Hello everyone, this is just a line of thinking about why World of Tanks armor, War Thunder damage model and all the things that these games have in common and all the things they are different in. Please note that this is my personal opinion, that I am not only not forcing on you, I fully admit I could be wrong – up to you, whether you agree with me or not. First and foremost, no matter how much ANY producer brags about realism or historicity (some stuff in War Thunder German tree still makes me chuckle, but then again, Waffentr├Ąger E-100 is a complete fake), both World of Tanks and War Thunder are arcade games. From that title alone it is relatively pointless to talk about some realism, when you watch the vehicles from 3rd person and have literally a sniper mode in both games. And that’s fine – they are games after all, meant for as wide audience as possible. This however means one thing: in this case, too much realism doesn’t help, it hurts. As you might have noticed, War Thunder developer Gaijin recently released two posts about the War Thunder tanks armor model. The articles are available here (part 1) and here (part 2). The only notice I’d have here is this: the translation into English is shit and I had to switch to Russian two times to figure out what exactly is meant. Please, Gaijin, next time you publish stuff in English, don’t act like Wargaming EU and don’t use google translate. Anyway, back to the armor model. To be honest, having “grown” on World of Tanks, I consider the model Wargaming uses to be the ideal blend of realism and playability. It’s simple enough to understand (apart from some weird situations), the basic principles are clear and even newbies can grasp it fairly easily. Looking at the War Thunder damage model however, I am worried and I would not want this level of “realism” in World of Tanks. I am specifically referring to the following points: - the amount of armor groups Detailed armor model is good, right? Well, not exactly. This is a typical example of “too much realism hurts”. You see, it’s really cool to have your armor model behave the way it (to an extent) did in real life, but this will also introduce unpredictable results. The entire frontal plate being (example) 120mm thick under 45 degrees? Nice and understandeable. 10 armor groups on upper front plate only? Ugh. Basically, it means that you cannot rely on shooting the general area, you have to aim at a specific armor group and unless your tank has laser-like accuracy, this will produce totally unpredictable results. It is also completely unhistorical (in real life, actually hitting the entire tank at combat distances was a success). In this case, less is more and looking at the disassembled armor model of the T-34, I cannot help but wonder, how will Gaijin deal with the amount of “why the hell did THAT happen” complaints - the amount of “modules” Yes, I understand War Thunder damage model works differently and I think that after reading up, I have some understanding how roughly it works. The thing is, there is a reason Wargaming did not go this way and the reason is “cripples”. Basically, unless you introduce real life rate of fire (if I remember correctly, the 122mm D-25 gun in IS turret was rated at cca 2 rounds per minute, which roughly corresponds to World of Tanks artillery), you will have tanks “spamming” shells, that could not exactly destroy a tank, but cripple it, because the entire damage model is based on module destruction. Realistic, yes, but again, possibly not the best game decision. Imagine a rapid-firing tank spamming one shell after another, each destroying or damaging something critical. The danger is that if implemented improperly, in the end, you will have swarms of half-dead tanks without crewmembers, with damaged engines and transmissions etc. limping around the battlefield. Doesn’t sound like fun. Let’s hope this situation will be avoided (but quite honestly, the way the modules are “packed” in the T-34 tank scares me). By the way, why separate radiator from the engine module? What will its destruction cause? - separation of transmission from the engine This is actually a good thing! This is also something Wargaming should do. The entire “front transmission” engine fires bullshit (that concerns German tanks) is not historical (as Hilary Doyle confirms, there were no specifical fire cases caused directly by transmission fluids), it is a game decision and a de-facto nerf of certain tanks. Speed reduction sounds more like it. Good idea. - spalling I think modelling spalling effect like this is a terrible idea. For one, it can obviously potentially create more cripples (crewmembers being hit by the metal shards). The way it is displayed in the second part of the damage model preview looks really complicated and complicated in this case means bad. Spalling will produce even more unpredictable results. Once again, Wargaming has it better. In World of Tanks, you shoot and you can roughly guess, what the shell will do. In War Thunder, it looks like the RNG factor will be through the roof, as you will roll a RNG hit on the gun, then on the armor group it lands on and THEN you have the spalling effect. Again, realistic (spalling was indeed a real threat), but unpredictable. The way it is written, it reminds me of spamming lowtier HE: completely random effects, sometimes you get nearly 0 damage, sometimes you get oneshots. This is NOT what I’d like in a game and this amount of RNG will make the game unviable for e-sports. - armor quality Oh god, not this shit again. Wargaming basically cancelled armor quality modifier very early on (some of the older players might remember there was such a thing), because it was unintuitive (producing even MORE unpredictable results), but also because it was partially unhistorical. Take for example the German armor. There is this bullshit myth running around about the German armor being inferior by the end of the war (Doyle answers otherwise, even though US reports point out the general brittleness of German armor). It’s mostly a myth – but then again, so is the crap about German armor being somehow superior. The truth is, the only nation, that was using truly inferior steel for tanks was Japan (and partially Italy, Hungary steel was for example on par with German in quality up to RHA plates of (IIRC) 60mm). Soviet steel quality was also actually good, but welding was problematic (according to Continue reading →

More...