Helicopters SB EC

[DerGrafVonZahl 4,228]

Simple as the text says. 

 

Answers range from full agreement to full disagreement with 5 stages inbetween

Edited November 16, 2020 by DerGrafVonZahl

[Twisted 3,112]

To be honest that's a whole lot of stupid questions that mean the same thing

[DerGrafVonZahl 4,228]

No not necessarily. Question 1 asks about changing current SB EC, so a top tier SB EC without helicopters would no longer exist. Question 2 asks about adding a mode. So helicopters and planes have a combined EC but planes have still the option to play without helicopters. In question 3 helicopters and planes will still be separated in sim. 

 

Question 4 is the question wich situation you prefer. As you may agree with all of the three and still have a favorite. 

[Twisted 3,112]

Well after all that pointless jaw flapping, I sure hope you have something worth while to add to the real discussion

[DerGrafVonZahl 4,228]

1 minute ago, Twisted said:

Well after all that pointless jaw flapping, I sure hope you have something worth while to add to the real discussion

 

Yes... A poll. 

 

 

Joking aside, I would recommend to separate the discussion from the polling avoiding influencing anyone partaking. 

 

[[email protected] 38]

I like how this went from an interesting topic to "I can make a better poll". Lol

[Twisted 3,112]

Not to mention missing the entire point of simply allowing Helis in the regular EC line up with no changes required

 

 

  

[DerGrafVonZahl 4,228]

34 minutes ago, Twisted said:

Not to mention missing the entire point of simply allowing Helis in the regular EC line up with no changes required

 

 

  

 

That is option/question 1. So it is not missing. 

Edited November 12, 2019 by DerGrafVonZahl

[Twisted 3,112]

The idea was a single thing, to simply allow Heli's in the EC line up with no other required change.

 

The approach was to conduct a good natured experiment and get everybody on board that it was an experiment and there was no need to go into convulsions at every single turning point.

 

Of course we never got past the quality of the poll, because there exist in this world knowledgeable people such as yourself, who ensure that nothing ever gets done.

 

If  you ever wonder why gaijin never pays attention  . .it because of people like you, who take a simple task, like allow players to spawn into heli's like the AI already does and turn it into a pointless argument about their own over inflated opinion.

 

Good job.

 

Let me know when you get the heli's done. 

[DerGrafVonZahl 4,228]

2 minutes ago, Twisted said:

The idea was a single thing, to simply allow Heli's in the EC line up with no other required change.

 

Yes... That is point 1.

 

2 minutes ago, Twisted said:

The approach was to conduct a good natured experiment and get everybody on board that it was an experiment and there was no need to go into convulsions at every single turning point.

 

Yes. But the point of a poll is to gage the opinions, not to convince people. 

 

2 minutes ago, Twisted said:

Of course we never got past the quality of the poll, because there exist in this world knowledgeable people such as yourself, who ensure that nothing ever gets done.

 

Because the questions were loaded. I mean everyone disagreeing was put as a drama queen. So what ever the outcome would be, it was highly influenced... And should be dismissed. 

 

2 minutes ago, Twisted said:

If  you ever wonder why gaijin never pays attention  . .it because of people like you, who take a simple task, like allow players to spawn into heli's like the AI already does and turn it into a pointless argument about their own over inflated opinion.

 

Then why weren't you able to honestly ask people. You were ruining any point of a poll because you wanted to influence it to get the outcome you desired. 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Twisted said:

Good job.

 

Let me know when you get the heli's done. 

 

That isn't the point of a poll, the point of a poll is to gage what the players want. 

 

You can use the poll afterwards for that. But for that it needs to be a neutral poll and the outcome shows that the players actually want helos in SB air EC. One step at a time. You made the poll with the expectation on what the result should be... Wich is what I criticized.

 

Let's just doing one step at a time. 

The first question is "what do the players want? " 

 

 

"how do we get it?" is the second question. 

[Twisted 3,112]

So basically I spent the whole day having an idiotic conversation with you, and you had not one single word of contribution to the actual topic at hand.

 

All you were concerned with was a poll of which you never understood the question or meaning off, but had to voice your opinion and derail the entire conversation because your sensibilities were hurt that your theoretical non-existent opinion was not being respected and represented.

 

So its really too late to try and act smart by cutting and pasting my post to actually make it look that your reply has any weight.

 

I will leave with a pearl of wisdom

 

"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody has one, on special occasions, when you meet the arseholes with opinions, its best to keep walking"

Edited November 12, 2019 by Twisted

[DerGrafVonZahl 4,228]

Just now, Twisted said:

So basically I spent the whole day having an idiotic conversation with you, and you had not one single word of contribution to the actual topic at hand.

 

I am willing to talk about helos in SB EC. But again a poll is not the place for that. 

 

Just now, Twisted said:

All you were concerned with was a poll of which you never understood the question or meaning off, but had to voice your opinion and derail the entire conversation because your sensibilities were hurt that your theoretical non-existent opinion was not being respected and represented.

 

No it was loaded and therefore useless as a poll. If it was only a tool to convince people, why use a poll at all? Polls are for gaging opinions, not for changing them. 

 

What is the point of making a poll if the honest opinion of the playerbase doesn't interest you? If the opinion did interest you, why make the questions loaded? This baffles me. 

 

If you wanted to convince people of your idea.. Why make a poll? 

 

Just now, Twisted said:

So its really to late to try and act smart by cutting and pasting my post to actually make it look that your reply has any weight.

 

No I am just responding to you. I am trying to tell you why your initial poll wasn't useful... You took it personally. 

 

Just now, Twisted said:

I will leave with a pearl of wisdom

 

"Opinions are like arseholes, everybody has one, on special occasions, when you meet the reverse, its best to keep walking"

 

Look, nothing of this was opinion. Using unbiased questions for polling is the rule if you want useful results. 

 

https://www.surveymonkey.com/mp/writing-survey-questions/

 

Point 2.

 

Not like I invented that stuff. 

[ZdrytchX 1,261]

Put this into the moderated suggestions thread and link it here instead.

[v_seraphim_v 16]

yeah i think it would have been more effective to just ask, would you want them in EC or not. not to which varying degree, lets just get them in there first, then we can decide if we want them changed around.
first steps first eh.

 

[DerGrafVonZahl 4,228]

7 hours ago, v_seraphim_v said:

yeah i think it would have been more effective to just ask, would you want them in EC or not. not to which varying degree, lets just get them in there first, then we can decide if we want them changed around.
first steps first eh.

 

 

The point of a poll is to see what people want. Polls aren't done to accomplish anything, they are to gauge what a population wants. 

 

The point is to get a feel of what people actually want before (!) taking action. 

[v_seraphim_v 16]

10 hours ago, DerGrafVonZahl said:

 

The point of a poll is to see what people want. Polls aren't done to accomplish anything, they are to gauge what a population wants. 

 

The point is to get a feel of what people actually want before (!) taking action. 

ok well it would seem that at this moment your poll indicates that majority of people just what them in the current form of EC, not in a separate EC with also planes (which would just divide the player base even further.), not in a helicopter only EC.

so now we know that,  at this time anyway. majority of people that have participated in this poll want. can we start trying to work to get them to add it,
if they turn out to be ****, then no one will use them , and the current EC isnt effected. if they turn out to be good and people use them, then the current EC isnt effected. if some people like them and some people dont, the the current EC isnt effected.

[DerGrafVonZahl 4,228]

On 18/12/2019 at 07:42, v_seraphim_v said:

ok well it would seem that at this moment your poll indicates that majority of people just what them in the current form of EC, not in a separate EC with also planes (which would just divide the player base even further.), not in a helicopter only EC.

 

That is the indication at the moment yes. the point was, that when you make these assumptions firts and have the poll influenced by that or even create a poll with the conclusion you drew before the poll, than the poll becomes useless, as the questions are loaded and you lead them to a foregone conclusion, wich then in term results in the poll not proving anything. The reason of those multiple answers was to prevent that so the poll can be representative.

 

The sample size is rather small atm. with the 21 answers in the current distribution we can only be 95% certain with an error of 18.17%.... with 76% of the answers in favor on integrated helos in EC, we can only be 95% sure that about 58% have this as thir preferred solution.

 

 

On 18/12/2019 at 07:42, v_seraphim_v said:

 

so now we know that,  at this time anyway. majority of people that have participated in this poll want.

 

No we have evidence for 58%

 

On 18/12/2019 at 07:42, v_seraphim_v said:

can we start trying to work to get them to add it,
if they turn out to be ****, then no one will use them , and the current EC isnt effected. if they turn out to be good and people use them, then the current EC isnt effected. if some people like them and some people dont, the the current EC isnt effected.

 

Oh there are threads asking for it... this is a poll, making arguments and strives for the implementation inside the poll would ruin the poll itself... it would be selfdefeating. Because when the poll is ruined you no longer have the basis to say xyz% are in favor...

 

Polls and arguments or campaigning need to be done seperately.

[Herra_Tohtori 1,574]

Integrating helicopters into current SB EC (rank 6 only) could be possible, but not without issues. Ideal situation would be to change the high tier SB EC slightly to make helicopters a better fit for them.

 

The first issue is that helicopters themselves would be too compressed to lump into a single EC rank. Splitting them in Rank 5 and Rank 6 would be a possibility, but in my opinion it feels a bit wrong to put even the starter helicopters into Rank 5 with WW2 jets and such. If Gaijin introduces EC Rank 7 at some point, then it would make sense to have the Rank 5 helicopters available in EC Rank 6, and the more advanced Rank 6/7 machines available in EC Rank 7. That would make for a thematically more satisfying solution, if you know what I mean.

 

Second issue is of how helicopters would affect gameplay of planes, and how planes would affect gameplay of helicopters.

 

In all honesty, the best thing helicopters would be suited for is taking out enemy tanks, pillboxen, and howitzers on battle areas that happen to spawn near an airfield. That gives you a short transit time (even with a slow helicopter) and that would probably allow you to get research done on helicopter upgrade modules in a pretty decent way.

 

Another thing that helicopters would be suitable for, but would take a much longer time to accomplish, is assaulting convoys (as long as they're not right next to an enemy airfield). Transit times would be much longer, but in the end this would allow you to do actual "missions" of sorts. Long transit times are a bother, but probably manageable.

 

The last thing, however, is somewhat bothersome. If a map has some vertical features near an airfield, and a high rank helicopter manages to sneak there, it's entirely possible for them to take out the airfield defenses with no danger to themselves, and then just sit there taking out the aircraft that are spawning in. Or they could outright ignore the airfield defenses, sit outside their range, and just send missiles in to destroy aircraft that are spawning in. Of course they would be weak against fighters attacking them, but even then the fighters would have to find them first and some of them have all-aspect heatseeking missiles so it could end up being a highly annoying situation. They would die eventually, of course, and it would take a long-ish flight back after they can respawn that helicopter, but that doesn't mean this situation should exist. Airfield defenses could probably be improved to prevent this kind of situation, but before we get radar-guided SPAA and SAMs for airfield defense, I'd like for more aircraft to receive radar warning systems and preferably also countermeasures like chaff (and flares against heatseekers) and ECM, and weapons specifically designed against radar threats (anti-radiation missiles, specifically).

 

Aircraft in general would likely mostly find helicopters as additional targets. Helicopters don't really present a credible threat to any contemporary fixed-wing aircraft, and a pilot could probably completely ignore helicopters if they wanted to just fight aircraft. Of course a helicopter with AIM-9L or Soviet equivalent missile could destroy a plane that veers too close, but overall, helicopters would be present at low altitudes and fly at much lower airspeed than high tier jets do.

 

In all honesty, what I would prefer is to have Rank 6 (and future Rank 7) EC maps extended to 2-3 times their current size. Then, airfields for fixed-wing aircraft can be moved away from the front line, and helicopter pads can be introduced to about the distance where the current airfields are from the front line. Actually I'd like to see the "Army Camps" (i.e. inactive bombing targets) be used as unmarked helicopter bases, as that would make it more difficult for the enemy to guess where helicopters are spawning in or landing at.

 

Splitting SB Air community into current SB EC with planes only, and a new SB EC with planes and helicopters would be inadvisable. Having an SB EC mode dedicated to helicopters could be all right, but the problem is that helicopter vs. helicopter combat is incredibly stale and uninspiring, largely because helicopters aren't designed to do that stuff in the first place.

 

So, even with its issues, I think integrating helicopters into current SB EC is the best possible option, but only after EC Rank 7 is added so that helicopters can be split between Rank 6 and Rank 7 game modes.

 

Because I totally have no interest in flying Hueys in the same game mode where Ka-50 exists.

[FouManchou 2,463]

3 hours ago, Herra_Tohtori said:

helicopter vs. helicopter combat is incredibly stale and uninspiring

Don't say that until you've flown a Gazelle F 

 

3 hours ago, Herra_Tohtori said:

If Gaijin introduces EC Rank 7 at some point, then it would make sense to have the Rank 5 helicopters available in EC Rank 6, and the more advanced Rank 6/7 machines available in EC Rank 7.

Do we really need an actual Rank VII to have an EC:7? Let's be honest, the capability of a Meteor Mk4 is absolutely incomparable to that of a MiG-21SMT. So yes, do give us EC7, with the eventual addition of helos in EC6 and EC7.
 

3 hours ago, Herra_Tohtori said:

In all honesty, the best thing helicopters would be suited for is taking out enemy tanks, pillboxen, and howitzers on battle areas that happen to spawn near an airfield. That gives you a short transit time (even with a slow helicopter) and that would probably allow you to get research done on helicopter upgrade modules in a pretty decent way.

I had suggested in another thread about Helo EC that some special missions could be added based on the "Single Missions" templates. 
For example :
"Rescue downed pilot" : helicopter must fly through enemy lines, land in given area, and return safely
"Support Infantry" : a "bomb-zone" appears that loses HP when shot with MG or rockets (simulating an enemy infantry force getting suppressed)
"Deliver Special Forces" : fly along a predetermined path (e.g. along a river) to get to an AO, delivering troops down ropes
etc.

I also suggested that :
A) Normal AA be made capable of damaging low and slow flying aircraft --> Helicopters therefore either have to choose their route to avoid AA (or fly high), or destroy AA positions
B) Ground units (and bases) signal (on the map and/or chat) they are under attack, or even only spotting a target --> Helicopters can't just farm kills without the airplanes ever being able to find them
C) Rewards be recalculated to take into account how much more difficult it is to kill anything with helicopter-borne rockets

Special missions ("Destroy Radar position") could be combined with ground forces spotting aircraft, to make everything more dynamic : a Helo's successful mission has a positive impact on team larger than just amassing "victory points".



Completely agree on the much larger maps, especially in Jet tiers. Not so much about "not splitting the community" : since we don't really have waiting times because of the rooms list, and the limit is still 16v16 anyway, it really wouldn't change much to have 2 or 3 different variations on the gamemode provided that Gaijin makes the UI effort to make it understandable wether you are joining an airplane only EC or a any aircraft EC.

[Herra_Tohtori 1,574]

Well, yeah, admittedly my experience of helo vs. helo combat comes from RB helicopters before they removed it and that was incredibly stale and uninspired. Possibly largely because of the markers. If there are no markers, then things would probably be more interesting but only in the sense that whoever gets the drop on the enemy will likely win the engagement - and Gaijin's really doing their utmost to make sure element of surprise is removed by super loud engine sounds, including helicopters.

 

17 minutes ago, FouManchou said:

Do we really need an actual Rank VII to have an EC:7? Let's be honest, the capability of a Meteor Mk4 is absolutely incomparable to that of a MiG-21SMT. So yes, do give us EC7, with the eventual addition of helos in EC6 and EC7.

 

No, we do not. In fact I would argue that there should always be an "EC Rank N+1" bracket which would offer a place for pilots to actually just fly the top rated machines with no spawn points or timers - simply so that they can actually get some use out of them instead of having to wait 30 minutes every time they lose a top tier aircraft. Which actually ties to other issues with EC, like the fact that if you want to fly a top tier jet specifically, it's faster to return to hangar after losing that plane, join another EC match, and quickly get some spawn points in that game to fly out the top tier jet again, than it is to wait out the 30 minute timer.

 

And unlike all other planes, you can't uptier top tier, so you can't circumvent timers at the cost of meeting enemies that are flying more powerful aircraft. But if there was a "top tier bracket" (which would be EC 7 at the moment), which would require a top tier jet for players to enter, then that would be a solution to this issue and make it a bit easier for BR 8.0 jets (like Meteors) to get by in EC 6 without having to deal with quite so many T-2s and MiG-21s and Phantoms and such.

 

Of course, when Gaijin eventually introduces Rank 7 aircraft (other than helicopters), then they should add EC 8, and so forth.

23 minutes ago, FouManchou said:

I had suggested in another thread about Helo EC that some special missions could be added based on the "Single Missions" templates. 
For example :
"Rescue downed pilot" : helicopter must fly through enemy lines, land in given area, and return safely
"Support Infantry" : a "bomb-zone" appears that loses HP when shot with MG or rockets (simulating an enemy infantry force getting suppressed)
"Deliver Special Forces" : fly along a predetermined path (e.g. along a river) to get to an AO, delivering troops down ropes
etc.

 

Having mission goals specifically designed for helicopters would be absolutely the right thing to do, especially for utility helicopters which are not necessarily the best at direct combat (*cough* Mi-4 *cough*).

26 minutes ago, FouManchou said:

Completely agree on the much larger maps, especially in Jet tiers. Not so much about "not splitting the community" : since we don't really have waiting times because of the rooms list, and the limit is still 16v16 anyway, it really wouldn't change much to have 2 or 3 different variations on the gamemode provided that Gaijin makes the UI effort to make it understandable wether you are joining an airplane only EC or a any aircraft EC.

Maybe. But even now it's sometimes tough to find a populated EC 6 game that you can join with the nation you want to fly. Maybe the influx of helicopter pilots could make things easier, maybe not. Ideally I just see War Thunder at its best at being a combined arms platform, so a well-executed helicopter+fixed wing aviation game mode would always get my support over aircraft-only game mode. But some helicopter pilots might not see it that way when I'm flying around in a jet while they want to be doing helicopter things...

[FouManchou 2,463]

5 hours ago, Herra_Tohtori said:

a well-executed helicopter+fixed wing aviation game mode would always get my support over aircraft-only game mode. But some helicopter pilots might not see it that way when I'm flying around in a jet while they want to be doing helicopter things...

A mixed gamemode, if implemented as is, would practically be tantamount to having helicopters do their thing, and airplanes do their thing, with neither intersecting much with the other.

In GF SB, it can already be kind of difficult to find and shut down a helo, despite the altitude and map size being quite low. In EC, where it is currently pretty much impossible to tell where ground forces are getting attacked (unless one group gets particularly slaughtered), and aircraft fly much higher, fixed and rotating wing aircraft would inhabit the same space but never cross paths.
Not something I would call a "well-executed game mode"

Which is why I think the first thing to implement is units calling out when they are attacked, as well as ground radar giving more info as to the whereabouts of both teams.

[Yamiinu 6]

Would it be possible to implement a 5 minute timer before people can spawn in helicopters? This would let tanks get to cover and not be camped in spawn. I think it would make this game mode a lot more fun for everyone and still let people fly their helicopters.

[DerGrafVonZahl 4,228]

7 hours ago, Yamiinu said:

Would it be possible to implement a 5 minute timer before people can spawn in helicopters? This would let tanks get to cover and not be camped in spawn. I think it would make this game mode a lot more fun for everyone and still let people fly their helicopters.

 

There are no player tanks in EC... 

[Kernow1346 1,847]

4 hours ago, DerGrafVonZahl said:

 

There are no player tanks in EC... 

Sadly, and despite the poll results above, there are still no player helicopters either.

 

However, helicopter BRs do not equate to equivalent fixed-wing BRs, so, if they were included simply based on BR (and we know Gaijin would likely do that), gameplay would degenerate into the totally unbalanced club-fest which is so typically Gaijin.  We should probably be thankful EC6 “only” has a few massive problems and doesn’t also have 21st Century helos clubbing Vietnam-era and late 1940s jets.

[DerGrafVonZahl 4,228]

8 hours ago, Kernow1346 said:

Sadly, and despite the poll results above, there are still no player helicopters either.

 

well as there is still a little bit missing for being able to play helicopter sim alltogether, i really don't see the problem. (yes helos are a bit better than bombers, but really not much)

 

To me, SB Air should not be polluted by non-sim-ready vehicles. If the helos get an overhaul.... fine. If not it's the same as adding tanks: a hard pass.

 

8 hours ago, Kernow1346 said:

However, helicopter BRs do not equate to equivalent fixed-wing BRs, so, if they were included simply based on BR (and we know Gaijin would likely do that), gameplay would degenerate into the totally unbalanced club-fest which is so typically Gaijin.  We should probably be thankful EC6 “only” has a few massive problems and doesn’t also have 21st Century helos clubbing Vietnam-era and late 1940s jets.