Comments by "Nattygsbord" (@nattygsbord) on "What Computer Games Get \"Wrong\" about War" video.
-
4200
-
Tanks in real life doesn't act like in World of Tanks. If the enemy shots off your track, you will need half and hour to repair it, you cannot do it instantly and you can absolutly not doing when the tank is still moving lol. Furthermore, if your tank gets penetrated by a shell its game over, its not like in games where you can take 4-5 hits before your tank gets wrecked. And if your tank takes serious damages, it can take many hours to fix.
And unlike WOT can't you turn your tank gun trough walls and destroyed tanks, like your tank was a ghost. And you cannot drive full speed into a mountain wall and backflip with your tank without serious damages.
And your tanks will also have to refuel in real life. And your tanks will be organized under a commander, instead all 15 tanks acting independently. And in real life will also vision be limited in tank combat, and often does the driver have the best view of the outside world. And tanks will have to take mines, infantry, planes, Anti-tank guns into consideration, and not just other tanks.
So its a tank game without much realism. Its for entertainment and not real life battle simulation like the game creators says. A realistic tank game would probably be pretty boring, as the game would be over as soon your tracks been blown off. And a single hit could take your tank out, so people would hide like cowards.
5
-
Things that annoys me:
-Ridiculus political assumptions in a game... like in Hearts of Iron when you control the entire UK plus a million provinces and the country still refuses to surrender because you havn't taken some bullshit province in far east Asia where the new capital is located.
And the Soviet Union sooner or later always attacks Germany... which I think is stupid. Since I think a Russian attack was unlikely in real life.
-Too many sci-fic units. When a game like panzer corps adds in some exprimental units to spice up the game it can be fun, but at some time its stop being a real world war 2 game, when most units are Maus, tortoise and IS3 tanks, and amerika bombers are dominating the skies.
- The stupid AIs in hearts of Iron that puts 100 divisions into Washington DC, and then you can wipe them all out with an atom bomb.
- The total lack of logistics which takes away any realism in any game. You cannot form a kettle to starve out an army, or having it suffer attrition by a long march through lands without resources.
- The inability of a game like Hearts of Iron to just make you able to temporarily demobilize your panzer divisions so they don't suck up supplies. It feels pretty dumb and unfair to having to delete your divisions completly and then rebuild them again and train the manpower.
In a realistic world I would just send the men home for a while until they are needed and the unit would be activated again. OR I would just transfer my veteran troops to the infantry so it could keep full combat strenght.
- Another system is production of units, which in itself needs technology, money, production capacity, manhours of work, inputs of resources... and an endless number of other factors.
But I can be satisfied with a simple system of purchasing price only, but when the price system is unbalanced the game play can get messed up. For example, in Panzer General II a german tank on average costed about 400 prestige... while a russian t-34 tank literarly costed 0 credits to buy. So even if you inflicted 10 times higher losses on the enemy, he could still throw endless numbers of tanks against you.
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1