The game is broken when it tries to follow reality by using realistic units, but giving them un-realistic functions.
Wrong. You are expecting that a T80 is supposed to act like a T80 but that's what a sim is, not a game. It is your opinion that it's "broken" because you are expecting something where as others can plainly see it for what it is.
You are wrong Sir!
Game can be a simulator (simulator games like DCS: Black Shark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0utEsx4wVc
) or Simulator can be a game (like Steel Beast Pro: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDC5W8iHF6M
RTS isn't simulator but simulator can be presented as RTS if its realistic. Eugen developers (or at least their PR department) has said that WG:EE has units what work like realistic counter parts. It is their words, not mine!
And game can be serious or casual (and other things as well). A definition of video game doesn't mean it can not be realistic. A video game is about that game is interactive on screen.
Is your definition of "game" that it is casual and simple what is only way to have fun game? In other words, simulator can not be a game?
"My Honda Civic is broken because it can't do 300kph."
pssst...it's not a Ferrari...
Your car analogy does not work at all.
In game, WP and NATO vehicles has almost identical features because game has wanted to be in balance and accessible.
Really? "Almost identical"? Name 5 and not LOG trucks please.
Check units firing ranges (example top AA missile units, BUK-M1 35km vs Chaparral 9km but "hey, lets give both same 4200m range!") and then how units are limited to same ammunition (example no way to change what to shoot against soft and armored targets) when they should have different types for different targets.
Like it is stupid that all modern MBT's are limited to same specific firing range when they could actually shoot much greater distances if they just have change to have fire control to give them target solution so terrain should be the limiting factor, not artificial "range" like 2275m. So with MBT's it is usually 1925m vs 2100m vs 2275m depending their era (not to forget the latest patch to lower medium tank ranges to 1575m).
RTS can not be simulator, but RTS can be realistic.
Guess you never played Harpoon...
Actually I have, but Harpoon isn't RTS but simulator of commanders and other naval officers how they fight the naval attack (it isn't today that you sail few hundred meters from enemy ship and fire your cannons and then get close to try capture the ship.). Harpoon has as well version (like Steel Beast Pro) for serious training use.
If one WP side ATGM can destroy targets over 5km but NATO only between 2-3km, then it is so.
You cannot make WEE uber realistic and expect a happy community as WP will just romp NATO every time, just as predicted in RL. And to make it realistic, at least in your eyes, you would have to include fixed-wing assets too.
Yes, fixed wings would need to be added but that wouldn't be such problem if left limited.
And NATO didn't have comparable units what WP had in first eras of Cold War but later they had better units. Still, different doctrines will help a lot, not that you place same type unit against each other what happened in WG:EE, like when someone brought T-80, it was almost always best to bring Leopard 2A4 or M1A1 against it and then use little tactics because units has similar stats.
(there isn't "über realistic" as game either try to be realistic one or not. The "über realistic" would be the reality to realistic ones)
So many whines are worthless because they are only based to un-realistic behaviors of "so called realistic units".
No. Most people raise concerns about balance because they see WEE for what it is; a game. YOU slap the "unrealistic" label on things and then proceed to judge all of us that see this great game for exactly what it is...a great RTS. Eugen puts the word "realistic" into that quote you posted and you seem to do exactly what I said; take things to the nth
Sorry, but now I need to ask, are you idiot? (And that is just a question!). Most people don't understand that developers sells this game (and yes, I know it is a game, as it is so unclear for you) as RTS what has over 300 realistic units, what are not realistic at all but their features limited very widely to fit for very specific casual game what does not try to be realistic under "skin".
(And if you still wonder, "Realistic" doesn't mean that units needs to be physical or that game needs to be a simulator like if it is a RTS game what WG:EE is, it just means units has own features as it does in real counter part. Like if real counter part had missile what could destroy enemy vehicle from 5km, and other side didn't have anything like it, then it is so. You don't go and remove them or limit its features for "balancing reasons". Then you either drop the whole unit from game or you find other way to balance the game with realistic manners.)
Like what the thread is about, helicopters have unrealistic RPM's only for balancing reasons, not for following the realistic counter parts (what would demand that game engine can model different firing solutions per unit like 5-100 bursts)
I am not demanding simulator here, because WG:EE can not be a such but it can be realistic RTS and when developers say that:
Every one of the 300 units in the game possesses realistically rendered performance and behavior.
, game should be where their mouth is.
And here you are against what people expect game to be what as it is said to be by developers. WG:EE has (had if devs don't release SDK) change to be a great modern war RTS game with realistic behavior, but it demands unit follow as much as possible their counter parts in real life.
With SDK, those who want casual game of WG:EE could happily play it as it is. But those who want to have serious RTS game, could have modification of it for more realistic behaviors.
If still you are against that game should not be toward realistic behavior, then say to webmins that they change the game description to reflect game and not to dictate something else.
If game does not promise to be realistic one with every unit, then there is no reason to even discuss that helicopters should strafe, MBT's should have better range or correct terminology should be used because game does not try to be realistic but casual one so mistakes and un-realistic behaviors can be allowed in game.