Yes, I think for 9.3+ (so once supersonic aircraft are common) 8v8 and 12v12 for Sim maps should be standard. Additionally, we need 2 spawn locations per team to break up the “take off go left”
1 Like
Sim-sized maps have been standard for the last year and change.
It was only 1 or 2 major updates ago we got Afghan back, which I appreciate cause having sim-sized maps all the time is boring.
Also you need forced random airspawn if you want multiple spawns, like the current air spawn Golan Heights.
Sim maps are absolutely not standard. They’re much, much larger than the standard size. Perhaps sim isn’t the right word, but everyone knows what I’m talking about. Maps like Rocky Canyon, for example.
And there would be no need for airspawns. Just have two airfields per team, one towards the left of the map and one towards the right.
2 Likes
Right… I’m fairly certain that you noticed yourself that with more modern aircraft, the engagement range also increased and that dogfights generally got smaller.
Large scale WW1 or WW2 style furballs are thing of the past.
But I don’t need to tell you that since you read books and combat reports, right?
Sim maps are 100x100 - 128x128km in size [in-fact a few are 80x80km, which are the most popular sim EC matches].
All but city and Afghan are 100x100km or more.
@TyphoonCro
Dogfights are rare in war period. Dogfights weren’t the majority of air kills in WW2, it was general engagements.
On top of that, Vietnam had such large scale engagements which is what caused F-15, 16, 18, and now 35 to exist in the forms they do.
The Vietnam conflict is one of the primary reasons the world has the aircraft they have today.
The books I’ve read go all the way to the Gulf War.
No, the world hasn’t seen another Vietnam in a while, it’s still plausible which is why all air forces are trained for high intensity conflicts and why real-life war games feature such simulations as well.
yes, it is.
goes on to talk about real war like we’re fighting a real war and this isn’t a video game meant for fun
It is fun. I’m experiencing a fragment of the chaos real-life pilots had and have to go through, and that’s exciting.
It’ll never be the real thing, hence a fragment of; I just don’t want WT to turn into Counter Strike, cause that’s what stopped me from playing air RB until ~2018 to begin with.
Air arcade shouldn’t be more realistic than air RB, IMO.
I don’t agree with this. Instead a new gamemode might be a good alternative for people who aren’t interested in the grind but taking this away would make it way more difficult for people trying to get top tier stuff which would be even worse than 16v16 in general for the playerbase.
It was fun for the first week, now it isn’t fun at all. It is just the exact same furball, and exact same steamroll. The steamrolling makes for an incredibly bad experience since it isn’t the funnest to steamroll every match, and it isn’t fun being in a 1v4+.
It is not, and never will be.
16v16 can exist, as long as it is not the norm. If it was only on the EC sized maps that would be fine. It should never be on the non EC maps.
1 Like
You shouldn’t be doing the exact same thing all the way through each match. If you meant the match always starts the same, sure, thats true of every WT game mode except maybe Naval at times and is a different discussion than player numbers.
But the actual engagement should not be the same. Top tier jets are mostly about situational awareness and you should be positioning yourself in such a way that youre a hard missile target while moving to a position relative to the fur ball where your missiles work best. And otherwise early gun solutions are for head ons and true dog fight gun solutions are for after the fur ball has thinned out.
I say all this and I actually would prefer more spread out engagements. I think top tier jets wouls be more fun with random start positions at typical mission altitudes sometimes together and sometimes broken up by squad as if two sets of combat air patrols encountered each other.
1 Like