utilizing tactics in WT. It was fun running around wildly when almost nobody knew what was going on, but now exploring the map and learning areas of advantageous terrain is important for success.

      Historical battles in WT are great…just remember whether you are shooting Russian or German for the match ;)

      • I am a WoT closed beta tester and believe me, I once had the same feeling of “wow, tactics are developing”.

        Those were the good times when everyone just rushed the field in Malinovka, no matter what tank they were driving and tactics were only a flavor of the month, changing regularly with every patch.

        Still, it is in no way indicative of how much the game itself actually supports or encourages tactical gameplay. I know you guys are all hyped up about WT and I am happy for you, but the game you will play in a year or two will be MUCH different to what you are playing now – so don’t jump to conclusions like “WT is much more tactical” so early.

        In case I misunderstood you, just ignore my comment. ;)

        • No player control Arty in WT and no players control planes in arcade battles in WT. I think I would still prefer WT in a year or two unless WOT finally gives us a no player control Arty battle option.

          • WT has Arty by using LTMTs…..they are even more OP than arties in WoT because it gives u a better overview of the map around you…..Stop the bullshit of WT is better because there’s no arty

            And WT has a really pathetic crew leveling system….Forcing players have to be masochist if they dont want to spend Golden Eagles, or spend alot GEs even the game is still in so called beta…
            Don’t get me started on the STRONK trees….

            p.s.I’m playing WT(up to the point to unistall it), in case you think I’m a troll

            • Another WOT fanboy. They just nerf Arty, it is inaccurate in WT so no one shot kills although it is a barrage and you actually get a warning when an arty barrage is about to hit you.

              Far more realistic than that piece of fantasy fake in WOT.

              Their premium tanks are also value for money as they are the same as tech tree tanks. Not nerf like in WOT.

              • Did I forgot to say I’m not a troll ,not a WoT fanboy as well so you will not accused me that…..

                WT arty are inaccurate….let me get an example;
                In low tier like Karelia when you just spawned at Spawn point 1, you go out, see bunch of enemies, fall back, use Arty, since too many of them cramp together at the corner you can still destroy one of them at least…

                And you didn’t disagree my point of WT Arty gives u better view range…so….?

                Realistic doesn’t mean better, vice versa….Maybe I’m too casual to enjoy WoT bit more than WT

                About premium tanks/planes…I only have one prem plane(Hagiri’s A5M4) given at the start, is ok until I face the Zhukovskys I-153-M62(and I-15/16s e.t.c) for the ones starting Russians….You probably know what I mean so I stop here

                quite a few prem tanks in WoT are alright; especially t5 and higher ones. If you dont like them you can still use normal tanks to grind FE, silvers, and training crew…
                The Super Pershing nerf pissed a lot of people(including me) but WG gives my money back…

                In WT some planes or even a nation is UP(Yes I’m looking at the Japanese tree)….since it has to be Realistic, Japan tree will be UP forever…If Gaijin at least make the Jap planes dont burn themself that often in Arcade I’ll be sticking of WT……but probably not
                And do I have to start the T-50 legend?

                At last, I just want to emphasize to people not to be persuading other one-sided to WT or WoT…..Both have their own flaws
                If they don’t like WT/WoT because whatever issue, they’ll quit and join the other one or even other games

                Not to remind this blog is for WoT mostly so please, anyone who prefers WT stay off. We aren’t dumb to choose which game suit us better.

                • The grass is always greener on the other side and in a few years or months it will be “god damn those stupid noobs are ruining the game” all over if the title is successful enough and attracts many players.

                  If not it will be like the CS classic scene with very few very dedicated players where you can highfive each other all day long for being part of the select elite that still sticks to the game.

                  Whatever floats your boat, I guess. But the best of both worlds? Nah, this will never happen imho.

                  P.S.: Please don’t be the “ZOMG YOU ARE NOT VEGAN?!? IT’S SO MUCH BETTER!!!!1″ guy. Those are online toy tank games we are talking about, not some kind of religion you have to go on some stupid jihad for. Everybody hates those guys. Don’t be one. Thx. ;)

                • Haters gonna hate :D

                  Japanese fighters are the most lethal in the game, in the right hands. Jap bombers are the most heavily armed. You lack the capacity to appreciate difference. Keep enjoying the rolling nerf game called WoT :D

                • @nononononono:

                  Lethal?…mobility and dogfight wise yes, but any gun can damage u badly, fuel tank leak and burn, or pilot/gunner knocked out….Not to mention Arcade mode is more like gang fight….with all the focus fire is hard to survive…

                  Bombers…I know they’re well armed on the back but I really don’t enjoy H6K4 and bombing is kind of boring….and nowadays killing bomber is ridiculous…My Ki-61′s 2×12.7 2×7.7 guns fully unloaded on a He.111 and still can’t kill it….
                  If you don’t believeme….watch Jingles’ video below

                  p.s. Do I’ve to emphasize again that if you like WT, carry on and don’t annoy people who like WoT that’s on this site…

                  @genosse: Your message seems replying to “nononononono” and “goff0103″ but u are replying to me…????

                • Sorry but this a Historical tank blog, the wot is inside because WOT was the only tank MMO game when the new FTR blog was created.

                  So stop being narrow minded WOT fanboy. And play better in WT instead of complaining about it in FTR. You want to give feedback give it in the bugs/suggestion forums in WT.

              • Why are you even coming here if you don’t like WOT you like to show us how advance you are that you are playing WT so you could feel better ? I have to laugh when ever I see such blinded person who see only in black and white.

  5. While I agree about the balance issues in HB, those can be fixed easily. As well as incentive to play lower tiers in HBs – I played it for medals and I usually took out my lower tiers (Wolverine, Pz IV, etc), not the top ones.

    Following is a repost from me replying to overlord’s latest feedback:

    “HB are pmuch killed right now – for everything that’s in the dropdown you have an EXTERNAL reason to go there (training – I need to test map, platoon / team – I want to play with friends, team / company – I need to train stuff) – except for HB. They need to be visible more, because otherwise there’s no incentive in playing them.
    Either of:
    - randomly playing with popup (you will get thrown into HB: Yes/No)
    - button for HBs in the main area (side by side with random)

    And possibly some kind of icon that tells you: YOU CAN PLAY HBs WITH THIS VEHICLE, because people will STILL forget.
    Sometimes I remember I’d like to play HBs, but usually I am like: “Meh, nobody will be there anyway.” which further decreases number of people inside…”

  6. Is weak idea. WG must change MM for this battle, other way it will not work.
    Bonus for XP or credits will not work, u lose any way. Better (etc) is give each person points for HB, if u try play good tank, u lose points, if u play weak, u get.
    Problem is in HB u must have tank i garage, so is not good, because other way u can force player to choose only battle, but like in LoL get all in preper battle window where u get one side (etc german/british) and with other ppl u must take tank avaible. So u not wait for battle. But if u can only take 1 tank (per site) is useless, all have best tank and story repeat.

  7. WG have brought HB too late. The player base that was chomping at the bit for HB when WoT first came out were more tolerant of the problems that HB are now facing as the game itself was kind of rough and were much more geeky about HB. Now everyone is conditioned into the way games are played. HB are a tough ask with in the limitations of WoT because the battles in real HB were not just tank on tank as the tanks on both sides were part of a bigger operation where a vast number of factors ensured that any tank actions were never balanced.

    The only way to save HB within Wot is not to expect any one battle to be balanced but to have HB campaigns that will be balanced over a number of battles by varying composition of tanks and the maps that they play on. That way the battles would reflect the discreet actions within the greater battle and every one would have a chance to win some battles. HB stats should be separate from normal game stats so that failing in HB does not damage ones overall WoT standing and there should be separate enhanced rewards for achievement in HB that reflect the commitment of taking part.

  8. One thing is to support playing little tanks by not only some funny 10% bonuses, which still will be nothing compared to bigger tanks, but make it 50, 100 or even 200% bonus, so you could actually earn something in those T-70′s, Pz.III’s and SU-76′s.
    And do the opposite to Tigers and SU-152′s. Nerf their income and XP gained big time.
    But that would probably solve only one part of HB problem – balance. The problem with no one playing them would be still actual and should be motivated much more actively by some huge missions, like those last SP and IS-6 ones and by adding more features to HB, like possibility to play in platoons, etc.

  9. I would also add a respawn or two for the lower-tiered vehicles (particularly in the case of those that would be of little use for anything besides scouting, like the Panzer IVH at Lake Balaton) in order to give people the opportunity to make mistakes, and thus an inventive to play the lower-tier vehicles without feeling too gimped. Unfortunately, implementing this would cause cries of theft of ideas from Gaijin’s War Thunder.

    • I agree with the respawn mechanism, also, enable premium tank behavior for these low tier tanks and people will play HB using these tanks. The battle mode should be combined with the Random mode, like the confrontation mode was.

    • Agree. Respawn (for common tanks), a ticket system, and HB as assault mode. And this was discussed in wot forums ages ago. I just fear that they can’t make the game engine tackle respawns.

  10. The time limit is a good idea, but i think the britishs would be clearly in trouble against such firepower.

    The only manner i see to balance this mod is to not allow the player to choose the tank he wants to play. The player choose the battle he wants to play, and that’s all. Even if the player don’t have the right tank in his garage he would be able to play with it for this battle, and the award would be a tiny bit of free xp and much more credits. This solution is also great for wargaming cause new player can directly play with “hightier” tanks (mid tier at least) and if they find them cool they’ll grind them. It would be purely random, the tanks would come with a standard module set up and standard equipment setup with 100% crew with no skills.

  11. the problem does not lie with the players, because well .. who would queue up with a lesser than OP tank!? no one
    the problem lies with WG that did a poor job with this mode

    the players should queue with all tanks (allowed in HB) and the MM chooses what tank they use once in battle, not the player

    HB was hyped ever since 2010 CBT, now delivered 4 years later …..

    • “the problem does not lie with the players, because well .. who would queue up with a lesser than OP tank!? no one”

      I do. So do a few others. There’s various reasons, because we’re cocky enough to think we can pull it off, because of Historical accuracy or because we want a challenge.

      So some portion of the blame lies with the players.

      • If the game is designed in such a way that the player’s laziness or lack of attention span beats the interest factor that is supposed to attract the said player to a game mode, or enables the players to break the said mode with normal, human, predictable behaviour, then I have three words for you:
        BAD GAME DESIGN. A well designed and thought out game mode would have people waiting in line. The problem is that this was cobbled together and given to the players much like when parents their a kid a shiny new toy just to shut him up, not thinking whether the kid really wants it or should get it, or if teh toy is even safe.
        To stop stretching metaphors, I believe the problems of patch 9.0 and HB mode are the product of WG producers pressuring the developers, and WG trying to pursue too many directions of development with not enough resources or will invested to produce a satisfying product.

  12. Why doesn’t WG implement a rooster similar to team battles? This way they can limit the high tier tanks by the amount of available pool points.

  13. I thought WG was going to make the weaker tanks more attractive?
    Here is just a thought of mine:

    Why not add Damage buffs to the Weaker tanks in HB? Like adding HB only equipments, so IE:

    If you have a KV-1 as best choice on 1 team, which is stock and has horrible pen, why not give the Pz. IV H a little damage buff on the top gun, giving it 125 damage per shot, instead of 110. Because there is nothing historical about damage points.

    Another example:
    When we had the battle of kursk and you had stock KV-1S’s fighting Tigers, the Tigers could barely be penned and if they were, they only lost 1/15th of their health…

    Maybe the Weaker tanks in HB should be given HB-only buffs to make teams more balanced.

    Another thought:

    WG does not have tanks like the Pz, III F, the Pz. IV C, Churchill Mk. II and the M4A1 Sherman. These tanks are in game, but have a different name.

    So, what if WG basically gives tanks dynamic names, so if you install a Pz. IV B turret on a Pz. IV A tank, that the name of the tank will change into Pz. IV A.

    This could also be like this:
    Stock KV-1S: Still named KV-1S.
    KV-1S given top turret, name changes to KV-85.
    KV-1S with top turret equips top gun, name changes to KV-122.

    Same for StuG III G:

    StuG III G
    StuG III gets the StuH 42 howitzer, name changes to StuH 42.
    StuG III G gets L/70, StuG III mit L/70.

    This idea is so simple and would be so much more interesting for the game, as it adds more historical accuracy. This way, HB names of tanks work better. Tanks with dynamic names would work much better.

  14. Everything needs to be automated, one-click and you’re in. The rewards need to be at least x2 of a normal Random game as well to get people interested and willing to wait a few minutes more.

  15. One-click would help A LOT.

    Another idea would be to allow you to pilot any tank that you’ve unlocked in historical battles. I’m not really keen on buying a tank that I’m not particularly interested in playing a lot of just to take part. Stugs and PzIVs are nice and all, but I have better things to put in my slots and man with my crews. Perhaps have the game auto-buy it all at half price and then sell when done, with a standard 100% crew (no skills)?

    Oh, now there’s a thought! Tanks in historical battles should behave as premium tanks for crews! There’s an incentive. I must admit that buying a PzIV and kitting it out isn’t as annoying as crewing the damned thing. I’d still rather not have to buy it at all if it’s unlocked, but this would go some way to making it better.

    Hit points are another huge problem. It works in the standard game, but taking the Ardennes as an example it’s not the armour or firepower of the KT so much as its huge health pool that lets it ignore multiple threats. In HBs, tanks should get relegated to a standard amount of HP based on their class. A KT would still have more than a Sherman and *far* more than a Hellcat, but not nearly FOUR TIMES the HP of a Sherman. (400/600/900 for TD/Med/Heavy?)

    But I’m going back to the problem of convincing people to buy a tank just to play historical. I’ve not played one, and this is the reason for it.

    • Completely agree. I have pz4 in garage, but I don’t have crew for it. And I don’t wanna use gold to get crew only for HB. It is easier to get battle on test server than on regular one.

  16. Not taking Hellcat into Ardennes for a challenge? Mind you that Hellcat in Ardenned has 76mm gun. Have luck in shooting Panther or Tiger II.
    In fact the best what American have in Ardennes is Jackson with 90mm, but as a vehicle isn’t popular, since everywhere else in WoT Hellcat performs better.

    If any, Ardennes should be an assault mode, where Germans have to assault. That would make them to move instead of just camping and waiting for US tanks to come and get killed.

    • Hellcats with the 76mmM1A1/2 can still flank Tiger II and Panther’s weak side armour……and consider the amount of Hellcats in Ardennes….

    • Yeah, but the Americans also have the numerical advantage. Tactically speaking, it would be suicide for the Germans.

  17. this is brilliant! listy your a genious, thx ss for posting this ur awesome 2

  18. TBH the whole HB User Interface, the way how and when you choose a tank should be changed in my opinion.

    Little list on what I think how it should have been:
    - first a players chooses his side in an HB battle, allies or axis
    - player can only choose a side in a battle if he meets requirements of: min 2 playable tanks available (*Example!)
    - MM consists of semi hardcaps on team setups,
    - player sees which tanks are required by the MM, which slots are already taken and which not.
    - player then selects his tank of choice which still has a free slot in the MM.
    - when all slots are filled battle commences.

    This though has a foothold in garage battles and that mechanism should thus be sort of implemented.

  19. The original of WoT is bring all kinds of different tanks together with arcade playstyle to balance……HB is not working on WoT if people want balance and playable gameplay…..

    WT HB works because there’s many bots and there’s not much balance in the first place…

    WG wasted too much resources on HB in WoT…..I rather carry on the usual bug fixing, new maps and tanks…

  20. give me a break with blaming the players… how about making it like randoms or team-battles!?!?!? select a few tanks from your garage that you would like to use and pres PLAY!!! send the players in the que and put them in random maps, it doesn’t matter, it’s the only way! OFC people want to play the Tiger but is it really that damn OP that a su-152 couldn’t take it out??? seriously , WG is to blame for the failure called HB that came with 9.0.

    • The players do have some responsibilty, who didn’t save up a space for a Tiger/JT/Pz4H/ISU/SU-152 for the HB when 9.0 is live? At least I did…

      HB shouldn’t come out in first place… the first time I think WG shouldn’t listen to their player’s desire :(

      • In my defense, I had the Tiger before I even knew HB was a thing, and I just didn’t have the time to grind any new tanks to play (though I also had the Tiger II and Panther M/10 for Balaton and the Ardennes, and the Churchill III and SU-85 for Kursk by the time the update went live – I just haven’t been able to get into any battle other than the Ardennes, and unfortunately the German side always lacked the coordination needed to deal with a Hellcat zerg rush).

  21. You have the standard random battles MM working pretty fine (at least compared to HBs) thanks to the fact that you CAN’T choose if you will be the top tier or not. Why does everybody wonder that HBs are simply overflowing with Tigers and SU-152 – it’s natural that players do not want to play as cannon fodder (I apologize to all true scouts out there) but choose the top available tier. You can’t possibly reenact the historic battle in a realistic way in WOT anyway so why do why bother with historically accurate setups that are simply not suitable for HBs due to the large tier differences? IRL, a T-34 could easily one shot a Tiger for example from an ambush position. In WOT? No way. All because of the arbitrary hit points which make a great difference.

    My expectation for HBs was mainly to be able to play with tanks of the same nation against their historic enemies – similar to the Confrontation mode but we all saw how Confrontation ended up and it could have been a sign for WG as far as HBs are concerned too.

    And my two cents to fix HB? Either let the players choose their tanks but put only the tanks of the SAME TIER against themselves – tanks of the same tier are pretty well balanced (with some exception). Or allow different tiers in one battle but players would have to have ALL tanks at least from 1 side (e. g. IS, KV1-S, SU-152) in the garage and the tank in which they would play would be chosen randomly – similar to the random tier placement in the random battles but here it would be the tank and not the tier that is chosen randomly just to eliminate the factor that (almost) everybody wants to be the top dog.

    • It sounds like you are asking for having confrontation mode back, which I think it was not so bad. It provided some variety to the random mode battles, you see I like the scouts … I loved to be in my MT-25 in this mode and help the KV1S to smash the Panzers.

  22. The first and last problem with Historical Battles is they’re trying to recreate a section of a battle with just tanks, when no battle was ever just fought or decided by tanks. 1. No battle in WW2 was purely just tanks – where are the mines, infantry, artillery, tactical airforces etc. and 2. Balance doesn’t exist in a real context, one side will always be superior in quality or quantity.

    Basically HB mode is terrible and cannot be fixed unless you pick very specific scenarios. There is a chance of making a few balanced games – North Africa springs to mind simply because you can have Tier 2, 3 and 4 tanks from both sides in 1941/2 battles.

  23. I can easily solve this problem but a., noone will listen b., noone will implement it. But i write it down anyways :D

    In order to solve the problem we have to bait the players and make them grind for the “rewards”.

    How to bait them? Simple. You don’t need the tank in your garage in order to play this mode. You won’t get any XP for the tank and a little amount of silver BUT you will receive 6x FREE XP if you win and 3-4x free XP if you lose (because we know how much the free XP is essential to this game).

    Now… How to get them play this mode over and over again WITHOUT forcing them to ragequit? By adding a “point-ladder”.
    Lowest tanks cost 0 point to play, they earn points (let’s say… 7 if they win, 4 if they lose). The next tier of tanks costs approx 15 points to get into battle, if you win you get 20 points, if you lose you get 10. The list goes on…

    So this way you won’t have to worry about everybody using the most OP tank and you will have a queue!!!

    PS: you still need to balance the tanks…

    • That bait idea is great. You could balance it a little by giving the out-of-garage tank an arbitrary sety 70-90 or 100% crew, that would not earn any crew XP, or by requiring the player to have the tank unlocked in the tech tree, or by giving the free XP only for top 5-10 players. WG have many mechanics that could work already. They could also exclude the top tanks from that feature, so you could drive an state-issue Pz IV, but to drive a Tiger, you’d need to have it available in garage.

      It would allow HBs to be a great option to play with friends without the need to keep lower tier tanks. Giving the tank an 100% crew, would advertise the importance of crew training (kind of a test-drive for 100% crew, maybe some players would spend credits/gold after seeing how good a 100% crew is), but would still leave room for dedicated players that would benefit from skills and perks.

      If HBs would be a fun alternative, it would push players to keep the historical vehicles in garage, making possibly the historical designs more popular in randoms which would be well-recieved by some people that don’t like prototypes and fantasy tanks.

  24. One click and your into the Historic Battle query. You are randomly placed into a tank with a crew that has random skill levels from 50% to 100%. Then you are placed into a briefing room that shows a map and objective with all the players on your side for a few minutes before the battle to talk tactics.

    Your statistics are tallied in a separate Historic Battle service record. 1. You learn to work as a team. 2. You do not need to purchase tanks as they will be provided randomly for each battle and taken away after said battle. 3. If you leave the battle because you don’t like your tank or team kill, you lose prestige in your Historic Battle service record.
    4. There will only be team chat.

    World of tanks can charge real money for decals to place on your garage tanks for achievements gained in historic battles.

      • I wouldn’t. First thing that is wrong with this idea is RNG possibly screwing You hard even before the battle starts, by giving You a shit crew. Secondly, why would You bar people from using their seasoned crews? Doing that will detach HB from any sense of progression within the game. Personally I would rather see it done as it was already proposed in this thread: tanks in HB should have a Premium status, so all crews trained in a given class can be used. Also, the lower the tier of the tank the bigger XP/Credits it should be earning. And contrary, big boys should have a really dificult time with gains from a battle. And any defeat suffered should really hurt them. Another thing that put me off HB was arbitrary removal of certain tanks, as “they would be useless”. Well, I’d rather decide it for myself. Being a scout fan, after Kursk had Panzer II removed it kind of lost the flavour to me. I recon that with good spotting crew and correct gear it could be quite useful, if played smart. Same applies to Marder II. So basically, if the tank fought historically, leave it in and let the players decide whether it’s useful or not.

  25. Here’s how Historic Battles should have worked.
    • There is a list of Historic Battles. You pick one, and click “Play”
    • The tank is auto-assigned to you. If you have a valid crew, then is uses it. If not, you are assigned a crew with a 75% rating. Not once does it use your tank. Just the crew.
    • There is no equipment, and no consumables
    • There is a random selection of maps. It picks one with appropriate scenery to the battle. There would be a list for each Historic Battle
    • Since it’s assigning tanks randomly, platoons are allowed
    • Battle begins as either Encounter, Standard or Assault. This is random. However, it will adjust teams accordingly in Assault/Defend, giving the attacker an extra tank or two, or the defender less
    • Credit and crew XP is x2 for all Historic Battles. If it’s an x2 Weekend, then these are additive. Historic Battles always give twice the amount as normal

    With this setup, battles would happen quickly. There would be no long queues where everyone wanted to play the PWN all Tigers or SU-152’s. It would also encourage people to have the right tanks, or at least the right crews in their garage, so they could earn XP. It would also still allow you play for grins and giggles, even if you didn’t’.

  26. Listy, i proposed this not so long ago: bonus to FREE XP. Compare how many tanks are in HB to all fantasy tanks – main incentive would be that you still can grind them while not playing them. And the weaker tank, the bigger bonus of course. We don’t need to put more words into this ;) to understand.

    SS, i kind of disagree, l43 has 103pen on AP so it goes through everything (a bit of skill and luck needed sometimes). Try playing Pz4d in randoms, it is a great machine and with good crew and intelligent player can mess with higher tiers.

    • Luckily the PzIV does not have to deal with Tigers, with 100mm frontal armour, If the tiger is more than 5 degrees angled, you cannot pen it. And that is before any RGN.

  27. Great it’s the players fault for not wanting to take the worst tank they have in to the battle?
    That’s how I always play this game, everyone wants to be the first tank oneshoted in the battle.

    Historic Battles no thanks!

    • I would play HB in low tiers if I can get more training for my crews in high tier tanks. But one challenge I noticed on HB mode is the radio coverage, this radio concept in WoT is all screwed; everyone expects to be able to see spotted tanks all over the map. Explain the HTs and ATs that they need to be near to the scouts to be able to see the lighted tanks. Maybe the HTs will understand, but ATs, no way.

      • The official word from WG is that radios are unimportant and not an issue. Trust me when I say I did try more then once to deal with that issue.

        • Maybe WG wants us to grind the 2 skills regarding the radio signal boosting that none does :-)

  28. They should get rid of the tank requirement and just use the mm to balance. just throw 30 players or whatever in to a lobby and have them balanced automatically. If people want to play HB, they will be happy being in something that is somewhat historically balanced (ie on ardennes, americans are automatically divided in to 40-50% M4s etc.). I know I wouldn’t mind, cause it would be cool to see some vaguely historical numbers rather than just everyone trying to find the most op tank.

    Its historical. Balance it to reflect history, not the current meta, even if that means taking some choice from the players.

  29. I am not playing these silly little tank mode battles so some Developer can get a stiffy over statistics. What a waste of resources.

  30. Why not just give massive bonuses for playing the less completive tanks and I mean massive like 200% more credits or xp.

  31. So why not do what we do with “assault mode”. Ability to turn it on or off? Someone gets in a hellcat and they can either be put in standard or HB. While people grind other historical tanks (Matilda, Hellcat, Churchill, T-34, ect) they can also leave the option to be put into HB. If there aren’t enough for HB then it just puts them in a standard match like any other.

    By doing so they would also have to enable the “historical load out” before any battles. When you get picked for a HB it auto changes your load out (pretty much like it does already when you click “load historical supplies”). That way no one gets left in a queue, no one can PLAN on being in a HB so they don’t all bring the good tanks.

  32. I only ever queued as Sherman, Panzer IV, and T-34. It’s much more fun to be one of a horde than the big lonely guy.

  33. There’s a second problem that Listy hasn’t mentioned IMO.

    The tanks that are in HB tend to be in tiers 4-8, with a couple of exceptions. That means most players already have them, and have already “gone past” them in the grind up through the tiers. A lot of players have actually rebought Stug and Panzers just to play HB.

    Problem is – when I play HB in my Hellcat, Stug, PzIV, Tiger etc what I basically get as a reward is some credits (which I could get more of running a premium tank in “regular battles”), some crew training, and a bunch of wasted tank xp because I have already unlocked the Tiger II, T-25/2, VK3601 etc from the HB tanks. Added to that, most players probably get less of those, because they’re mostly in HB tanks with stock guns, limited gold ammo etc.

    Weighting lower tier tanks might help a bit, but players wanting to spend time grinding (and most do) will quickly go back to playing normal battles simply to keep climbing up the trees.

    IMO – to solve the problem, give players something that they need, and they can’t get in “regular” battles – additional free xp (say 2x or 3x), biased towards the “low end” tanks.

    Do that and you’ll have people queing up for what is otherwise actually a fun game mode.

  34. “IMO – to solve the problem, give players something that they need, and they can’t get in “regular” battles – additional free xp (say 2x or 3x), biased towards the “low end” tanks.”

    Based on that:
    Recurring mission (once per day for each HB vehicle):
    Win 5 historical battles and come in the top 10 for experience.
    ~500 free XP
    Quantity of gold dependant on vehicle – i.e. Matilda = 10 gold, Cruiser II = 30 gold.

    That way, if you were to play through all the tanks in the Siege of Tobruk you’d earn maybe 100 gold and 2,500 free XP. As people would be unlikely to be able to ‘complete’ all the vehicles (~50 battles for an 50% player), there is choice between playing the strongest tanks, and earning more gold. Maybe even 0 gold reward for the top-of-the-table tanks.

    *Obviously subject to tuning