Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

War Thunder : WoP - simmers wet dream

KoolNoodles

Arcane
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
3,545
I have to say, I fired the game up and have played around for a few hours. First impressions: It's not a simulator, but it works fairly well. Damage is modeled in an okay way. You can take down "high-tier" planes with some good hits and moves even in the shittiest of planes. Feels less crappy than WoT. It's also less boring than Wo2. The grind is still there, but in just a few battles you can hop into a plane that can take down the big boys almost as fast as they get you. No IL-2, obviously, it's an arcade sim. Still, kinda fun.
 

Father Walker

Potato Ranger
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
1,282
Well, the game has three realism settings. Arcade battles are run on the lowest one. Check out historical battles if you want more realism.

Anyway, playing it for a few days now and it's still fun. People bitch that my Spitfire is OP, but fuck them :smug:
 

SkullSplitter

Educated
Joined
Mar 17, 2012
Messages
27
I got a beta invite and I've been playing it, it's very pretty!! The flight model feels really smooth--too smooth. You can do SICK turns and maneuvers without stalling unlike in IL-2. The machineguns are also much more powerful than the peashooters in IL-2.

Though I don't like that you can't choose your team, or add friends, or get an awesome plane from the getgo (without paying). :L
 

KoolNoodles

Arcane
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
3,545
Well if they keep the same progression in the release, I don't see why anybody would have to pay much, if anything, unless they want a maxed out crew or fancy side plane like the P38J. Most of the nations, except the US, can get a pretty decent(read: cannons) plane at level 2, which you can get to within a couple of hours of game play. Once you get an interceptor/fighter with cannons, you can blast anybody out of the sky fairly easily. Survivability might still be low because of less speed/"armor"/maneuverability, but you can still dish it out.
 

Destroid

Arcane
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
16,628
Location
Australia
Does it have the same god planes as Il-2 in the Spitfire and La-7?

Can you fly the Il-2 with twin 37mm cannons? That was a fun bird.
 

Father Walker

Potato Ranger
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
1,282
Well, Spitfires are pretty powerful. Judging from the amounts of bitching, they are the most OP planes at the moment.
 

KoolNoodles

Arcane
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
3,545
Yeah, Spitfires are OP because of the way cannon damage is modeled, but most of the planes' flight/damage models aren't even implemented yet, so hopefully that will change. The IL-2 is a beast, with cannons, rockets, bombs, etc. They are going for historical accuracy on the weapons here, which is why you see 10 different bomb types for Japanese bombers. People had to wikipedia what they even meant to find the right bombs for the right missions(some are high-explosive, and some are armor-piercing types for ships). Really, it seems like they are putting a lot of thought into it, and in "realistic" mode the planes handle much much more like a flight sim. I've had wings shredded, fuel leaks, multiple engines knocked out on a bomber, crew killed/unconscious, fuel tank explosions, engines on fire(which you can try to put out by reducing throttle and diving), and all that good damage stuff.

It's shaping up to be some pretty fun flight sim-ish multiplayer action.

I guess saying some of this is a breach of NDA, but w/e.
 

Father Walker

Potato Ranger
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
1,282
I pilot British planes myself, so I can't judge how badly OP are Spitfires. Mk Vc is a beast, though, since having 4 cannons means that most of the planes are shredded as soon as you hit them. Piloting Spits exlusively is pretty hard in arcade mode, because repair costs are pretty high. That's why I've decided to stick with Hurricanes and cheaper Spitfires. I don't even use Spit Mk Vc, since it's too expensive to earn good money most of the time.

I'm not an expert, but FM in "realistic" mode is good. I've crashed more than once due to my shitty piloting skills.
 

overtenemy

Augur
Joined
Sep 6, 2007
Messages
293
Simmer's wet dream is a complete misnomer for this one. Though it might one day be pretty fun if they implement the World War dynamic campaign feature well, I have serious doubts that this will ever be a proper sim. At the moment, people are giving it leeway because the flight models are incomplete. The reality of the situation is however that most of them are incomplete. The game features several planes with their FMs finished. One such aircraft is the BF 109 E-3. Flying on the "historical mode" (yeah right, I'll get to that in a bit) it feels ridiculous. Almost impossible to stall, turns like a champ while barely burning energy. There's very little feedback for your aircraft achieving unacceptable levels of angle of attack or too many G's, aside from a big red blinking message that says "OVERLOAD!" if you pull too many G's...not that I've ever actually managed to damage my plane going at 700 KM/H+ in this supposedly completely flight model. The controls would be fairly unresponsive at that point in an early 109. The weaponry is also modeled pretty poorly at the moment, not just in the above mentioned absurd power of the Mark Vc Spit, but in the ballistics; cannons are fuckin laser beams. Maybe they'll fix that, maybe not. Moving on.

I fly historical mode most of the time because arcade mode is mostly retarded (has a freaking dot telling you where to aim lawl). But even historical mode, which uses "realistic" settings, has a minimap, giant icons showing you where everything including ground targets are, an open cockpit so you don't have to see your cockpit or wings, and once again the flight model even on completely planes is silly. The potential of historical mode was that you're tasked with destroying enemy ground targets so that your forces may either repel an enemy attack, or attack the enemy successfully. Friendly tanks will rush enemy positions and based on whether or not you've done a good job, win or lose. The problem here is that typically a historical map is 10v10, planewise, and once the enemy loses all of its planes the other side automatically wins regardless of the state of the ground battle. How well the bombers did becomes moot. What this translates to in practice is that unless your entire team consists mainly of bombers, winning through destruction of ground targets is highly improbable. I've only seen it happen twice. More likely, the game is simply air Counterstrike, where you win by annihilating the enemy team. This demonstrates the gamism, rather than simulationism of War Thunder. The irony is that arcade mode is typically won by doing the objectives rather than killing the enemy because you can respawn in different planes.

Further, the playerbase appears to be largely shit. Most everyone plays arcade which is fucking pathetic. And the people who do play historical have almost no flying sense. They don't attempt to gain altitude with fighters of any kind, allowing me even in a piece of shit plane to choose when and where I want to fight, with hilarious consequences. In a Soviet I-16, I have killed a FW-190 D-13. In a 109 E-3, I've destroyed an La-7. These are but two examples of people being stupid as fuck because they probably haven't played a sim before. It happens alot. Although, that's somewhat positive beacuse it means higher tiered planes don't mean an automatic win...but really, taken altogether, it's quite silly. I hope it improves.
 

KoolNoodles

Arcane
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
3,545
Simmer's wet dream is a complete misnomer for this one.....

:bro:

Although I like the game, I completely agree with you there and really hope that the closed/open beta phases allow them to "fix" a lot of problems and update all the models. I still think it's pretty fun, but yeah, it's crap as a sim compared to IL-2 etc.(games I love). I've had a lot of fun doing co-op missions as well. I think there's a lot of potential but right now the damage/flight models are bringing the game crashing down to earth. Arcade mode is of course, bullshit(and after the initial fun of just dicking around blowing shit up, gets old), but sadly the only good way to earn XP/Lions right now.

Playerbase is indeed shit, no argument there. The forums are a mess.

Also, you can turn that dot off and other things in the options, I did that almost immediately and have been trying to fly only from the cockpit. I know this puts me at a pretty huge disadvantage over almost every other pilot, but......whatever.
 

KoolNoodles

Arcane
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
3,545
I would also encourage sim-lite fans to give this game a whirl, try out realistic missions with joystick too. Or anybody who thinks shooting planes/bombing ships/tanks sounds fun in a well-made, good looking sim-ish game. I'm not sure if they can pull off the scope they are going for, but it sure is ambitious and atm pretty fun.
 

Dim

Not sure if advertising plant?
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Messages
562
Location
Syndi Vegit notanatzi
For me, who has no joystick and a meh screen, the games are about even atm. NDA! Even 'flow' interruption, but one has better level system. Controls for both are not good enough, either I can't hit or cant maneuver tightly.
 

fizzelopeguss

Arcane
Joined
Oct 1, 2004
Messages
762
Location
Equality Street.
For me, who has no joystick and a meh screen, the games are about even atm. NDA! Even 'flow' interruption, but one has better level system. Controls for both are not good enough, either I can't hit or cant maneuver tightly.

Agreed completely. Neither game feels good enough currently.
 

KoolNoodles

Arcane
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
3,545
You do not need a joystick or even to be that great at handling M+K to be a decent flyer in War Thunder. The controls are really not that bad. Look into your settings. If they are set on one of the "more realistic" modes then yeah, you'll fly like shit, but if they are set at the "mouse look" mode, or whatever the simplest is, then you should be more than fine.

That critique doesn't include historical missions etc., which have a slightly different, slightly harder flight model atm. Maybe it's because I have enjoyed IL-2 and such in the past, but WT is pretty damn easy to get into and start flying around.
 

Dim

Not sure if advertising plant?
Joined
Feb 24, 2012
Messages
562
Location
Syndi Vegit notanatzi
The red arrows indicating enemy need to be more opaque. Starting 15km from any kind of action is the opposite of fun. Pls make it 3km. As for the turning and tight maneuver, I can either use the wasd keys and not see where i'm going, horribly overshoot especially on roll and have my mouse camera give a misorder OR turn at half speed with the mouse. Where is the mouse as joystic control scheme? I am pretty sure all of the control complaints apply to WoT2:WoWp except the 'horribly overshoot'. There everyone uses keyboard only and no-one can kill anyone else ever.
 

KoolNoodles

Arcane
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
3,545
Well they already reduced map size by a quarter(from 100% to 75%), and I think that's fine. The battles are meant to just constantly throw people into the "fur ball". There are some tactical things to be aware of that the space of the maps allow. More space is good for bombers that want to gain altitude and come in at ships or land targets from several kilometers out, for instance. I think the maps are pretty good as is for the arcade mode. It's not an fps, it's trying to be a flight sim, gonna have to do some flying.

As for your M+K troubles, I'm not sure what to say. Mouse aim works pretty well for me with M+K, and realistic works pretty well with a joystick. Maybe get a few more battles to work out the kinks.
 

GreatPretender

Educated
Joined
Nov 1, 2012
Messages
190
The red arrows indicating enemy need to be more opaque. Starting 15km from any kind of action is the opposite of fun. Pls make it 3km. As for the turning and tight maneuver, I can either use the wasd keys and not see where i'm going, horribly overshoot especially on roll and have my mouse camera give a misorder OR turn at half speed with the mouse. Where is the mouse as joystic control scheme? I am pretty sure all of the control complaints apply to WoT2:WoWp except the 'horribly overshoot'. There everyone uses keyboard only and no-one can kill anyone else ever.

Arcade will not be the main mode in future.
 

Bony

Learned
Queued
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
295
War thunder 9/10

wowp 1/10
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom