Jump to content

Close Air Support in Ground RB: Updated Version Post-1.71


@ Landkreutzer

 

You can argue if their (Gaijin) approach is the right one or not, yet the success of the game with rising player numbers since 2012 shows they do something right.

Which rather supports the thought they do something right. Even if You might think otherwise.

 

Gaijin is at least for a long term in the business and earning money for a living with the decisions they make.

And tbh. I doubt they care if you  or me or someone else leaves for a certain change they implement if that brings 5 players per leaver into the game. Simple as that.

On the end they are here to make money with the game and they will do whatever is needed out their view to keep this going.

 

And we might consider their Idea of how the game should be as wrong. But on the end it is their creation  that belongs to them and they alone have the right to do with it and in it what they want.

It is really as simple as that.

 

@Stank Faust

 

back then basically all Flight sims that were not Single/dual player (Parallel / Serial cable connection) or Lan 4 playergames had simplified Flight modi due the amount of data that an physically correct one 

would have produced.

Hardly doable back then via Dial in Modems, which you needed to support if you wanted the mass amount of players.

The reason later services like KALI came up to support multiplayer for those games that used to be MMo only via dial in.

 

 

 

 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Sidiros said:

 

Just out of curiosity,  do you play everything in Ground RB?    I think you do.

 

When playing everything do you think that would be a good dynamic with CAS being higher spawn costs and Clean fighters being lower?     If you were to play as a Fighter right off the bat under those rules (using up all of your spawn points in the process:)   what would you be doing while you wait for those higher costing CAS to show up?      I'm for lower Fighter costs mind you; however, I think CAS costs are also good where they are or should be lower.    I honestly would like to see a fixed point allotment for RB though and do away with earnings in general.      The main issue I see is that they are just not consistently present to create a good dynamic with.

 

I can tell you that the times I played the P-38 (favorite all time Aircraft) and was hunting CAS; most of the time I was circling the AIr spawn point waiting for CAS to show up and it sucked.

 

I personally think SPAA are fine as they are a low cost counter (although not that powerful in average hands.)    It's the fact that you have nothing to do until CAS shows up that's a pretty substantial issue as they are not ready when Air shows up.    You're stuck just waiting around; hoping a target spawns.     SPAA players would be much better and effective if they had targets early on.    Normally they're only 150pts to spawn as they are typically lower BR than the rest of player's lineups.

 

Even without Cap-n-fly.   As soon as someone had enough points to spawn one,  SPAA wouldn't be ready (as they're harder to get),  Fighters/SPAA wouldn't be ready and that player that went out of his way to find a good position would be Frustrated when a 2,000lb bomb came down on his head.

 

Right now I can pretty much kill anything I want with US planes sporting 1,000lbers or better.     I get 4 Aircraft spawns if I want (2 Fighter bombers and 2 Attacker/Bombers)  and can pretty much chain spawn them once you get rolling due to the much higher earnings..     I can't see them unnerfing bombs now with Strategic ordinance in the game; especially, now that they've trained pilots to be better at pinpoint attacks.

 

Heck, just nerfing Aircraft spawn point earnings (to be inline with tanks) and combining Bomber/Fighter categories (to stop the abuse of two different spawn point doublings to pull from) would help a lot.     If they did any simple fix to test the waters;  that would be the one to pursue as it seems obviously broken.

 

 

edit- I also think bomb splash now is good; however, it shouldn't require strategic ordinance to obtain it.   I think 1,000lb bomb splash as is currently should be 500lbers and limiting ordinance to that bomb size (and increasing the splash to match current 1,000lbers) would help all nations as it would open up way more aircraft to utilize.    With the way it is now;  traditional CAS aircraft is pretty much garbage due to the balancing around those Strategic bomb sizes.

I do play all kinds of tanks and many kinds of planes.

 

Pure fighters would likely spawn on both teams and the fighters would be duking it out. Whichever team ended up winning the initial fighter engagement would then be able to have CAS on their side spawn more safely and be able to intercept enemy CAS that spawns.

 

With a much greater variety of AI targets that could compete with “plane vs player tank” actions in overall score, this would draw away a good deal of stuff raining down from planes. Planes would still be able to help win matches, but they wouldn’t need to bomb/rocket all player tanks to oblivion to do it.

 

If SPAAG all had lead indicators, more players would spawn them and use them, guaranteed.

 

I don’t think strategic size ordinance will be going anywhere, I understand your desire to limit bomb sizes to 1000lb/500kg or less, but it’s probably not going to happen. If smaller bombs get buffed like you and I want, there will always be some people using larger bombs just for the chance of a multi-kill.

 

I could see spawn point earnings being curbed to what tanks earn, but I’d prefer to see tank on tank and tank on plane earnings increased to what plane on plane and plane on tank get. Same with scoreboard points, SL, and RP.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, warrior412 said:

 

He could have just as easily come in a tank and killed you then.

 

20 seconds is also extremely doubtful too.

 

But I can counter a tank.... 


He would also have to cross the entire battlefield, to the enemy side... giving a chance for him to die.

 

CAS as it stands is like a CoD killstreak call in that is guaranteed 1-2 kills.  Why is 20 seconds or so doubtful? Even 30 is fast. You air spawn, you dive instantly and hit 700kph. You don't have to circle and look for the enemy, you don't have to climb. Just spawn and dive straight away with WEP. Ez pz. 

Edited by DaffanZ
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, MH4UAstragon said:

I don’t think strategic size ordinance will be going anywhere, I understand your desire to limit bomb sizes to 1000lb/500kg or less, but it’s probably not going to happen. If smaller bombs get buffed like you and I want, there will always be some people using larger bombs just for the chance of a multi-kill.

 

I'd limit max bomb sizes to 500lb/250kg...     That's a decent CAS size and increase the damage of those to current 1000lb/500kg performance along with pushing up the smaller bomb sizes slightly.    It would make a whole slew of traditional CAS aircraft more competitive and make the Nation capabilities closer.

 

40 minutes ago, MH4UAstragon said:

 

I could see spawn point earnings being curbed to what tanks earn, but I’d prefer to see tank on tank and tank on plane earnings increased to what plane on plane and plane on tank get. Same with scoreboard points, SL, and RP.

 

Yeah, I like my respawns and would prefer more; however, I think lowering the Aircraft earnings might work better as there are a lot of players that like the lower amount of respawns.   Heck, a lot of players exit out of a match after one vehicle is lost.    Allowing more Tank spawn point earnings equivalent to what Air gets would drastically increase the amount of player respawns in a battle.   

 

It's not uncommon for me to be able to get 7 respawns in Ground RB if I'm going nutty. 

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Sidiros said:

I'd limit max bomb sizes to 500lb/250kg...     That's a decent CAS size and increase the damage of those to current 1000lb/500kg performance along with pushing up the smaller bomb sizes slightly.    It would make a whole slew of traditional CAS aircraft more competitive and make the Nation capabilities closer.

Or just give German, Russian, Italian, Japanese, and perhaps select French planes better CAS options to keep up with spam of bigger weapons on American and British planes.

 

Still balance things around 250kg/500lb bomb sizes, but make more effective ordinance cost noticeably more spawn points.

 

A P-47D with 3x 500lb bombs and 10 rockets would cost probably cost 1350SP (base 1000pt cost for CAS plus 50SP per effective ordinance launch), while a P-47 loading 2x1000lb, 1x500lb, and 10 rockets would cost 1600SP.

25 minutes ago, Sidiros said:

Yeah, I like my respawns and would prefer more; however, I think lowering the Aircraft earnings might work better as there are a lot of players that like the lower amount of respawns.   Heck, a lot of players exit out of a match after one vehicle is lost.    Allowing more Tank spawn point earnings equivalent to what Air gets would drastically increase the amount of player respawns in a battle.   

 

It's not uncommon for me to be able to get 7 respawns in Ground RB if I'm going nutty. 

With more SP per kill, three kills or two plus a cap would be required to spawn any kind of serious CAS plane. Meanwhile clean fighters and SPAAG would be nowhere near that pricey.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, DaffanZ said:

But I can counter a tank.... 


He would also have to cross the entire battlefield, to the enemy side... giving a chance for him to die.

 

CAS as it stands is like a CoD killstreak call in that is guaranteed 1-2 kills.  Why is 20 seconds or so doubtful? Even 30 is fast. You air spawn, you dive instantly and hit 700kph. You don't have to circle and look for the enemy, you don't have to climb. Just spawn and dive straight away with WEP. Ez pz. 

In that one instance of revenge bombing I was damaged by, it took roughly 30-45secs for the T29 player I killed to come back in an F6F-5.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MH4UAstragon said:

Or just give German, Russian, Italian, Japanese, and perhaps select French planes better CAS options to keep up with spam of bigger weapons on American and British planes.

 

Still balance things around 250kg/500lb bomb sizes, but make more effective ordinance cost noticeably more spawn points.

 

A P-47D with 3x 500lb bombs and 10 rockets would cost probably cost 1350SP (base 1000pt cost for CAS plus 50SP per effective ordinance launch), while a P-47 loading 2x1000lb, 1x500lb, and 10 rockets would cost 1600SP.

 

That's a whole lot of tweaking...      I'd still prefer to totally get rid of the bunker busters though regardless of the costs...     Does anyone think it's a good thing to have those dam busters in a Combined arms game?

 

Quote

With more SP per kill, three kills or two plus a cap would be required to spawn any kind of serious CAS plane. Meanwhile clean fighters and SPAAG would be nowhere near that pricey.

 

I gotcha..    Those points would also be usable for more ground spawns though; which, would increase the amount of vehicles used in a battle if Tanks earned as much as current Air does.   It would also further magnify the balancing difficulties as players that only use one spawn and exit would have much more of a negative impact.  I think scaling back Aircraft spawn point earnings would be a less drastic change keeping with the "realistic" aspect of the mode.

 

Either way though Air and Ground having similar Spawn point earnings would be far better than what we have now.

Edited by Sidiros
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, OldDeadMan said:

I wonder what this would look like if someone randomly audited a replay from everyone here? Would the numbers match the reported experiences? Would be interesting to find out!

 

I've made a few youtube vids of the spawn point earnings shenanigans...      I don't play anymore and can only post here due to some testing I was doing for a standalone OSS app and wwiilogs.com.   I'm not sure you'll find too many recent replays from me.

 

I quit playing due to most of what is discussed here.  

 

I should do some testing tonight and can get a 7 spawn vid if you want....   It's a pretty wreckless way to play though and requires a lot of Jumping out of planes to fit within the match time.

 

 

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Sidiros said:

I gotcha..    Those points would also be usable for more ground spawns though; which, would increase the amount of vehicles used in a battle if Tanks earned as much as current Air does.   It would also further magnify the balancing difficulties as players that only use one spawn and exit would have much more of a negative impact.  I think scaling back Aircraft spawn point earnings would be a less drastic change keeping with the "realistic" aspect of the mode.

And the side effect of more tank spawns in general means that losing one to a plane suddenly isn’t a match-ender for most people, unless they bring just one tank only and have no backups for it.

55 minutes ago, Sidiros said:

That's a whole lot of tweaking...      I'd still prefer to totally get rid of the bunker busters though regardless of the costs...     Does anyone think it's a good thing to have those dam busters in a Combined arms game?

I don’t see a problem with it if the ordinance penalties in flight performance would be made more severe. A loaded P-47D or AD-2 shouldn’t be able to outmaneuver much of anything till its dropped its payload first. Yet in some cases I see loaded planes manage to do so.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MH4UAstragon said:

 

I don’t see a problem with it if the ordinance penalties in flight performance would be made more severe. A loaded P-47D or AD-2 shouldn’t be able to outmaneuver much of anything till its dropped its payload first. Yet in some cases I see loaded planes manage to do so.

That's because instructor and mouse aim is so good at smoothing everything out, in addition to combat ranges being extended by 100% a lot of RB engagements are ended by prophanging or sniping which heavy ladened aircraft can still do, especially when you have 6-8 .50cals just spraying like mad, therefore heavy maneuvering isn't really as impactful or required. In SB with max ordinance on a P47 taking off is an ordeal because you barely just get over the trees and forget climbing even to 1500 meters. 

 

Any sort of extreme pull on the stick and your plane will start shuddering and stressing like crazy, and even in some cases like the KingCobra with 3x 500 will 'flick' over and you instantly have to apply rudder to stabilize. Both a combination of the engine being in the back so center of weight is different and  the bombs. It's almost impossible to feel shudders/stress in RB and flicking over is impossible.

Edited by DaffanZ
  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DaffanZ said:

That's because instructor and mouse aim is so good at smoothing everything out, in addition to combat ranges being extended by 100% a lot of RB engagements are ended by prophanging or sniping which heavy ladened aircraft can still do, especially when you have 6-8 .50cals just spraying like mad, therefore heavy maneuvering isn't really as impactful or required. In SB with max ordinance on a P47 taking off is an ordeal because you barely just get over the trees and forget climbing even to 1500 meters. 

 

Any sort of extreme pull on the stick and your plane will start shuddering and stressing like crazy, and even in some cases like the KingCobra with 3x 500 will 'flick' over and you instantly have to apply rudder to stabilize. Both a combination of the engine being in the back so center of weight is different and  the bombs. It's almost impossible to feel shudders/stress in RB and flicking over is impossible.

I’ve played planes in SB in the past and P-47s specifically were not hard to take off with. Hell, most planes I’ve flown in Sim were relatively easy to take off and land, probably the hardest was the “tutorial” LaGG or whatever they have you fly.

 

Granted, I haven’t played Sim in a while, due to being salty about the mode receiving multiple nerfs due to fixes in other modes for other modes’ problems. 

- MK103 nerfs (several, all impacting their ability to kill AI Medium Tanks, there was nothing wrong at all with the gun oneshotting AI in EC when mouse aim was taken out of the equation)

- nerfs to all other AT guns vs those bot tanks

- inability to zoom in on some planes without going into the dumb scope view.

- flight model nerfs to the Me-410, formerly my favorite plane to fly in Sim. 

- and then severely curtailed rewards on everything in Sim EC, which doesn’t make much sense to begin with given that Sim is leagues harder to fly in than RB. Removes any incentive to play the mode over RB honestly.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, OldDeadMan said:

I wonder what this would look like if someone randomly audited a replay from everyone here? Would the numbers match the reported experiences? Would be interesting to find out!

 

 

you can do that. Just stick their username in the replays system on the main war thunder page and watch a few of their games. I tend to do it a lot for squadron battles to get a feel for what other teams are pushing etc.

 

I dont know if Austragon wants me to post on this topic as he knows I disagree with a lot of his points.

 

But regardless I'll say I agree Sidoris (shocking) that the raising the spawn point cost doesnt solve the problem just pushes it into a more extreme corner. The same symptons will appear, just a bit later in the game but even more one sided. If a player wants to fly a plane they will generate the spawn points needed, only now instead of being 1 of possible 2-3 planes in the sky across both teams they'll likely have the sky to themselves making them an even greater hindrance and annoyance to the opposing team.

 

The issue is fundamentally that aircraft are not balanced in ground battles, there is little to no control over what aircraft will show up, how many aircraft each side will have and as its currently designed their only role is as a power up to kill.

 

Put simple aircraft are Unbalanced Power ups and realistic battles is the only mode that they exist as such.

 

They are power ups in arcade but they are balanced power ups because every player has equal access to them.

 

And in Simulator they are not power ups as players dont need to do anything to use them and unlike the other two modes you are expected to take off from the runway. But they are unbalanced because like in rb players can choose to bring them or not and many choose not to and most players are discouraged in taking them due to the added complexity of simulator controls.

 

No amount of wrangling with spawn point costs or buffing spaa* or changing their spawn location will solve these issues for realistic. The same problems will persist just in increasingly more extreme fashion. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*on the topic of the radar guided spaa's it feels like the reason they were added was less to counter air as a whole but instead discourage low tier planes in high tier games. Even with the lead indicator shooting down a mig15 or other jet fighter is surprisingly difficult, but the natue of how MBTs changed during the cold war made them very weak to a lot of War Thunder's mid tier aircraft. A p47 a me410 or an SU6 all have easily the firepower to kill pretty much any 8.0+ tank while they'd struggle more with the heavier vehicles at their own brs. thats why players saw a lot of mid tier planes in 9.0 tank games and it was genuinely becoming an issue. But with the radar assisted spaa bringing anything that is not a jet fighter is pretty much suicide. You can still deal with such spaa with mig15s and sabres easily (especially because almost all of them suffer from hull break) but anything with a prop engine or larger then a fighter gets swatted down with ease.

 

Even with the 7.3 french spaa which is the lowest br spaa with radar assist (it coincides with the first lightly armoured french MBT). You can actually deal with it fairly easily in an f-84 if you keep your speed up (which is why we didn't abandon air with 7.3 squadron battles) 

 

So I would be firmly against offering lead indicators to low tier spaa, it appears it was added to solve a different issue to the issue you are raising.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DeKrieg said:

I dont know if Austragon wants me to post on this topic as he knows I disagree with a lot of his points.

 

I don't think anyone has anything against an different opinion as long as it is that  and open stated opinion based on own experience.

 

What most despise is when someone tries to state his opinion as an fact based on nonsense and tries to claim facts that are not there.

 

Don't see anything wrong with your open counter opinion.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, NO_DRAGON said:

You can argue if their (Gaijin) approach is the right one or not, yet the success of the game with rising player numbers since 2012 shows they do something right.

 

Player numbers are not rising. They are stagnant for years.

 

And the real answer to WT success is lack of competition. Their only real competition is Wargaming and they do hit points arcade only games which turns away a lot of people (yet they still have like 5x more players). If you want semi historical multiplayer game with WW2 vehicles you only have WT right now.

 

WT honestly makes me angry because on technical level game is amazing with Gaijin's damage system being 10x better than competition. But all of this is ruined with terrible gameplay decisions. This game could easily be many times more popular than it is. But Gaijin refuses to fix core issues for years.

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 2
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DeKrieg said:

 

 

you can do that. Just stick their username in the replays system on the main war thunder page and watch a few of their games. I tend to do it a lot for squadron battles to get a feel for what other teams are pushing etc.

 

I dont know if Austragon wants me to post on this topic as he knows I disagree with a lot of his points.

 

But regardless I'll say I agree Sidoris (shocking) that the raising the spawn point cost doesnt solve the problem just pushes it into a more extreme corner. The same symptons will appear, just a bit later in the game but even more one sided. If a player wants to fly a plane they will generate the spawn points needed, only now instead of being 1 of possible 2-3 planes in the sky across both teams they'll likely have the sky to themselves making them an even greater hindrance and annoyance to the opposing team.

 

The issue is fundamentally that aircraft are not balanced in ground battles, there is little to no control over what aircraft will show up, how many aircraft each side will have and as its currently designed their only role is as a power up to kill.

 

Put simple aircraft are Unbalanced Power ups and realistic battles is the only mode that they exist as such.

 

They are power ups in arcade but they are balanced power ups because every player has equal access to them.

 

And in Simulator they are not power ups as players dont need to do anything to use them and unlike the other two modes you are expected to take off from the runway. But they are unbalanced because like in rb players can choose to bring them or not and many choose not to and most players are discouraged in taking them due to the added complexity of simulator controls.

 

No amount of wrangling with spawn point costs or buffing spaa* or changing their spawn location will solve these issues for realistic. The same problems will persist just in increasingly more extreme fashion. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*on the topic of the radar guided spaa's it feels like the reason they were added was less to counter air as a whole but instead discourage low tier planes in high tier games. Even with the lead indicator shooting down a mig15 or other jet fighter is surprisingly difficult, but the natue of how MBTs changed during the cold war made them very weak to a lot of War Thunder's mid tier aircraft. A p47 a me410 or an SU6 all have easily the firepower to kill pretty much any 8.0+ tank while they'd struggle more with the heavier vehicles at their own brs. thats why players saw a lot of mid tier planes in 9.0 tank games and it was genuinely becoming an issue. But with the radar assisted spaa bringing anything that is not a jet fighter is pretty much suicide. You can still deal with such spaa with mig15s and sabres easily (especially because almost all of them suffer from hull break) but anything with a prop engine or larger then a fighter gets swatted down with ease.

 

Even with the 7.3 french spaa which is the lowest br spaa with radar assist (it coincides with the first lightly armoured french MBT). You can actually deal with it fairly easily in an f-84 if you keep your speed up (which is why we didn't abandon air with 7.3 squadron battles) 

 

So I would be firmly against offering lead indicators to low tier spaa, it appears it was added to solve a different issue to the issue you are raising.

The issue with planes in Ground Forces is almost as complicated as Bombers & Attackers in Air Forces.

 

Admittedly, I want to be able to see SPAAG be as practical and easy to use against enemy planes as it currently is to use a plane vs a plane or a tank vs a tank or a plane vs a tank. The lead indicators seem like the easiest means of doing this, because even with better gunsights it’ll still be very hard for a normal SPAAG player to hit a plane that isn’t playing into the hands of the SPAAG. Arcade would be an option for them but their repair bills are astronomical (just shy of 9k to repair an Ostwind, and over 20k to repair any of the top tier AA!). While I play both tanks and planes, the tank-only people simply will NOT shut up until either:

- A) planes get removed from ground forces (highly unlikely if not impossible)

- B) a separate tank-only game mode is added to permanent rotation (pretty unlikely but we have seen Battle Royale so with some developmental attention parallel to what EC keeps getting we could see it come back more often)

- C) give the tank-only players an easy-to-use means of swatting down planes that works reliably without dumping tons of hours practicing each and every SPAAG.

 

Thus option C is what I’m aiming for as it is the most practical possibility.

 

And I do agree that plane status as a “powerup” needs to change.

 

Technically we could see planes be brought in as normal spawns and every player gets a total of three spawns in whatever, but every time we see some historical event against US/UK, planes get spammed and spammed hard. Thus the only way to counter this is to buff SPAAG until planes can’t be spammed so recklessly. But if CAS is allowed at match start, you can be sure as xxxx that the tank-only crowd is going to whine for weeks on end until plane weapons get nerfed to literal useless status.

 

This is why I’m proposing buffing SPAAG, allowing unloaded fighters as first spawns, raising base spawn cost of CAS, having further increases based on what sort of ordinance one is carrying, and finally increasing the power of the weapons themselves. 

 

What I see CAS’s PvP roles are ingame:

- tilting a stalemate campfest in favor of one team or another, whichever won the initial air conflict at the match start

- uprooting people camping and locking down whole sections of badly designed maps (Poland northwest spawn, Karelia everywhere, East Europe all over the place, etc etc.), and as a side note the reason some pieces of heavy armor are ridiculously overpriced in repair bills is because of CAS no longer being able to reliably uproot them. Most Tier IV heavies cost 6.5-9k SL to repair now when they costed around 3.5-5.5k to repair during CAS spam days.

- and most importantly, cleanup duty once a match starts irreversibly going one way or the other. Due to repeated ordinance nerfs, this isn’t really possible anymore.

 

And, I think the mode overall just needs a hell of a lot more things for planes to do besides kill player tanks, and those other things need to actually compete reward-wise with player tank kills. 

- Scouting enemy tank motions silently from above

- Busting lines of pillboxes, AT guns, howitzers, and BMG nests defending enemy spawns and bleeding tickets as a result, SPAA currently sitting in spawns could actually defend these if paying attention now.

- Destroying enemy supply camps (aka minibases) and bleeding tickets as a result

- Destroying the enemy team’s artillery capabilities, which would bleed tickets a little bit (ideally I’d like to see a diverse offering of artillery units available for all nations, such as naval guns attached to bunkers for Britain, Germany, and Japan, Katyusha platoons for Russia, railway artillery for Germany and possibly other nations, Long Toms for America, and so forth, also having arty power scale with the tier)

- Destroying supply convoys coming from the supply bases to the enemy spawn points to bleed tickets

- Bombing out the AF to prevent enemy planes from spawning, and un-coupling it from the requirement of minibase destruction. Dinky little airbases on Ground Forces maps would have significantly lower health but would not immediately start bleeding tickets to zero like in AFs. Instead the enemy team would lose another small chunk of tickets and lose plane spawning ability.

 

Adding in all of these targets would fix a related problem in Air RB by actually making Ground Forces the place to take Attack planes, Bombers, and Bomber-killers, whether they’re good at killing player tanks or not they would have a purpose.

 

Long Story Short:

- buff counters to CAS and make clean fighters available from match start

- give CAS a hell of a lot more things to do so it is overall more inclusive of planes from all trees, and make these things competitive reward-wise with killing player units to take pressure off of player tanks. 

- rework CAS spawn mechanics so people can’t spam it

- buff its weapons up to historical levels so it can do its actual job, or reverse the 1.69 nerfs to bombs and rockets, as the issue then that still hasn’t been fixed is ability to spam it

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Enkidu69 said:

 

Player numbers are not rising. They are stagnant for years.

 

And the real answer to WT success is lack of competition. Their only real competition is Wargaming and they do hit points arcade only games which turns away a lot of people (yet they still have like 5x more players). If you want semi historical multiplayer game with WW2 vehicles you only have WT right now.

 

WT honestly makes me angry because on technical level game is amazing with Gaijin's damage system being 10x better than competition. But all of this is ruined with terrible gameplay decisions. This game could easily be many times more popular than it is. But Gaijin refuses to fix core issues for years.

The best thing this game could ever get would be some serious competition on the same level as WT. 

 

Serious competition that isn’t a pure arcadey game like WoT/AW, that isn’t a hardcore simulator like Steel Beasts/the various new games coming out this year is what War Thunder needs.

 

The new serious competition would serve as a “swift kick in the xxx” to start listening more to the playerbase than now, to get more in direct communication with the playerbase, and maybe even allow for a lot more outsourcing of certain developments to skilled CDK users. I’m thinking map design could be a huge burden taken off the devs’ shoulders, and maybe we could see better mission design too.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Enkidu69 said:

 

Player numbers are not rising. They are stagnant for years.

 

And the real answer to WT success is lack of competition. Their only real competition is Wargaming and they do hit points arcade only games which turns away a lot of people (yet they still have like 5x more players). If you want semi historical multiplayer game with WW2 vehicles you only have WT right now.

 

WT honestly makes me angry because on technical level game is amazing with Gaijin's damage system being 10x better than competition. But all of this is ruined with terrible gameplay decisions. This game could easily be many times more popular than it is. But Gaijin refuses to fix core issues for years.

 

It is funny how at all times there is an User in here or the in game chat, who never signed an NDA (as I had at a certain time).

Yet they demand they have inside knowledge which they don't have.

 

You can argue the numbers as much as you want. Fact is they are since 2012 constant rising with more players joining then leaving.

 

And Gaijin is doing what they wanna do with the game and in an grow speed they appreciate. Getting to big to fast is not always the way to go. And obviously Gaijin decided to take it one step at a time instead of rushing headless into something that might grow out of their control.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, NO_DRAGON said:

 

It is funny how at all times there is an User in here or the in game chat, who never signed an NDA (as I had at a certain time).

Yet they demand they have inside knowledge which they don't have.

 

You can argue the numbers as much as you want. Fact is they are since 2012 constant rising with more players joining then leaving.

 

And Gaijin is doing what they wanna do with the game and in an grow speed they appreciate. Getting to big to fast is not always the way to go. And obviously Gaijin decided to take it one step at a time instead of rushing headless into something that might grow out of their control.

 

Of course number of registered players would be rising over the years but number of active players is stagnant if not dropping. Compare it to the explosion WoWS had despite ships being far more niche than tanks not mentioning tanks and planes combined. I know a lot of people who used to play regularly and now play maybe once every two weeks and some left for good.

 

If number of active players was going up Gaijin wouldn't need to compress BR's.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DeKrieg said:

Put simple aircraft are Unbalanced Power ups and realistic battles is the only mode that they exist as such.

this is the root cause

fly from inside the cockpit, that would bring some balance to the mode

 

14 hours ago, DaffanZ said:

a lot of RB engagements are ended by prophanging or sniping which heavy ladened aircraft can still do

too much flight instructor for this mode

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, StankFaust said:

this is the root cause

fly from inside the cockpit, that would bring some balance to the mode

 

too much flight instructor for this mode

No, the root causes are:

- inadequate defenses against planes by tank players in the hands of an average player, and clean fighters can’t be taken as first spawns.

- lack of more objectives for planes to do in GFs, making player tanks the only targets for all that ordinance, causing them to whine about ordinance being overpowered when it really wasn’t.

- spam of CAS is still possible via Cap & Fly methods

 

These are the real problems.

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, NO_DRAGON said:

aijin is at least for a long term in the business and earning money for a living with the decisions they make.

And tbh. I doubt they care if you  or me or someone else leaves for a certain change they implement if that brings 5 players per leaver into the game. Simple as that.

If it carries on like this they might just close RB all together as there really wouldn't much difference compared to arcade. Adding RNG, giving lead indicators, chevrons on maps, absurd damage levels of some shell types and ridiculous nerfed damage on others, pathetic small maps, totally arcade planes with pin pint accuracy weapons and so on are all factors that contribute to dumbing the game down and killing the main reason why people play RB instead of AB. I honestly don't care if this game dies or not or if RB survives as I have a life and I can play any other game I want (like I'm already doing) and still manage to survive. The only sad thing is to see a game with good potential just left dying because of the mass of players who always want things made easier because they cannot improve or they cannot stand that there are players that are better than them. RB is fun because it's harder and less forgiving, adding more and more features from AB will make it lose all of it's appeal and it will turn into another random arcade game like wot or AW which won't attract too many people as it will not offer anything new. This is why we play RB, because it's actually unique from the other games and this shouldn't change.

 

3 hours ago, MH4UAstragon said:

buff its weapons up to historical levels so it can do its actual job

Like hitting buildings, ships or train wagons and not pinpoint targeting tiny **** tanks sitting in the open?

 

3 hours ago, MH4UAstragon said:

or reverse the 1.69 nerfs to bombs and rockets, as the issue then that still hasn’t been fixed is ability to spam it

Really? You actually think this is a viable solution? Giving rockets even half the ability they had before the nerf would honestly mess up completely the already delicate balance we have now. It's just not an option.

  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took me a while to have a long enough match and for everything to work out.    I'm pretty rusty since not playing for so long.

 

 

This is pretty much it...       You don't even have to do well to keep chain spawning in Air with a good lineup and US is still the king with all their Strategic payloads and so many aircraft choices.

 

Nerf the Air earnings, the two Air categories, and you'd have an entirely different dynamic.  

 

  • Like 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, MH4UAstragon said:

No, the root causes are:

 

well, you certainly have your opinions, but I think we might have different backgrounds. 

 

27 minutes ago, MH4UAstragon said:

- inadequate defenses against planes by tank players in the hands of an average player

 

teachable skill and a 1:3 k/d is entirely achievable with an SPAA (even a crappy one) - 1:1 parity with a plane is not reality.

 

you've correctly identified that there is a disparity in the ease of use between aircraft (easy) and SPAA (somewhat more challenging) but your solution (to make SPAA's easy like planes) is entirely misguided for the mode.

 

the ROOT cause is that planes can be flown in simplified mode (with all the instructor stuff enabled) in combined arms.  That's a root cause.

 

Fly with a joystick/realistic controls in RB and none of that cheezy, saccharine simplicity is there.  you have to actually 'fly' the plane.  the reward is that you are using skill to accomplish your kills (like what is required now with an spaa) as opposed to pointing and clicking which is what you are proposing.

 

Im not for arcade changes to RB regardless of how easy or convenient they are.

 

 

medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StankFaust said:

this is the root cause

fly from inside the cockpit, that would bring some balance to the mode

 

too much flight instructor for this mode

 

Ehh that wont change a thing.

 

every nerf (cost, difficulty to control, lowering payload damage/numbers) people make to aircraft in an attempt to balance them just pushes them more and more into the "battlefield 2 helicopter zone"

 

for those who didnt play battlefield 2, flying helicopters in bf2 was much much harder then any of the following games where they were made a lot simpler to use. But once mastered a helicopter can do some insane tricks

 

Those players who had mastered the helicopter dominated the matches they were in. It was pretty much luck if you joined a match and the skilled pilot was on your team or the enemy team, or even if both teams have skilled chopper pilots.

 

Thats almost where Simulator battles stands right now. Those really good sim pilots when they show up tear through the opposing side. It's somewhat kept in check because gaijin control what planes show up in sim so you are not seeing players dominating ground with the really powerful planes.

 

But every push to limit planes just pushes the average player out of the sky and leaves only the dedicated and strong players. Which will just put us in a more extreme version of the same problem we have now. It'll be less common, but it'll still be the same problem.

 

The only way to fix air is to fix it at the start, not in the match where the damage has already done but in how those matches are formed.

 

They need to matchmake pilots into the ground forces games from the air realistic matchmaker.

 

Set a limit to how many pilots can be present for each team (3-6 per side) and matchmake pilots of the correct br into the ground forces game with the air realistic restrictions (only 1 life per pilot and start on runway or over runway if interceptor or attacker).

 

this balances out aircraft on both sides, it removes all the issues of being a power up and it stops cap and spawn abuse, revenge bombing and all the other issues that rise from tankers spawning in planes. 

 

Gaijin can also lock out specific aircraft that dont fit ground forces (so they only get matchmade into air realistic matches) such as strategic bombers and fighters with no form of payload. So that also solves players abusing aircraft not meant for a ground support role.

 

It's also under gaijin's matchmaker control which removes players bringing planes wholly out of their br range into games they dont belong in and stops specific planes being spammed.

 

Gaijin can also lock it to specific maps, so the few that are horribly broken in terms of air power (karelia, finland and jungle) can be exclusively tank only maps. While maps that are more balanced towards air due to the much longer distance between the airfield and battlefield (kursk, ardennes, hurtgen forest, port novorisk, mozdock etc) can be maps that allow aircraft.

 

Gaijin can even lock it to specific gamemodes, no aircraft in domination mode as there is a single capture point.

 

This is all in gaijin's power, they already do it with the players that choose to play in multiple region servers. If you choose to play in EU/US/RUSSIA you are essentially queuing in 3 different matchmaking pools.

 

same logic for planes, if a player has a plane that is suited to ground forces they should be put in 2+ matchmaking queues (depends on how many servers they have on) via the same method. They can even easily put in the same opt in/out feature easily enough (though my only concern is how an opt in/out might affect the normal air rb queue).

 

And Gaijin already has the ability to limit vehicles by type in the matchmaker. They do it for bombers in realistic air and they did it until recently with the abrams in ground forces.

 

It is the most direct way to solve this issue outright

 

every other suggestion is purely damage control. 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • _Catweazle_63 changed the title to Close Air Support in Ground RB: Updated Version Post-1.71
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...